As his Indian Wells loss showed, Andy Murray's biggest rival is his own inconsistency

Runner-up at Doha, losing to World No 2 Novak Djokovic in the final.
Fourth-round loss at Australian Open, losing to then World No 49 Mischa Zverev.
Champion at Dubai Open.
Opening-round exit at Indian Wells, losing to the 129th-ranked Vasek Pospisil.

Andy Murray’s start to his first full season as World No 1 can almost be seen as a microcosm of his career so far – tough finals, a big trophy, early losses, and erratic performances.

Indian Wells’ top seed Murray’s loss on Saturday to Canadian qualifier Pospisil, who ousted him 6-4, 7-6 (7/5) in the opening round, just accentuated this inconsistency – a stark contrast from his record run in the latter half of 2016 that saw him ascend to No 1, but a far more regular feature in the 29-year-old’s career graph, especially in major tournaments.

The BNP Paribas Open is not called ‘the fifth Slam’ without reason. It’s a Masters 1000 tournament but it is so much more, with the quality of tennis and quantity of players. It is a trophy all top players vie for, often missing other tourneys in preparation.

This edition was to be Andy Murray’s best shot at winning the elusive Indian Wells crown, a title he is yet to win. His biggest rivals – three of the erstwhile Big Four – are all locked in one quarter, with Stan Wawrinka the only other top seed in his half of the draw. Add to that his title-winning run at Dubai, which included a stunning fightback that saw him play a 31-minute tiebreaker and save 11 match points to prevail over Philipp Kohlschreiber, and the optimism that he could clinch the title wasn’t unfounded.

With such favourable conditions, most expected him to not only reach the semifinals, but go all the way and better his best performance here – a runner-up finish to Rafael Nadal back in 2009.

But as tennis has shown in the less than three months of 2017, the game is uncertain if nothing. Once again, Murray stumbled, this time at the opening hurdle. His loss to Pospisil shows that there are several more kinks left to iron out in the World No 1’s armour.

The Canadian’s aggressive intent combined with the Scot’s inability to capitalise on his chances and close out the game meant that it was an uncomplicated straight sets affair. Murray was a break up twice in the first set, but lost it 4-6. Failing to hold a break in face of a player as attacking as Pospisil is dangerous any day, but more so when your own service is lackluster.

As he himself admitted, he had a bad service game, which included seven double-faults. This allowed Pospsil, who was trailing 4-2 to win six straight games and then go a break up, without taking his foot off the pedal. Murray did mount a comeback and forced a tiebreaker, his double-fault gave Pospisil a 3-1 lead, and there was no looking back. The Scot saved three match points, but Pospisil converted the fourth with a powerful forehand winner to seal the win.

“I felt like I had the ability to do it, but going through it is another thing,” Pospisil, a former Wimbledon doubles champion, said, “I just tried to stay composed.” “It’s not every day you’re close to beating the number one player in the world. So I did well to kind of stick with the process and not really get distracted,” he added.

So, was it Murray who was distracted? There was a time when Murray’s biggest obstacles on the road to the top were the other three – Roger Federer, Rafael Nadal and Novak Djokovic.

Is it the old adage of uneasy heads and crowns, the pressure of being on top? Or is it that fact that he was again caught unawares by Pospisil’s game at the net? Or is it the inconsistency that has marred Murray’s otherwise stellar career, rearing its head again?

Murray’s weakness to the serve-and-volley style was already exposed brutally by Mischa Zverev in Melbourne, who took out the top seed in three hours and 33 minutes and charmed everyone by his style of play. One could say that Murray fell at the same serve-and-volley roadblock at the US Open last year, when he lost 1-6 6-4 4-6 6-1 7-5 in the quarter-finals to Kei Nishikori.

However, Murray himself discounted the talks that he is susceptible to the classic serve-and-volley style of play. “I have never really practised playing against serve-and-volleyers in my career. But when I have come up against them, it’s normally been a game style I have enjoyed playing against,” said Murray. “Today it wasn’t so much the serve/volley that was the problem. It was my own serve, not getting enough opportunities when he was serving. I think that was more the problem tonight.”

Speaking of the serve that Murray pointed out – it was only about 62% accurate. He won only about 67% points on his first serve, as opposed to Pospisil 71%. But it was his first return numbers that seem incongruent - only 29% of his returns won.

Which brings us back to the question - what ails Andy Murray? Yes, he is an unlikely World No 1 in this era of men’s tennis. But he became the World No 1 after winning the Wimbledon, Olympic gold, ATP World Tour finals and a spate of other titles in the second half of 2016, a clear indication that he has indeed shed the bridesmaid tag.

He was even reunited with coach Ivan Lendl with whom he played some of his best tennis. He has the game to beat the best, this has never been in doubt, and we have seen him do that so many times in the past.

The factor that stands out, and has been apparent for a while now, is Murray’s inconsistency. This inconsistency is why he has only three Grand Slams to his name, despite several final appearances and Masters titles, and it is this inconsistency that he will have to overcome – as much as any rival or style of play – if he is to ascend to the very top of his own game.