I also welcome you "theycanbillme" to MW.
All of your points are valid and most of them have been pronounce by other members of MW. The unfortunate situation is that that AM is the most stubborn and pig-headed top ten player in the circuit.
In his own opinion, he does not need:-
a) a proper and professional full time coach;
b) a sports psychologist;
c) a professional appearance;
d) a decent serve;
e) a fast and hard overhead smash
f) sponsors - it's obvious that his appearance and conduct on court has made this difficult.
Yes Andy is his own man, but this will not aid him to win the desired slam.
Then he's not going to win a slam, without extraordinary luck, and at the back of his mind I think he knows it too.
He's gone as far as he can the way he has been, he will not get any further without an evolution.
Look at the way he played in the last 2 finals against Fed & Novak. There was no sense
from him that he was truly competing, he was just hoping his opponents would fluff their lines.
There's still time though, I don't not buy this Idea that Andy `must win a slam before his 24th birthday or he never will` etc.
Particularly given the obvious complexity of his game & well, let's face it, his present immaturity in comparison to other top ten players.
Its his attitude that is stopping him from getting to the summit not the theory of induction!
Fred Perry was 24 when he won his first.
Murray might be the first to win one when he is 25 and go on to win another 10 or he might not get near a final ever again.
But it will be Murray that mostly decides his own fate in this matter at least in the present circumstances, not the weight of history.
How many (male) Tennis players had won a slam in Switzerland before Federer came on to the scene?
Not many and maybe none I would think!
PS Thanks for the welcome OldScotSupport!