i know a lot of people on here don't really think much about past matches but it's just so frustrating for those of us who have seen this entire script time after time after time. yet again he loses after losing the first set. so what now when he loses the first set in the australian open final? or hell, the first two?
it's just knowing that there's that 1/2% between them. murray serves for the match (rome) or has multiple match points (shanghai) only to see djokovic come back; you know djokovic has got it wrapped up. he breezes through the third in shanghai, the tiebreak in rome. the opposite way around (here) and you know djokovic still has every chance in the third and he takes it thanks to a self-inflicted break. the amount of times murray will be in a decisive set and have break points early on only to quite easily miss them and end up getting blown away (or simply losing) ie rg15, rg16 (break point at the start of the second). or the typical break points / 0-30 when djokovic is serving it out (here, rg, madrid).
then you have djokovic blowing a 5-2 lead in the 5th set of australia 2012. murray gets back to 5-5, 15-40 and djokovic STILL digs it out. murray does this all the time... except against djokovic. you might say i'm reading too much into a 250 final but it feels like the same old story. the difference is so minimal yet so often decisive in djokovic's favour. maybe i thought murray would have even more belief now he's number one. maybe i thought djokovic was still slumping. murray's game was ultimately fine, bar one game in each set (of course). but that tiny, tiny difference between them is the same as it ever was.
Great post. It is so frustrating the way he played a lot of the break points. Ok, he broke Novak twice, but there were opportunities where he had 0-30, and made bad errors on shots that were t even that aggressive. I'd rather be went for it, and if he loses some of those pounts, then so be it. Passive play has never worked against Novak, and I hope that Lendl can find a way to change the mindset.