Would Andy Murray be an ATG in another era (tennis)?

[MOTHERDUCKER]

Seems he lost again and mentally didn't have enough to pull through. That's 2 slams wins out of 8 finals now..

I also don't believe he is able to get through say Nadal.... Federer and djokovic in the semis and then the final.. Basically needing one of them to get injured or have a shock early exiT..

Do you think he can win another slam and how far away from.. the likes of djokovic and Nadal is he?? I could see him cleaning up when hewitt and roddick were winning titles tbh

[Monaco Slim]

He's just reached the grand slam finals after having the worst year of his career. Sure he lost against the world #1 in the finals, but who the hell would have thought he would have even made it to the finals after how bad he was in 2014?

Murray is going to be a serious contender for Wimbledon and the US Open this year.

Gold medalist, British Wimbledon winner, US Open winner. All of those in the toughest era in Tennis makes him an ATG, just not on the same level as Djokovic, Federer or Nadal though.

[Dirk Diggler UK]

Murray IS a Roddick or a Hewitt. He managed to nick a couple of Grand Slams when the big 3 were off form or injured but he'd never be as dominant as any of them in any era.

[hayZ]

His best chance at winning a grand slam is Australian Open and Wimbledon but he can also win the US Open. French Open is out of the question though...

Federer is 33 which is ancient in Tennis, Nadal is 28 (usually past prime in Tennis terms) and is pretty injury prone. The other top players are just so hit and miss. Wawrinka has the game to beat anyone IF he is on his game but he's pretty inconsistant. Del Potro's wrist injury has pretty much ruined him. Cilic is SO hit and miss too, not really great on Grass/Clay. Berdych is not a grand slam winner calibre player.

Tennis has been pretty **** since 2010 imo, it was extremely good towards the end of 2009 beginning of 2010 (Aus Open) because you had all the top players playing great Tennis. Federer, Djokovic, Murray, Nadal (arguable), Davydenko (unbelievable level and would have won Aus Open IF he didn't play an inform Federer), Berdych, Tsonga, Del Potro and on the outside you had Cilic, Wawrinka and Verdasco.

The new upcoming players are pretty terrible too. Djokovic should be number 1 for a few years imo.

[Tom Cruise]

Hes such a mercurial player that i donthink he would be able to sustain the level that the top ATG's did.

On form he can give any player in history a good game, but on other days he looks terrible.

[Monaco Slim]

The new upcoming players are pretty terrible too.

Yeah you know its bad when Bernard Tomic is highly touted. RIP Tennis once Fed, Nadal, Murray and Djokovic retire.

[squealpiggy]

Would Andy Murray be an ATG in another era (tennis)?

Isn't the point of being an "all time great" that you could compete in any era? Like if you could dominate at a time carefully picked as being one without any really good competition then that means you aren't an all time great, surely?

[Lullaby]

Murray IS a Roddick or a Hewitt. He managed to nick a couple of Grand Slams when the big 3 were off form or injured but he'd never be as dominant as any of them in any era.

basically this.. He's no ATG material.

[SterlingStained]

Murray IS a Roddick or a Hewitt. He managed to nick a couple of Grand Slams when the big 3 were off form or injured but he'd never be as dominant as any of them in any era.

come on now, murray is better than leyton freaking hewitt and roddick.

he clearly has a more versatile game.

brits/scots just need to be patient. roger is almost out. nadal can get injured anytime and novak isnt fed or sampras who is just unbeatable.

my one advice for murray?

Put a ring on kim sears finger and have kids with her. It will settle him down. He looks so jacked up amped up when he plays. With murray its mental. its not talent.

getting married, having kids, settling down, working for your children instead of just fame and fortune for himself will do murray wonders. he presses wayyyyy too much when he plays. look at pete sampras and fed in their prime. they never had that mental approach. they always looked relax and calm for the most part. Murray is the complete opposite.

it will improve his game.

[MOTHERDUCKER]

Isn't the point of being an "all time great" that you could compete in any era? Like if you could dominate at a time carefully picked as being one without any really good competition then that means you aren't an all time great, surely?

I think he could be an atg in this era...he probAbly has 2 more slams in him..

I was thinking in another easier era he could have won a lot more..

Now I understand what u mean.. but there are a lot of boxers who people consider atgs who dominated in poor times.. Just look at Wlad/Vitali..

Maybe Murray is up vs guys who could be considered the best tennis players of all time