This is from the BBC sport page,I took out the part pertaining to Andy Murray,as I'm sure Chet&Wise might want to use the rest because it contains Goran's views on our transitional no1.


Murray 'can be world number one'
By Sarah Holt



Ivanisevic (left) expects Murray to climb the world rankings in 2007
Former Wimbledon champion Goran Ivanisevic believes Britain's Andy Murray has what it takes to be the world number one.

Murray ended 2006 ranked 17th after his first full season on the ATP Tour and Ivanisevic says he can go higher.

"He can be number one," he told BBC Sport. "But I don't know when. He can easily be top 10 next year.

"He is already very close to the top 10 and must continue what he's doing. He's a great player and will get better."

Ivanisevic, who retired in 2003, believes bringing American coach Brad Gilbert on board to advise Murray will benefit the Scottish 19-year-old.

"Brad was a good player and he's a great coach," said Ivanisevic, who is in London to play in the Masters tournament at the Royal Albert Hall. "He knows what he's doing.

"Murray has got the talent, but he's young and needs someone to tell him things. You have to have more than one pair of eyes.

The Grand Slam for Roger Federer will be very tough because Rafael Nadal is better on clay

Former Wimbledon champion
Goran Ivanisevic

"The better he gets the more pressure there will be. He is already a great player and he will become even better."

Obviously Murray is being tipped to be at least a top10 player by many in the game.I even think he could win a GS title,but is he really that good to become numero uno?

awww, you have to love Goran :wub:

every year he says nice things about Tim, and now hes moved on to Andy - he knows how to win over the British public!

Andy - good? yes. top ten? I reckon so. Number one? very doubtful....

I share the views of Pebs...It is not sure that Andy Murray will be able to reach the No1 position of the ranking: They are several very good young players out there and yes I saw him becoming part of the top 10..But No1 is another business: Wait and see

I guess that the most interesting part of the Goran interview is when he talking about Federer and Nadal. Here his views:

"The Grand Slam for Roger will be very tough," said Ivanisevic, 35. "I don't think he will win the French Open because Rafael Nadal is a better player on clay.

"If he stays healthy, Nadal can dominate the French Open for another five or six years. :yikes:

"Nadal has had his difficulties this season but when the clay comes it is a different story. To beat Nadal on clay, I'd probably have to shoot him :D - and I don't know how to beat Federer either!

"There are only two guys who can beat Federer at the moment and that is Nadal on clay and Ivan Ljubicic :yikes: on the hard courts and indoor.

"Ljubicic always gives Federer a tough battle with his huge serve but after he and Nadal nobody else comes close.

"Federer is the only player who can win the Grand Slam. He has a chance to become the best ever in the history of tennis - and for him anything is possible."

Other details here:

Article BBC


What do you think in particular about his views concerning Lubo? I guess he is a little overestimating his Tennis :whistle:

Its quite apparant that he clearly overates Ivan who hasnt beaten Federer for like almost ever yet he sits there saying he one of them to challenge Federer.Nadal yes on CLAY he is like amazing but outside of that he is dissmal.I doubt next year that he will be as dominant on clay.His type of tennis very taxing and I have stressed this so many times before!I honestly cant see him running for countless hours enduring long long rallies again and being successful again in triplicate.His type of tennis doesnt allow that type of dominance!

Finally,with Gorans comments about Andy being number 1,well,thats actually a joke.One win over an obviously tired Federer deems him to be the next best thing.Shame!Murray needs to sort out his attitude,his fitness and his mental toughness.Win more titles and then make his challenge to remain inthe top 10!Andy is far from world number material!

I think Andy DOES have the potential do be no.1, but so do so many others. In terms of raw talent, Andy is up there, but nobody on this board can say with any degree of certainty where he will end up. What Goran is saying is that he feels he has the game to make it to the top. I cannot see that happening whilst Federer is still at the top of his game. However once Murray, and his contemps ie Gasquet - Djokovic enter their prime, there may a gap there to exploit.

Goran wants a lucrative contract from The BBC. He realised McEnore had a good job emphasising the chances of Henman winning Wimby. Goran is after McEnroe's job.

Tenez, do you think that is Gorans motive for these comments?

Hi Tenez...It could be at the end... roflmao

BTW and once again...I am waiting for RG and the interview of FED by Wilander: Will the Swiss Maestro stay calm when the (you have no balls) man will ask him how to win RG?

roflmao

2007 a great season also for past glories of the sport :rolleyes:

No.1? roflmao roflmao

sorry, but he's not good enough to be a no.1, he's just going to get over-hyped by the british media it looks like

NO! You honestly cannot be serious here with this.Even if he does by some miracle become number 1,he will be like the transitional 1 filling in the period for the real number 1.thats like the perion before Federers dominance!

But he is not going to get that lucky Saviour!In terms of raw talent,that goes to Gasquet without a doubt.Murray is bland and very boring to watch.He plays a game kinda like a Karol Kucera with a harder serve.Really Murray is overhyped.Talk talent and potential we talking Berdych and Gasquet!

why so much talk about nonsenses of goran? may i remember you that federer just has 25? Maybe you can bring that story in five years not now. It's impossible to play better tennis than federer, it's just a matter of mental toughness and consistense, specialy on the important moments, and federer is improving on that, so why all this nonsense? :tsk:

There's not much credibility to what Goran is saying. Probably if the masters-cup was being held in France, he would have said that Gasquet can become no.1. Murray has not done anything much this year. The win over Federer in Cincy was a lacklustre match with Federer playing as bad as he possibly could and should not be counted. A professional athlete who says that he cannot get up early morning to play a match at 11 AM is not worhty of being no.1.
On hard courts, there are only two players in the current crop who can give Federer a real run for his money: Marat Safin & Richard Gasquet. Safin is a psycho whose form oscillates like a sine wave but I hope Gasquet gets more consistent and improves his fitness. For one set in the Toronto final, he beat Federer at his own game but couldn't keep it up. He is definitely as talented if not greater than Federer.
And he owes me 1000$ I lost on him during this year's wimbledon.

Lol, a reasonable point of view :blink:

Shame about the $1000 heh?

roflmao

Wow, Im a little shocked at the lack of credence and respect being given to Goran's opinion here. He may just know a little bit more about tennis than some of us. Also were does it say that he's basing his opinion of Murray being world number one some day, on his victory over Federer. It's not all about Federer you know, he won't be world number one forever. We will have many world number ones after Fed has gone, if we are going to pick out future world number ones then why not Murray? I think Goran is basing his opinion on Murrays felxible baseline game, his promise that he has shown on all surfaces, his (at times) strong mentality, and impressive individual displays this year. Also, Murray seems to care, what ever you think about his attitude, you know he wants to win.

I never would've had him down as future world number one personally, possibly a Grand Slam winniner, but not number one. But then again, why not? Who knows the situations that will develop in the future leading to an ascent in the rankings, it's really a matter of how far can Murray keep going up before he levels off.

I've always felt he's had the game to be in the top 5. Also Goran never says that Murray would be an all dominating number one like Federer is now, which is what I think a lot of people are assuming.

I think I will adopt TV's very wise wait and see approach :)

just to putt some sense in this thread i just say that if nothing happens to federer he will be number one for more 4 years, so some people on this forum want to follow a carreer in forcasting the future, have you made an aplication to a circus?

Excuse me?

Sorry Saviour if that has destroyed all your illusions on Murray.

(I am being sarcastic and half kidding here. Though I would not be surprised if there wasn't some truth in it ;)

Hi Chet, This time I assure you, you are really funny to read and your post is really interesting... B)

Start with the funny part:

roflmao

Yes ok but you have to consider that he is very young and moreover it was "only" a match at the USO..He has the right to sleep the poor man...More seriously we have to wait at least one year more to see what type of player he really is. ;)

Agree with you here. Gasquet is terribly talented and the Tennis he was able to present during all the Toronto event was just great -this evening I will watch once again that final it was really good :P -: He recall me really FED around 2002-3 he needs to win a big event after that he will become though for everyone because he will start to believe fully to his Tennis (now he believes on it around 70-80% and you need a 100% to beat FED)

Finally, on hard I will add some other names able to give Roger a real run for the money:

A. Nalbi. :) ..Do not worry if this guy is at the top of his motivation he is really dangerous.
B. AROD (+Connors :yikes: )..Yes I believe he will manage next year to beat him at least once...
C. I believe as well in Blake and Berdy (even if this last one needs to do the same additional step than Gasquet).

Ciao :rolleyes:

Probably is, I remember Tracy Austin saying once how lucky she felt to have a job for the BBC, as they're so hard to come by. We should have more tennis stars who have been there commentating rather than the likes of Andrew Castle :doh:

Saying that though Sam Smith is one of my fav commentators, so just because you've won the big ones, doesn't make you autmatically a good commentator I suppose.

I'm sorry, but is goran talking the biggest pile of crap ever? roflmao

God you get a win over a below-par Federer and suddenly you're predicted to be number 1. We should all feel sorry for Dominik Hrbarty in that case then, he never got this kind of prediction after beating Fed in Cincinnati in 04 :doh:

"Excuse me?"

Okay no problem i excuse you, Happy?

But Hrbarty didn't also beat the two time finalist at Wimbledon, or go on the kind of winning streaks Murray did, win a title so young etc.

I really think Goran has more sense than to make such a prediction based on one anamalous match. I haven't even seen the match, nor would I want to. It's the overall picture of Murray's succesful year as well as his KEY ability to beat people in the top 20 on a regular basis that seem to show promise :)

I think that is what Goran was basing his prediction on.

I was never unhappy, I just wanted to know what you were talking about?

What about McEnroe's views on Henman's chance to win Wimbledon back 2 or 3 years ago? ;)

Let's not forget that Mac or Goran are nice professional guys keen to give the public what they want to hear in order to spice up talks prior a Wimbledon or during a dead season. Having said that Murray has indeed a reasonable chance to become number 1 at some stage.

Now, if they were interviewed by the Maltese TV, I would not be surprised to hear those 2 say that Tony Drago, also, has some chance to win Wimbledon as well.

:D

Maybe i was talking about this:

Mystery man Denis feels no menace about Federer clash

DENIS Istomin has never seen the great Roger Federer in the flesh, having only watched the game's genius on television. Early next week, Istomin will see Federer for the first time from across the net.

It's understandable that Federer also knows nothing about his opponent, since the ATP itself knows little of the 19-year-old, who a matter of months ago was ranked 805th in the world. There are no details of his career or life on the official ATP website.

Federer's brief inquiries about his Australian Open first-round opponent have also come up negative.

"Nobody knew him either," said the champion yesterday. "Have no clue how old he is, how he looks, if he is left or right, so I better find out."

Here's some hints, Roger. Istomin is from the central Asian republic of Uzbekistan. He has never played a grand slam match - you will be his first. He is fair-haired and plays right-handed, hitting a two-handed backhand.

He earned entry into this tournament by winning the Asian wildcard - the promotional love child of Paul McNamee - and is now ranked 194 places behind you. His favourite surface is hardcourt, and after having a hit yesterday said he did not mind Rebound Ace, either. He has shown considerable pluck to get to Melbourne Park, given that he was badly hurt in a car accident as a 16-year-old and did not play at all for two years.

Istomin yesterday described the accident as "very serious." He broke his hip and wrist in several places. Doctors told him that he would never play competitive tennis again. He defied that prediction and it was clear yesterday that, while he might be the most obscure opponent Federer will ever play in a grand slam, Istomin is not intimidated by the prospect of making his grand entrance to slams against Federer.

He admitted he had nothing to lose against Federer and even suggested it was possible that he could win. "For me, it's good … I win, maybe," said Uzbekistan's top ranked player. "I can, I wish."

Asked if he had a game plan for tackling a man who lost only four times in 85 matches last year, Istomin at first said he did not know (the usual answer for Federer's opponents) but then suggested that Federer's backhand was his weaker shot and that he might play to that.

Although he speaks little English, Istomin managed to convey confidence and the sense that playing Federer represented a wonderful opportunity rather than a curse. A player with no record has less to lose.

Istomin has won a Challenger (the second-string professional tournaments) event in Uzbekistan and his passage to the Asian wildcard was assisted by the venue - it was played in his hometown of Tashkent, where he still resides. These are the most significant victories of his career, though he has also played Davis Cup for his country.

He said tennis was only "so-so" in his homeland, where he was "easily" the best player. He said his best shot was the forehand, adding that he owned "a good serve" and played from the backcourt. He had never played in a stadium with a capacity greater than 3000 but was not perturbed at all by the prospect of up to 15,000 on Monday or Tuesday.

"It's OK," he said with a shrug, sounding almost nonchalant about the prospect of playing Federer, whom if seldom stretched these days at least will experience the unknown.

Humm maybe not, it's too ridiculous, even if today everyone wants to get there, so what was i talking about?
Well maybe that's too much to ask from me, i gave you allready hapiness don't ask me for orientation...

I don’t understand why people think being a good player automatically makes you a good commentator – in fact, the real geniuses may be poor because they don’t understand why other players can’t do things they could do easily (IMHO, McEnroe is a rare exception to this).

For my money, the best colour commentary (ie analysis) often comes from players who have played on the pro circuit, but without scaling the heights, for example Leif Shiras and Pater Fleming (yes I know all about Fleming’s doubles success…). Personally I like Sam Smith, though I know a lot of people don’t.

The bottom line is that playing and commentating are two completely different skills, and while some people are able to master both, many more aren’t.

Thats a nice article Jamaral, although I don't think anyone really see's that match as significant.

I didn't bother reading all of it actually, I've read enough articles on Federer to last me a lifetime as it is :rolleyes:

It's nice to change this focus to some of the 'others' on the ATP Tour for a change sometimes :)

Yes I think Sam Smith is really good, one of the best out there :)

I do tend to prefer listening to someone like Mac or Jimmy Connors though, as you really feel in safe hands.

Someone like Boris Becker is not such a good commentator though :blink:

I've heard Martina Navratilova a few times and she is really good also :)

oh my god just look what i found:

ANDY SET TO COPY FEDERER TACTICS

ANDY MURRAY breezed back into his homeland last night and vowed to follow in the footsteps of world tennis No.1 Roger Federer.

The Scots sensation, sporting a sleek new haircut, is back to help defend the Aberdeen Cup against Greg Rusedski's English team this weekend.

And the 19-year-old revealed he is taking a leaf out of Federer's book to enhance his career.

Murray, who faces Rusedski tonight, said: "I got too tired in some tournaments because I hadn't prepared as well as I might have done.

"If you look at Federer, he goes to pretty much every tournament four or five days beforehand to get the best preparation.

"Although I'm not Federer, if it works for him it's going to work for most people.

Okay now i belive in it, i am seing in this a pattern:
Yes, yes, the silly season started roflmao

Hi SportRepo...Only for the fun I am ready to pay any TV channel to have one ( I say one no more) FED match with the comments of W-ANALYSIS, Chep (near to the court) and Doctor roflmao roflmao

How many times they will refer and use the verb Choke and sentences like: this player chokes once again... roflmao

BTW: My prefered is definitely McEnroe :bow:

Chris Evert is excellent, too.

I hate to sound like a snob, but it does seem that the better educated players are more likely to develop into good commentators.

I could see Venus being excellent as well, should she ever decide to give it a go…

‘Only for the fun I am ready to pay any TV channel to have one ( I say one no more) FED match with the comments of W-ANALYSIS, Chep (near to the court) and Doctor’

TV in the UK, Sky Sports has this feature called FanZone where during a football match you can switch to commentary from 2 fans, one each supporting the two teams that are playing. It’s often very funny, so I reckon we should extend that to tennis and have you and chet commentating on the next Federer v Nadal match! roflmao roflmao

"I could see Venus being excellent as well, should she ever decide to give it a go…"

You are kidding?????

I hope Chris Evert comes back (maybe now that she's getting a divorce she will) - She was excellent. Both the McEnroe brothers are good too. In the future, I could see Roddick commentating - that's if he can sit still for more than five minutes.

Andy Murray sent the world number one packing in straight sets at Cincinnati in 2006 so it is logical to suggest that he will improve even further. Next year I believe there will be a huge turning point in the careers of a few young guns, which will lead to many of the top ten being displaced. I see Richard Gasquet (with Murray, Djokovic and Monfils) being a catalyst for change. I have watched a lot of Roger Federer's matches over the years and his game is crying out to be punished. If Gasquet starts to peak next year then the situation will be similar to when John McEnroe hit form whilst Borg was aiming for his fifth Wimbledon title. I would love to see a Federer vs Gasquet final at Wimbledon next year, but I have a feeling Andy Roddick may have something to say about that. Roddick vs Gasquet would be equally as mouth-watering.

I must say I'm quite suprised by the comments here on Murray.If I had to predict a No1 from the young guns,I would probably go with the flair of the Frenchman,Mr Gasquet.Trouble is it's the obvious choice.He's a great shotmaker,and has an invention to his game.
Mind you a lot of Frenchman seem to have this gift of flair,but it's substance that's often lacking in these guys.

Personally I don't think Murray has artistry,but he has a few special plays up his sleeve.I saw all his matches at Montreal,and the amount of times he banged the DTL backhand for a winner on key points,great stuff.
Also when he was pushed wide on the forehand only to whip the ball crosscourt on a tight angle.
The dropshot which he does overplay at the moment,althoguh experience will teach him when to use it.
He's also a very good volleyer.

Who knows if he will?The only thing that concerns me about him is his attitude.When things are going well,he gets on a roll,and just doesn't seem to miss.If things drop a bit,he berates his own poor standard and can tank sets better than Nalbandian :D
I really believe he has enough firepower,and in a tour that is criticized for players bereft of imagination,Murray in contrast is Van Gogh.
So why not.

I don't know about that. The thing about Federer is that he seems to have gotten really good at adapting his game to his opponents. It's not like he plays an entirely different style of game from one match to the next, but he picks up better than most on the subtle things that will trouble one opponent more than another.

pretty fair post Brakkus ....again. What I would question more is his agility around the court. Fine if he can keep his opponent on the move but what if he has to move as well?

I said exactly that at the USO against Davydenko and was convinced Davydenko would make him move as well with his angled shots. It was close to humiliation.

Murray looks awkward simply walking, so can't imagine him running a lot and guys like Bagdhatis, Davydenko, Gasquet, Djoko will make him run...unless he has a blessed day and hit great returns and winners one after the other.

I'd place Murray in the same category as Djokovic (although I think the latter's marginally the better player). I could definitely see Murray winning a Slam at some point, but getting to number 1 would requie some luck, i.e Berdych, Gasquet and Djokovic taking longer to mature. This is unlikely however, as Murray's fitness is a long way from being up to scratch. On the other hand the young Scot's shown he's got a good mental attitude, dismissing an on-form Federer in straight sets at Cincinatti.

As for Goran's comments, we have to remember the loveable Croat is a bit of a joker. I'm not saying he was just messing around with these comments, but Ljubicic beating Federer? Clearly a case of sticking up for his much derided countryman. Completely agree with his views on the French Open though, Nadal only looks out of form because he's not used to the hard courts. Come the clay court season, the Spaniard will be beating Federer right left and centre as usual.

Agree on the movement Tenez.I think the way a person runs is a gift from God.It's why people like Sampras,Federer,and Borg were so good.If you can glide,rather than punish the court surface,then your game is only going to benefit.

IMO Murray&Roddick are similar in that way,they are heavy footed even though they are obviously great athletes and both defend the court well.

We will soon sound like Chet and Wise complimenting each other at this rate Brakkus :P but well pointed this resemblance between Roddick and Murray.