Ever since Federer became dominant back around 2003, pros have had to wait their turn to try to move up the ranks.  The first player that waited and waited was Rafael Nadal.  Nadal was part of a group of players that have become the most solid group since maybe the Americans back in the early 1990s (Sampras, Agassi, Chang, Courier).  These players include Djokovic, Murray, and potentially del Potro.

Nadal basically was number 2 from 2005 to 2008 when he finally reached number 1.  He waited about 3 years to make the jump.  Djokovic waited at least as long.  He was number 3 from 2007 to 2011.  At least Nadal kept winning the French Open even if he wasn’t number 1.  Djokovic did get his first Slam back in 2008.  He was somewhat lucky.  That year, Federer had mono and although he reached the semis, he wasn’t 100%.  And in a huge breakthrough, Jo-Wilfried Tsonga came from nowhere to reach the semis (interestingly enough, he beat Andy Murray in the first round) where he upset Nadal by mixing power off the ground with finesse at net.

Andy Murray has had it even worse.  He’s been waiting at number 4 since 2008 his “breakthrough” year (though he was about #6 when the year started).

Djokovic had the upper hand even early on, mostly because Djokovic could play on clay and Murray struggled on the surface.  For a long time, Djokovic would go deep in the French Open while Murray struggled to reach the quarters.  The reason, it seems, was Murray’s power.  Murray was peculiar for a high-ranked player.  He liked mixing off-pace shots, including slices and drop shots, and then use his great anticipation and speed to make incredible gets.  It almost felt like Murray was daring his opponents to attack him and then he would sneak the pass.

At his best, Murray’s change of pace would disrupt an opponent’s rhythm.  Many players love consistent pace.  Arguably, Murray hit less hard than many of his contemporaries.  Indeed, early on, Murray was criticized for his lack of pace on shots, his unwillingness to dominate points.  Even if Djokovic was more of a counterpuncher, at least his spin and pace made it somewhat hard for opponents to attack Djokovic.

What forced Murray to change the way he played is ultimately Nadal.  Nadal has the biggest strike zone in tennis.  He can hit well off balls that barely come off the ground and he can hit moonballs equally well.  If you don’t give him pace, he can attack, especially if you leave balls short.  Murray can’t play his usual style against Nadal.  So Murray has built a Nadal strategy which, alas, has changed over the years because Nadal continues to improve his game.

The joy of watching Murray play Nadal is seeing what he unveils to deal with Nadal.  You watch Roger Federer, and it feels like he trots the same things out over and over.  In particular, Federer has never been able to control his excesses when it comes to unforced errors.  Federer seems to play with blinders on.  Murray learned to play a defensive style, but has adapted it to be more aggressive.  Federer seems unwilling to play a more patient style because he believes that when his game is on, it’s a challenge to beat him.

Murray has struggled with Nadal because Murray hits a bit flatter than Djokovic which means he is more prone to errors and because many of this early strategies are no longer sufficient.

Here are a list of Murray ideas for beating Nadal.

  • One of Murray’s early ideas was the short crosscourt forehand to the Nadal backhand.  Nadal loves to run around his backhand because he is so much more offensive on his forehand.  It’s not that Nadal can’t hit a good backhand, but that he can’t easily dictate off that side.  Many players discovered this early, but even so, it’s hard to get it to the backhand.  Murray hopes Nadal hits a middle of the court shot, and then hits it inside out to Nadal’s forehand.  Since Nadal likes to camp far in the deuce court, this left the inside out option available.  Nadal has started to counter this shot by hitting more backhands so he doesn’t give up quite as much court.
  • One part that was lacking in Murray’s arsenal was a reliable down the line shot on forehand and backhand.  It’s not that Murray couldn’t hit this shot, but that he lacked confidence in it.  Back in 2010, when Murray was experience his first slump after his first Australian Open final loss, he was beaten twice by David Ferrer.  Ferrer would pound the Murray backhand until he could get a good shot to hit inside in.  Murray seemed very reluctant to hit the down-the-line backhand to keep Ferrer honest.  To be fair, this is a hard shot to hit which is why most pros don’t go for it.  In 2011, Murray is finally getting that down-the-line shot working on both sides.  This is particularly important because one of Nadal’s favorite strategy is attacking the backhand.  He doesn’t do it to Djokovic because Djokovic can hit it down the line, something Federer can’t do reliably well.
  • Murray is learning to hit shots on the rise more and stay closer to the baseline.  He can’t always do this, and it’s against his nature (he prefers to stand way back).  But give Murray credit.  Roddick and Monfils are often criticized for standing way back, and they haven’t made nearly the progress Murray has to solve this problem.  By hitting off the rise, Murray avoids getting pushed back, maintains good court position, and stays relatively offensive.  These ideas seem picked off from Djokovic who has been doing the same thing against Nadal this year.
  • Murray has picked up another strategy from Djokovic which isn’t too surprising which is attacking the Nadal backhand.  His goal is to either hit a hard sharp angle to the deuce court and draw Nadal off wide or if he gets an angle to attack to the Nadal forehand, then head back to the backhand, possibly with an approach.
  • Murray now attacks Nadal off his backhand.  Traditionally, most players attack the net with their forehand, usually with an inside out shot.  However, most pros, most notably Nadal, use the angle from an inside approach to create an angle for the pass.  Murray goes down the line with a very shallow angle so Nadal can’t “curl” the ball in, nor can he get a nice angle out wide the other direction.  In the Tokyo match, Murray hit nearly every volley back up the line knowing that Nadal likes to rush to his forehand (where the open court is).  Nadal is forced to switch directions very quickly and it’s tough to control a ball like that.
  • Murray was using, for a while, the inside out Federer forehand shot.  This is the one where you aim about a few feet inside the baseline right at the sideline.  Federer has been hitting this shot forever.  Murray uses it, but he’s not always confident, so he sometimes aims closer to the baseline with less angle.
  • Murray’s biggest improvement is his power backhand.  When he’s drawn out wide, he hits very hard and very flat with a huge angle.  Nadal has two replies to this.  Either he tries to curl it up the line or he hits back a crosscourt of his own.  If Nadal curls it up the line and doesn’t get it close enough to the line, Murray then hits it crosscourt often to an open court or to a rushing Nadal.  If Nadal hits a huge angle crosscourt, Murray is now either hitting that sharp angle again or he hits it up the line, which he didn’t do as much before.  This power backhand is perhaps the single hardest shot Murray has, and seems bigger than the more precision-oriented Djokovic.
  • Murray has not been willing to what Djokovic does which is engage in ultra-long rallies.  This year’s US Open was wearying to watch because Djokovic was willing to engage in 20-25, even 30 shots rallies trying to wear Nadal down.  It’s a safer strategy for Djokovic, but it is very tiring.  Murray wants to end the rallies sooner than that.  This creates a problem for Murray.  He has to hit awfully well to win.  Djokovic just have to be very good.  Murray has to be amazing, as he was in Tokyo.

The question is, should Nadal worry about Murray?  At the moment, Nadal is probably not concerned.  Murray has zoned against Nadal before, but a few of his victories have come when Nadal was less than his best.  For example, in Rotterdam in 2009, Nadal hurt his ankle and just couldn’t play that well.  In the 2010 Australian Open, Nadal was similarly hurt.  Nadal had won 5 matches in a row, and generally he wins because Murray can’t keep his error count low enough for his aggressive style.

Even Djokovic took a while to get to Nadal.  Everyone was talking about “the streak” when Nadal met Djokovic in the finals of Indian Wells and perhaps that intimidated Nadal, but Djokovic’s wins over Nadal have primarily been on hard courts, so it’s no surprise if Djokovic wins over Nadal.  Nadal had to say, in both his losses (Indian Wells, Miami), that he took a set off Djokovic and had his chances.

What was more important was that loss in Madrid.  Up the then, Nadal had never lost to Djokovic on clay.  Indeed, Nadal has few losses to anyone on clay.  And that was a straight set win.  Nadal must have really been bothered when Djokovic beat him in Rome.  Realize Djokovic was almost out of the tournament, down a break in the third set against Murray, and managed to win that match.  He should have been tired and played subpar.  Instead, Djokovic again won in straight sets.

At this point, Nadal has to chalk this loss up to Murray playing extremely well.  Even Murray said he’s never hit this hard, this accurately, for so long.  And that’s what Murray has to do consistently if he wants to move past Nadal or Djokovic.

Historically, Murray has not maintained this hard hitting strategy.  Instead, he adjusts his strategy to whomever he plays.  On the positive side, he was able to use this power strategy to handily beat David Ferrer who, after all, is ranked 5 in the world.  He struggled a bit against Nalbandian, a superb returner.  He was in trouble against Baghdatis, a break down in the third, before he righted the ship.  The positive news is he won those matches anyway.

I think Murray is trying to avoid injuring himself by overhitting and so he doesn’t crank up the pace against everyone he plays.  Still, it might lead to easier victories if he did so instead of matches that seem to go on a bit longer than they should.

Shanghai will be an interesting tournament.  Murray should be feeling a bit of fatigue.  He’s won two tournaments in a row and he’s the defending champ.  The one positive is neither Federer nor Djokovic are there.  Murray is also in the somewhat friendlier part of the draw.  Tsonga and Fish are in the same half, but they have a bunch of tough players in that quarter and only one can play against Murray.

Berdych is having a bit of a resurgence too.  Until today, he had not won a title in about 2 years although he has solidly been making quarters and semis all year long.  He may give Nadal some problems should they meet.

And looking ahead, one still has to worry about Juan Martin del Potro, although Murray has a pretty good record against the Argentine.

So to answer the question, I think Murray can break through, but the question is whether the way he beat Nadal is a way he can sustain consistently.  They say great players win even if they aren’t playing well.  Today, Murray played as well as he can play, and the results show it.  But can he maintain that absurdly high level of play?  More than anyone else, Murray seems to show new wrinkles in what he does and adds stuff that surprises.  It used to surprise me all the things Nadal did to make his game better, but Murray surprises me nearly as much.