Why is it that I actually feel bad? I know...because there were actually people praying he would lose. Fans just usually want the other guy to win, not the Murray to lose. (I don't mean Murray in general doesn't have fans. I just thought saying the guy multiple times would be confusing.) See the bookmakers are the true evil.

Larry Stefanki accused Murray of playing "negative tennis". I believe Federer said something similar a year ago?

postmatrac: think Fed said that AFTER he'd lost to Murray....hmmmm...Steve Brierly (I think) in Guardian said, b4 Andy M lost to Andy R , that he needed to "destroy not toy." All Andy M's beleagured fans would agree most heartily with that! Perhaps Andy M can nab Stefanki, he's transformed Andy R.

I think Andy M thinks that using the same tactic which works on Fed means he'll beat everybody using the same tactic. Against 1-2 punchers, they dont really play around so you need to impose a lil bit of attacking strategy otherwise you'll get bullied off the court.

Afraid I have to agree with stefanki about our muzz. Muzz must respect stefanki and I'm sure he will listen by adjusting to being a top 3 player. #3s should leave more of the 'tactics' to all-comers and let them worry about HIS game - which should be one of taking others apart rather than capitalising on their inability take him apart.
Yes, Muzz can make good players look bad by forcing them to play to their weaknesses, but if they hit a purple patch and start replacing his question marks with their exclamation marks - like nando, gonzo and A-rod - he can find himself making them look even better than they are.
My main behind-the-sofa moments these days are when muzz needlessly prolongs rallies with unexpectedly soft mid-court teasers instead of ending rallies with slammers to the corner.
Also, Muzz's strength of will is definitely a plus but he mustn't return to the stubbornness of his early days (e.g. refusing to admit his drop-shots weren't working, like 10 times in a match). While there's no doubt that Team Murray has worked well, a major difference between muzz and A-rod these days is that A-rod has a senior authority figure that can tell him, "Lose 15 pounds, son" and it gets done. Had stefanki been muzz's boss for even a couple of days before the Wimby SF who knows what the result might have been. E.g. When muzz was 0-40 up on A-rod's serve set 3 game 1, he could have been more aggressive, driven him back and pushed in for the kill - losing that game was perhaps where muzz lost the match.

That all said, muzz is a great learner, and I'm sure he will take henman's and stefanki's comments re- aggression and less passivity on board for the US h/c season. After all, he has shown glimpses of it at times, like against rafa in the USO SF last year. We all know you're a great thinker, muzz - but your tennis is even better, so just go out there, take them apart as quickly and clinically as possible, and leave more of the thinking to them. They, after all, are the ones with more to worry about.

Yeah, I agree alex. He needs to work on his forehands. His slice, double-handed backhands are all very good.

not sure, i think aggression is something that is in you, you can't learn it - though Novak proves me wrong; he's game went from controlled aggression to uncontrolled defense.

postmatrac: if you want to win anything, surely you must have a certain amount of aggression in you, mustn't you? It's about utilising it at the right moments. According to Pat Cash after the match against Roddick Andy went into the locker room and smashed all his racquets. Good, shows aggression and the will to want to win.