Back in early July of 2005 at Wimbledon I took a phone call from the office of The Herald in Glasgow, conveying an urgent message about Andy Murray.

"You better get yourself over to America next week," a voice said. "Andy's playing his first event there as a professional and a whole bunch of reporters are going over."

I duly cancelled my imminent week off, got flights booked, and headed over to Newport, Rhode Island, on the beautiful New England coastline, where the 18 year old Murray was making his professional bow on American soil.

I can't remember the details of that event - Murray fell in one of the early rounds - but I do recall we spent a lot of time chatting with Mark Petchey, the first of myriad Murray coaches, about his chances in tennis.

Back then, amid growing Murray mania, this was the question: was he up to it? Could he - eventually - win a grand slam event? Could he crack the top of tennis?

I was wary of all the Murray hoopla in 2005, for one simple reason, summed up in two words: Tim Henman.

At various Wimbledons I had seen the heroic Henman come up short, despite the impassioned pleadings of a partisan home crowd. Henman reached four Wimbledon semi-finals, many of them amid incredible drama, but simply could not penetrate to a final.

Nor did Henman ever land any other grand slam event in tennis, despite 12 years on the circuit and a British press madly whooping him on each spring, summer and autumn.

In coming up short Henman soon passed from British hero to anti-hero. He was deemed to have let people down. He failed to live up to his billing. He was a living anti-climax.

Back in 2005 I wondered: does this same fate await Murray? If he doesn't land a big one, despite his apparent talent, will he, like Henman, become The Great Failure? Everything back then was so rosy and fresh for Murray but, far down the road, cynicism and dread always await.

Today, we know the answer to that. Murray has done it. He has won a US Open and a Wimbledon and, over the next 13 days back in SW19, he has the chance to add to his haul of titles.

He is in his very prime. At 28, Murray is not far off being at his physical and mental peak for the challenge. He also goes into this 2015 Wimbledon having won three titles in two months - two on clay, one on grass - and seemingly incapable of being more primed.

"I feel like I'm coming into the tournament as best prepared as I can be," said Murray. "In any sport, winning gives you confidence, and I've won a lot of matches this year. I enjoy playing the high-pressure situations."

This is as good as it gets, isn't it? Can Andy Murray ever be more ready for it than now?

Yet, even today, he faces downsides, the negative elements. He is routinely cited as one of tennis's big four - Roger Federer, Rafael Nadal, Novak Djokovic and Murray - though some claim that this is a far-fetched depiction of the Scot.

They may have a point. Federer has won 17 grand slam titles, Nadal 14, and Djokovic eight. Murray's two, to be blunt, seem a bit paltry by comparison. So is it really "a big three" with Murray the best of the challengers?

Whether that is true or not, this son of Dunblane is an immense tennis player, a superb guy, and is also novel and bold in his approach.

Murray is one of only three players in the world's top-100 with a female coach. When he took on Amelie Mauresmo last year, the traditionalists groaned, the right-on liberals squealed with delight, and the rest of us wondered how it would pan out.

Murray's self-analysis and probing of his own game are impressive. It is maybe why, since the days of Leon Smith, Mauresmo is his sixth coach in 10 years.

Such a batting-average doesn't lend itself to sustained, long-term planning, yet it is testament to Murray's constant quest for something better, if also different.

For many of us, the exciting July days ahead will focus on Murray's continuing quest to be the best he can be. His dedication to his career is incredible.

At 28, Murray probably has three more chances to claim a further Wimbledon crown. I cannot see him being an Andre Agassi, who was still threatening to win a grand slam at the age of 35. Murray's physique won't endure that long.

What Murray has achieved so far in tennis is enough. But it would be good to see him go better. He deserves more.