Jamie Murray

Madadman · Masters Series Champion

Jamie Murray

korriban · Challenger level

Madadman wrote:
I see that he is going to change partners next season. Teaming up with Brazilian, Doubles World number 23, Bruno Soares. Interesting.
I wonder who's decision it was to split Murrays or Peers.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/tennis/34590356

Hard to say from the outside, because they genuinely seem to get on well, and their results have been outstanding. For what it's worth, my take is that John always seemed to be the more solid player and that he would paper over the cracks to protect a (momentarily) out of form partner more often than Jamie would do the other way round. Over the course of a tournament both players will go on "runs" of good or bad form within a set or match: completely normal, and part of the fun of doubles. I though John had slightly less downs than Jamie, and they had similar ups.....if that makes sense.

However, I've found it interesting that in the super clutch matches - the 2 DC doubles and the 2 GS Finals, Jamie played very well indeed. All 4 matches. However in the 2 GS Finals, John was absolutely awful (all relative of course), and unrecognisable from his tournament form. He seemed to freeze both times, and I felt very down for Jamie. There was almost nothing he could do.

Is it possible that Jamie wants a partner with GS Final experience? Could it be that he feels if he and Peers reach another GS Final, the same thing will happen again? Or could it be (as happens more often these days) that 3 years was enough? They are certainly doing well again this week.

korriban · Challenger level

korriban wrote:
Madadman wrote:
I see that he is going to change partners next season. Teaming up with Brazilian, Doubles World number 23, Bruno Soares. Interesting.
I wonder who's decision it was to split Murrays or Peers.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/tennis/34590356
Hard to say from the outside, because they genuinely seem to get on well, and their results have been outstanding. For what it's worth, my take is that John always seemed to be the more solid player and that he would paper over the cracks to protect a (momentarily) out of form partner more often than Jamie would do the other way round. Over the course of a tournament both players will go on "runs" of good or bad form within a set or match: completely normal, and part of the fun of doubles. I though John had slightly less downs than Jamie, and they had similar ups.....if that makes sense.
However, I've found it interesting that in the super clutch matches - the 2 DC doubles and the 2 GS Finals, Jamie played very well indeed. All 4 matches. However in the 2 GS Finals, John was absolutely awful (all relative of course), and unrecognisable from his tournament form. He seemed to freeze both times, and I felt very down for Jamie. There was almost nothing he could do.
Is it possible that Jamie wants a partner with GS Final experience? Could it be that he feels if he and Peers reach another GS Final, the same thing will happen again? Or could it be (as happens more often these days) that 3 years was enough? They are certainly doing well again this week.

Just saw the Barry Flatman article on another thread after having written the above post. I agree!!

Spectator · All-time great

As the Vienna tournament (whose thread contains most of the discussion on the switch) is now over, I'll post here instead: gabanyis.com/ is an article giving Bruno Soares' perspective on the partner shift.

Spectator · All-time great

A question to people who are more mathematically inclined than I ... am I correct in thinking that it is still technically possible for Mr Murray and Mr Peers to end the year as the number 1 ranked team?

indiana · Tennis legend

Spectator wrote:
A question to people who are more mathematically inclined than I ... am I correct in thinking that it is still technically possible for Mr Murray and Mr Peers to end the year as the number 1 ranked team?

Absolutely.

Quite apart from what J & J could gain this week on the Bryans ( not playing ) and Rojer & Tecau ( like J & J into the QF in Basel ), there are 2500 points available in the Paris Masters ( 1000 ) and at the O2 ( 1500 ).

There may be some relatively small replacement of lowest counters to let in these ( the WTF is part of your counters, not an additional, in doubles ), but you could certainly theoretically get over 2000 points more than each of the two pairs above them and they are less than 1000 behind each.

As of the start of this week :

1. Bryan & Bryan 6285

2. Rojer & Tecau 6040

3. Murray & Peers 5335

So still quite big gaps, so unlikely, but with these 2500 to come very possible.

Actually if they got those maximum 2500 points ( winning both Paris and the WTF undefeated ) they probably would do it. Maximum total a pair could get as runners up in both would be 1600.