Again, I'm with Mark.
It doesn't matter how his performance compares with his usual.

That's like saying we can't call the Titanic's performance on Ice a disaster, because its normal surface is on Water so we have nothing to compare against.


(and yes, that point is slightly facetious   .......   )

Your point isn't slightly facetious, it's crap! It completely disregards how different clay is as a surface. Why are there so many who are specialists on it? And why are the Brits and Americans renowned for their crapness on it. Because it's different. And you can never judge how a player will perform on clay based on their form elsewhere. Cause for most players it's totally different. And for some decent players they never feel comfortable on the surface. Can't even win a match!

Sorry. I missed where Mark said that.
It does kinda mean he's not maintaining a logicially consistent stance, like the slippery eel he may well be .....

But I still stand by my opinion that his clay season is objectively a disaster, based on the results.

Note sure why you think my point is "crap".
If I went out and got the same results as Andy it would be a disaster.
Don't care if it's a different surface. Don't care if there are specialists. My point stands - the Titanic didn't do as well as a specialist icebreaker would have.

If you consistently don't win games at tournaments, it's a disaster.
unless you're only there for the air miles ...

A disaster would be if he went out of the top 30, he's 14, not a disaster as longs as he maintains or improves, which he is doing, he hardly had any games on clay last year so needs to get acclimatised again, fine he learned to play on it when he was in Spain but that was 6 years ago, no-one can just pick up where they left off after a long period away.

Surely a disaster (in tennis) is if you hardly win any games?

His ranking is irrelevent, but .... just thinking about it for a moment ...
realistically, Andy couldn't have done much more if he'd tried to drop out of the top 30!!
He's done about as badly, ranking-wise, as it was possible to do (given everyone else's results).

Trained all his young life on it? I think not. a couple of years in Barcalona, ok, fair point. He trained all of his young life on indoor hard (at stirling uni) moved to Barca at 14, spent 8 months out of the game at 16 with injury then worked back into form in time to join the pro circuit in Wimbledon 05.

I did actually mention in one of my posts about the fact that he likes to play on the surface. That doesn't mean he's any good on it!

Fair enough to say his ranking is irrelevant. But surely comparing his clay season this year to his own previous performances is a valid way to judge it. You obviously can't compare him to others cause that's either excedingly unfair on him (Nadal) or ridiculously pointless (Boggo). And if you compare him to himself, he is improving. This was my original point. I can't see how you rate an improvement a 'disaster'.

OK fair point regarding the his clay experience.

Absolutely not as he didn't have a previous clay season so instead we must compare it to what we know Murray to be as a player generally.

I refuse to judge Andys Clay Season until it is over its only half way through this thread makes sense once the French open is over.  If he washes out of Hamberg and the French open then yes it is disapointment and a disaster.  

Howether his clay court season so far has has been a vast improvement 4 matches won at ATP level compared to 3 matches in 2 years since the beginning of 2006 when he started playing at purely at ATP level.

The thing that is very disapointing is that when you look at his play in 2004 and parts of 2005 he was actually winning the most on Clay  at futures level he won mostly Clay matches 24 clay wins and 3 tournaments to 18 wins and 2 tournaments on hard court.  It seems that he only went downhill once he hit challenger level.

Maybe he just can't hack the clay when playing at a high level. its such a shame he showed so much potential on the surface as a Teenager.  I guess time will tell.  I personally think that next year will be his breakthrough year for this surface.  

Back to back matches now, beat a guy in straights who previously beat him in 3 on clay. 3rd round of a masters and still a GS to go. Still a disaster? I certainly think not!

I don't mean he's on fire Mark. Don't put words in my mouth. What I'm saying is that he's putting in a consistant improvement on what he's done before on clay, and indeed what he's done in MS this year!

From that I don't get you labeling it a 'disaster'. I keep putting that in quotes because of just how strong a word that is. Do you really see Andy's clay season on the same level (in tennis terms of course) as the earthquake on Monday. Cause that's a disaster.

Gasquet's season is a 'disaster'. He's even decided to probably miss RG cause of how bad it is. Last year was a disaster, injury followed by loss followed by significant injury. Wins over a bunch of recognised decent clay court players, a narrow loss to the eventual tournament finalist (and now top ten player) and now a R3 encounter against Nadal. This is not a disaster.

Obviously he's not 'on fire' or 'flying high', nor is it a roaring success. As I've said before I'm reserving judgement till it's done. Which is only sensible. If he beats Nadal today, maybe even pushes as far as the Q's or S's this week then makes R4 at RG do you still call it a 'disaster'? Although, I do think that in 3 weeks we'll be calling it a success, probably not a roaring success, but still a success.