Andy Murray - World Number One!

[Laphroaig]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/tennis/37882467

Due to the semi-final withdrawal of Raonic and Djokovic's defeat at the quarter final stage of the Paris Masters, Andy Murray will be officially crowned number one in the world tennis rankings on Monday. Incredible, considering how many points he was behind Djokovic just a few months ago.

2 Wimbledon titles, 2 Olympic Golds, 1 US Open title, part of the winning Davis Cup team in 2015 and now World Number 1.

Congratulations Andy, you've done the country proud...:cheers:

[Plaything]

Outstanding! As a Jock, super-proud.

[holzz]

if he was shit, he'd be called Scottish, not British haha.... i hope Sturgeon gets her way, and he's called Scottish properly.

[septemberboy]

In final but could lose no. 1 spot very soon...

[Laphroaig]

Murray beats an out of sorts Djokovic to win the final tournament of the season and end the year as world number one. :)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/tennis/38046276

[Stavros]

On the one hand Murray has managed this in a year with a declining Nadal, an out-of-sorts Djokovic and an absent Federer. On the other hand he has played some stunning tennis, has matured a lot as a person and deserves to be where he is. How much longer he can maintain the fierce physical and mental discipline it needs to be No 1 I don't know but at the moment he looks unbeatable.

[Laphroaig]

Arise Sir Andy Murray.

I don't particularly agree with the honours system, but well deserved.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/38462146

[peejaye]

Arise Sir Andy Murray.

I don't particularly agree with the honours system.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/38462146
You said it Phroaig! Honoured for winning Wimbledon? What next? Honouring football captains for winning the FA Cup?
All part of the Establishment I'm afraid.

[Stavros]

Murray should have had the bottle to say no, but either way this is the 'Establishment' desperate for approval assuming that the awards Murray actually works for are not enough and it must give its own to earn brownie points with the citizens, as if we cared. The award of a Knighthood -in the context of awards- should be made at the end of, or after the conclusion of a career, sort of like a valediction. Now all that is left, other than a seat in the House of Lords, is either the Order of Merit or its second-rate version the Companion of Honour. I think most of his supporters are more interested in the year ahead which, if it brings back into play as fit and ready Nadal, Djokovic, Federer, Warwinka as well as Murray could be an epic year for tennis, and that is far more important than a gong from Brenda, assuming she lives long enough to give it,

[broncofan]

Murray is a great player. About 7 or 8 years ago, a friend and I were discussing who we thought would accomplish more between Djokovic and Murray. Djokovic at the time had won one grand slam but Murray also had a lot of talent and it wasn't obvious who would have the better career. Novak has had the more successful career and won the majority of the time he played Murray in grand slam finals. But Murray has been a very consistent top 5 performer, has won three grand slams and is now number one. He's made it to an amazing 11 grand slam finals and frankly it's not his fault he has played Federer and Djokovic in the eight he lost. Federer is probably the best to ever play and Novak has won 12 grand slams and is not even 30.

When all is said and done, Murray will probably be inducted into the tennis hall of fame. Andy Roddick was inducted on the virtue of one grand slam win and 9 consecutive years in the top ten. Murray has done much more in a tougher era (Federer, Nadal, and Djokovic are a veritable murderers' row), and is still only 29. So let's see if he has a few more great years in him.

[Laphroaig]

In terms of Grand Slam titles won, Andy Murray has been "unfortunate" to play in the same era as Federer/Djokovic/Nadal in their prime. Three men who would almost certainly make any list of tennis top 10 greatest players. Earlier in his career he would often win a hard fought match against one in a quarter or semi-final, only to lose to another in the final. Whether that failure to get over the final hurdle was down to a lack of stamina or mental strength at the time can be argued.

However, playing against those greats has probably helped lift him to the heights he has now achieved and with the two Olympic gold medals, he has something that the other three don't and will never have. For that alone, even without the Grand Slam victories, he deserves a place in the hall of fame.

[broncofan]

However, playing against those greats has probably helped lift him to the heights he has now achieved and with the two Olympic gold medals, he has something that the other three don't and will never have. For that alone, even without the Grand Slam victories, he deserves a place in the hall of fame.
Thanks for that. I forgot about that entirely. The Olympics are very important...what made Graf's 1988 season so special was the fact that her slam was "golden". He should be a lock for the hall of fame. And he's not done.

In my view, Murray's career is as impressive as Edberg and Becker, who each won six slams and were world number one for a period. I don't say this lightly because I was an Edberg fanatic growing up. But Edberg could be very inconsistent, and neither he nor Becker dealt with anything close to Murray's level of competition. They came up at the end of the McEnroe Lendl era, and had won a handful of slams before Agassi and Sampras hit their stride. McEnroe was done by the late 80's despite not being very old and Lendl for some reason couldn't get it together on grass.

[Laphroaig]

I'll admit that I'm firmly in the camp that believes tennis along with golf, football, etc has no place in the Olympics. However, the effect of winning that first Olympic title had on Murray can't be underestimated. It gave him the belief that he could win a "major" final and without it he may not have gone on to win the 3 Grand Slam titles that he has.

I started watching tennis around the era of the Becker/Edberg Wimbledon finals. From memory and without resorting to Wikipedia, I think those ended 2-1 to Becker in terms of victories?