Australian Open 2013: the great rivalry with Novak Djokovic will be the making of Andy Murray Edberg and I came from an era with far more serve-and-volley players, and this was the style that defined us. I had a little more power than Stefan, whereas he had the greater mobility. But the best players now stay back, because they are able to hit winners from the back of the court. The trick is to remain aggressive even though you are a counter-puncher. This is where Djokovic has improved beyond recognition over the past two years, and he proved again in Melbourne that he is the master behind the baseline. We might be tempted to say after this performance that Djokovic holds the upper hand over Murray. But we should note that in the last two slam finals, they still stand at one victory apiece. They are awfully close. Djokovic is the world No1, so I have to put him slightly ahead, but Murray has been more impressive than anybody in challenging him point for point. They will be contesting many more of these finals over the next three years. Even though I would never rule out Roger Federer for as long as he plays the game, this rivalry is here for good. Mind games always come into a duel like theirs but I would not overestimate them. Both players were mentally very impressive in this match, but what I noticed most strongly was how far Djokovic has advanced tactically in just the last three months. He did not play so aggressively either in New York, or in his final against Federer at the O2 in November. People debate so much about all the work that Murray has done on his fitness in Miami during the off-season, but we forget that Djokovic has put in the same effort, if not more. It is simply that he does not like to talk about it. Yes, Murray was affected by the feather in the second-set tie-break and yes, he cursed a lot, but the crucial factor was that Djokovic found a different level, in his skill and his intensity. He played on the front foot throughout the whole match and by the end Murray had nothing left in the tank. For the first two sets Murray played well but in a slam final you have to seize your chances. Not many come your way, especially against Djokovic, so when he was break point up early in the second set and failed to capitalise, you sensed the momentum turning. I was shouting at the time, "Oh my God! He has got to do it now! But he did not grasp his opportunity. In the third set Djokovic broke for the first time in the match and then essentially ran away with it, partly because you could see that Murray was struggling with the blisters on his left foot. I would say that Murray was partly a victim of the scheduling in Australia, because whoever plays a long semi-final on Friday night is always at a disadvantage if the final goes long, too. The alternative argument is that the winner on Friday is riding on positive emotion, which can carry him through. This almost happened with Murray, but he and Djokovic have a history of long matches and once this one hit the three-hour mark, you could tell he was feeling the effects on his body. In terms of his mentality, I have seen Murray much worse. I do not believe he was nervous or tentative and his swearing should still be allowed, because as spectators we love it. He suffered instead from the fact that Djokovic was the one taking all the risks. Truly, the better man won. But Murray needs a great rival to help him reach the next stage. To become a multiple grand slam champion he appreciates that he has to erase all his weaknesses, that he cannot hope to attack a player as good as Djokovic if he does not change his game slightly. It is a natural progression. I found that towards the end of my career, Pete Sampras became my toughest rival, because he took his attacking abilities to a different plane. In the same vein, Djokovic's phenomenal talents are all the motivation Murray needs to be the best player he can possibly be. Becker's top three rivalries Bjorn Borg v John McEnroe: As I was only 12 at the time of their great Wimbledon final in 1980, this is about as far back as I can remember. Borg's ice-man personality and McEnroe's aggression made the perfect blend. Pete Sampras v Andre Agassi: In the final years of my career I played both these guys on many occasions and they were always wonderful to watch together. Sampras was the ultimate serve-and-volleyer, and Agassi the perfect returner. Roger Federer v Rafael Nadal: Considering these two players hold 26 grand slam titles between them, theirs is a difficult rivalry to beat. Their 2008 Wimbledon final was the best match I ever witnessed.