Most commentators say that Andy Murray's best chance of Grand Slam success will come at the US Open. That's a pretty easy call to make bearing in mind the Scot made the final in 2008 (lost 2-6 5-7 2-6 to Roger Federer), has now won hard court tournaments in North America each of the last four years (latest in Montreal a couple of weeks back) and he, himself, has stated that the surface is his personal favourite.
Going into this year's event at Flushing Meadows the 22-year-old is at the prime time to 'come of age' in tennis terms and claim his first Slam. After all, his two great rivals (Nadal and Djokovic) have done so and this leaves the spotlight pointing firmly at the young Scot. That most unwanted tag in sport is his for now ... the best player in the world never to have won a major.
Murray, to be fair, has done nothing wrong. He has earned his spurs on the ATP Tour, progressing from minor event success up to multiple Masters Series wins. A record of 13 tour titles eclipes that of Djokovic and the gap between him and Rafael Nadal closes all the time (Murray may currently heads Nadal in the world standings but trails the Spaniard 2:7 in their past meetings). Murray also leads Roger Federer, of course, 6:3 in their series.
World Number One... without a Grand Slam?
He has all the attributes of a champion and lesser players have held aloft the biggest trophies which the game has to offer but, sadly, until you've done it yourself there are always questions. The parallel can be drawn between Murray and the women's world No.1, Dinara Safina. But for Roger Federer's recent winning spree, the form of the previous 12 months on the ATP Tour could well have seen Murray take top spot in the world without winning a Grand Slam, something which Safina has done in the woman's game.
In the case of the Russian girl that has led to much questioning of her temperament (notably after her self-destruction in the French Open final) and she now has lost three Grand Slam finals in the past two years. Murray is yet to come under such scrutiny himself but the longer he goes without winning a Slam - realistically he needs to win one by the end of 2010 - then the greater the weight on his shoulders.
As such, backing the Scot to win a Slam ... until he's won a Slam ... is one which must come with a price warning. However, once he does break his duck then we may well see Murray winning many more titles - Roger Federer, it's worth noting, had only won one Grand Slam title by the age of 22 and six years on he has 15 to his name.
Murray needs to win and needs to win soon.
