AO Semi: Stan Wawrinka (4) vs Roger Federer (17)

[britbox]

Roger Federer d. Stan Wawrinka 7-5, 6-3, 1-6, 4-6, 6-3

 

[britbox]

Match Highlights:

 

[britbox]

 

[Moxie]

I'd like to clarify my much derided comment. Stan was, on paper, the man to beat left in the draw. Forget that he was playing Federer, who was a sentimental favorite, but not a favorite by ranking. Wawrinka won the last Major, and had a brilliant opportunity to win another. He couldn't do it. Stan runs very hot and cold. And he happens to match up well against the otherwise hottest player of the last couple of years: Djokovic, for those of you who focus on match-ups. He's nearly 32. It is my opinion, (and what else are we on forums for,) that he won't win another Major, but just play spoiler. That's a prediction, and I may be wrong. He'll still be in the top 3 contenders for RG. I just don't think he has another Slam in him. Losing this chance is not a small indicator.

 

[DarthFed]

Thrilled Roger won of course but he looked awful out there, even the first two sets were not good at all. I'm still not sure how the hell he won that match; Stan served better, seemed to move better, hit cleaner, etc. yet he still lost. It was a gutsy 5th set from Roger to save break points and somehow get through after a couple horrific sets to let Stan even the match, but that's about all that can be said. Playing that way on Sunday will lead to a short day regardless of who it's against.

I wouldn't completely hate on Stan there Moxie. I think you said similar things last year before the USO and look what happened there. I saw Stan lose a very routine match to Grigor at Cincy a few weeks before the USO and even I thought he'd be early road kill but he ended up winning the whole thing and in pretty dominating fashion. Roger is by far the worst matchup for Stan on any kind of a fast court, both mentally (I think he does have a mental block vs. his friend and much more decorated countryman) and physically.

Also, LOL at you referring to Djokovic as "the hottest player of the last couple years" Does it pain you that much to call him the best player in the world?

 

[britbox]

Also, LOL at you referring to Djokovic as "the hottest player of the last couple years" Does it pain you that much to call him the best player in the world?

I think Moxie was saying she finds Djokovic the most physically attractive specimen over the last 2 years.

 

[Murat Baslamisli]

Roger adding points after the AO is crazy in itself. Congrats.

 

[shawnbm]

Well, I was sleeping but will watch it tonight after work. Shall I just skip the final set? It seems like it was not the highest quality match in the first four sets or at least parts of them, based on what I have read here. I am thrilled Fed has returned to another final in a major, but I don't know if he will win if Rafa is there. He will be forced to hit 95 backhands and I am hearing that he may have sustained a tweak to his groin. One has to be in great shape to battle the Spanish Bull. I know Grigor could win, but I am thinking Nadal in five grueling sets. The manner in which he smacked down Milos was very impressive. I think knowing he is close to returning to a major final and could win and become the first in the Open Era to win all four majors at least twice may make him edgy and miss a few too many. I still think the Mallorcan goes through to face Rog.

 

[DarthFed]

Yes, I do. I think he plays spoiler from here on out. He's older, he's got head issues. He was lucky to do what he's done.

We had this discussion in that thread comparing Wawrinka and Murray. You said he's been fortunate with his draws during those slams that he's won which is beyond ridiculous. He's beaten Djokovic at all 3 slams he has won, and he's beaten Roger at 1 and Nadal at 1. You can just admit you hate the guy after the 2014 AO final (and yes I'm fully aware Nadal hurt himself during the match). Wawrinka had major head issues but I think that's a thing of the past. He did not play well at all last night but again I think Roger on a fast court is his worst matchup because he mixes it up so well which doesn't allow Stan to get much of a rhythm and he also takes time away from Stan who needs a lot of it to set up his shots. I knew Roger would destroy him at the 2015 USO semis for that reason especially since he was playing a lot better at that tournament than here.

Stan probably should've won last night, I'm still not sure how Roger pulled it out because he looked all of his 35 years of age and his serve was not good at all. But I don't think he has head issues at all, he has major consistency issues at smaller events but he steps up in a huge way at majors. That's something to be applauded IMO vs. the opposite which is where Murray was for many years before winning his first slam in 2012.

 

[Moxie]

Thrilled Roger won of course but he looked awful out there, even the first two sets were not good at all. I'm still not sure how the hell he won that match; Stan served better, seemed to move better, hit cleaner, etc. yet he still lost. It was a gutsy 5th set from Roger to save break points and somehow get through after a couple horrific sets to let Stan even the match, but that's about all that can be said. Playing that way on Sunday will lead to a short day regardless of who it's against.

I wouldn't completely hate on Stan there Moxie. I think you said similar things last year before the USO and look what happened there. I saw Stan lose a very routine match to Grigor at Cincy a few weeks before the USO and even I thought he'd be early road kill but he ended up winning the whole thing and in pretty dominating fashion. Roger is by far the worst matchup for Stan on any kind of a fast court, both mentally (I think he does have a mental block vs. his friend and much more decorated countryman) and physically.

Also, LOL at you referring to Djokovic as "the hottest player of the last couple years" Does it pain you that much to call him the best player in the world?

I don't exactly hate Stan, I just don't like him. And while I respect his play when he's top drawer, even beating Djokovic in big moments hasn't warmed me up to him. As to Djokovic, I would have called him the best player in the world, but I thought you'd be offended, because you insist it's Roger. Hey, GOAT is a moveable feast.

 

[Moxie]

You can just admit you hate the guy after the 2014 AO final (and yes I'm fully aware Nadal hurt himself during the match).

I didn't like him before that. Edit: Let me illuminate: He left his wife and 1-year-old daughter because he said he needed to "concentrate on his tennis." Which isn't really that plausible, because tennis players spend 9 months out of the year on the road anyway, so you'd hardly notice a wife and baby. Then there's his tennis head, which is not that reliable. He did sneak out that 2014 AO because of Rafa's back, then lost the subsequent RG in the first round. In case you haven't noticed, I've been on Grigor Dimitrov for the same reason for a long time. And before you chide me for inconsistency, as a past fan of the mercurial Marat Safin, Safin was gorgeous, and crazy on a level neither of them will ever reach, which was its own appeal and I can't explain beyond that.

 

[DarthFed]

I don't exactly hate Stan, I just don't like him. And while I respect his play when he's top drawer, even beating Djokovic in big moments hasn't warmed me up to him. As to Djokovic, I would have called him the best player in the world, but I thought you'd be offended, because you insist it's Roger. Hey, GOAT is a moveable feast.

Roger hasn't been the best player in the world since the early stages of 2010. I know he got back to #1 in 2012 but I think Djokovic was still clearly the best player at that point or at least he was over the course of the full year.

 

[DarthFed]

I didn't like him before that. Edit: Let me illuminate: He left his wife and 1-year-old daughter because he said he needed to "concentrate on his tennis." Which isn't really that plausible, because tennis players spend 9 months out of the year on the road anyway, so you'd hardly notice a wife and baby. Then there's his tennis head, which is not that reliable. He did sneak out that 2014 AO because of Rafa's back, then lost the subsequent RG in the first round. In case you haven't noticed, I've been on Grigor Dimitrov for the same reason for a long time. And before you chide me for inconsistency, as a past fan of the mercurial Marat Safin, Safin was gorgeous, and crazy on a level neither of them will ever reach, which was its own appeal and I can't explain beyond that.

Ok, now it makes more sense. I know you have a woman's perspective there but it's one of those situations where we don't know the details. What if she is a major dragon lady and things had been bad for many years which caused issues with his tennis? And I don't know the situation but is he still a part of the child's life? Paying child support, etc? One can't argue with his results after that went down.

 

[Federberg]

I didn't like him before that. Edit: Let me illuminate: He left his wife and 1-year-old daughter because he said he needed to "concentrate on his tennis." Which isn't really that plausible, because tennis players spend 9 months out of the year on the road anyway, so you'd hardly notice a wife and baby. Then there's his tennis head, which is not that reliable. He did sneak out that 2014 AO because of Rafa's back, then lost the subsequent RG in the first round. In case you haven't noticed, I've been on Grigor Dimitrov for the same reason for a long time. And before you chide me for inconsistency, as a past fan of the mercurial Marat Safin, Safin was gorgeous, and crazy on a level neither of them will ever reach, which was its own appeal and I can't explain beyond that.

That's a bit too woulda coulda for my tastes. Who knows what would have happened if Rafa hadn't gotten injured. Stan was tuning him before, so calling his win lucky really doesn't cut it for me. Might as well say that he got lucky against Novak last year. One thing is clear in retrospect (we certainly couldn't say it at the time) but Stan is an absolute monster in a slam final. The word lucky is at best ungracious he has more than proved himself now

 

[Moxie]

Ok, now it makes more sense. I know you have a woman's perspective there but it's one of those situations where we don't know the details. What if she is a major dragon lady and things had been bad for many years which caused issues with his tennis? And I don't know the situation but is he still a part of the child's life? Paying child support, etc? One can't argue with his results after that went down.

Look, as much as anything else, it's just that you don't cotton to some people. Hell, I don't like Marin Cilic, and there's not much not to like. For that matter, I don't like Marco Bagdahtis, and everyone likes him. I just didn't want you to think it starts and ends with the 2014 AO final. As to the ex, maybe she IS an ol' bitch. But when people marry and split in the same year, it's hard not to think they're flaky. But when they split again, he said "amicably" and she said, publicly, "no it wasn't and he's a dog," and then it comes out he was dogging that Aussie tennis player...whatever. I'll admit it...I'm being judgmental. Beyond a few specific wins over Djokovic, and with my not being one to swoon over a one-handed backhand, I can't really think of anything to like.

 

[teddytennisfan]

Well, I was sleeping but will watch it tonight after work. Shall I just skip the final set? It seems like it was not the highest quality match in the first four sets or at least parts of them, based on what I have read here. I am thrilled Fed has returned to another final in a major, but I don't know if he will win if Rafa is there. He will be forced to hit 95 backhands and I am hearing that he may have sustained a tweak to his groin. One has to be in great shape to battle the Spanish Bull. I know Grigor could win, but I am thinking Nadal in five grueling sets. The manner in which he smacked down Milos was very impressive. I think knowing he is close to returning to a major final and could win and become the first in the Open Era to win all four majors at least twice may make him edgy and miss a few too many. I still think the Mallorcan goes through to face Rog.

a big what if -- but what if Dimitrov and Roger Finals? lol

maybe baby roger will grow up and take the trophy instead of daddy federer?
if rafa plays really well -- i think he will win -- both match-ups.
the dimitrov factor is still in some question UNTIL he really does what the promised talent said - against two very experienced and all-time great layers giving some of their best performances..
should - somehow Dimitrov display even better levels and reach the finals -- he has some chance against roger - BUT it is a different kind of game as opposed to rafa's which dimitrov has to face lke a''a mirror" -- and in this case -- i think roger is still the MASTER between them.
so it's hard to see dimitrov getting his FIRST major against roger --
who will give it all he's got now that he's in the finals - to get HIS 18TH major.


a nadal-roger final will have to be proven ''against the grain" of their head-to-head records even based on their best days together.

and it's hard to see that -- IF - IF -- rafa and roger are PHYSICALLY and TECHNICALLY at their best again if rafa gets past dimitrov --

rafa would let go of that residence in roger's head.

we'll see soon enough.

 

[DarthFed]

If Dimitrov gets by Rafa I'd like his chances vs. Roger. Well, actually I'd dislike them since I want Roger to win. I've seen a lot of Grigor's matches over the years but the match he just played vs. Goffin is the best I've seen him play. The similarities with Roger's game has often been overstated...but in that match he really was moving and hitting like a younger Roger. So if he continues that roll and beats Rafa it'd be a real sense of the young vs. the very old. Experience and guile could push Roger through it but it'd be a battle.

 

[teddytennisfan]

If Dimitrov gets by Rafa I'd like his chances vs. Roger. Well, actually I'd dislike them since I want Roger to win. I've seen a lot of Grigor's matches over the years but the match he just played vs. Goffin is the best I've seen him play. The similarities with Roger's game has often been overstated...but in that match he really was moving and hitting like a younger Roger. So if he continues that roll and beats Rafa it'd be a real sense of the young vs. the very old. Experience and guile could push Roger through it but it'd be a battle.

if you are matching them shot by shot -- and the youth - and let's say that dimitrov does have the technical equipment like roger's, that seems very possible indeed.

i guess it IS the chance to see how -- on more or less similar talents - how YOUTH finally grabs the torch from ''experience".
the extra step here and there. and all that.

we'll see,

in any case -- it is also a chance for roger for yet another historic record - surpassing only his own - his 18th major.

unless dimitrov stops him =
or rafa the bull says 'vamos' to his 15th major while strangling roger yet again..since rafa seems to just know how to rope roger and prevent roger from playing as freely as he does with most others.

i'd guess roger will be rooting -- for dimitrov..lol

 

[Moxie]

That's a bit too woulda coulda for my tastes. Who knows what would have happened if Rafa hadn't gotten injured. Stan was tuning him before, so calling his win lucky really doesn't cut it for me. Might as well say that he got lucky against Novak last year. One thing is clear in retrospect (we certainly couldn't say it at the time) but Stan is an absolute monster in a slam final. The word lucky is at best ungracious he has more than proved himself now

I never said woulda, but I will say coulda. Novak or Roger coulda too, because they had before, but they weren't in the final.
This is very old territory, but it was one set and 2 games against Rafa, in Stan's first final of a Major when Nadal's back went. And Stan lost the 3rd on nerves alone, when Rafa could barely move. If I have to listen to moaning about Roger's mono in the 2008 Wimbledon, then I think I'm allowed to say that Stan maybe got a tiny handout from the tennis gods when Rafa's back went, which everyone watched in real time. Was Stan unlucky because Rafa pulled his back? No. Did it not affect the match? It did. So what's left? It was certainly an advantage Stan wouldn't have had. And I didn't use the word "lucky," you did.

 

[Federberg]

I never said woulda, but I will say coulda. Novak or Roger coulda too, because they had before, but they weren't in the final.
This is very old territory, but it was one set and 2 games against Rafa, in Stan's first final of a Major when Nadal's back went. And Stan lost the 3rd on nerves alone, when Rafa could barely move. If I have to listen to moaning about Roger's mono in the 2008 Wimbledon, then I think I'm allowed to say that Stan maybe got a tiny handout from the tennis gods when Rafa's back went, which everyone watched in real time. Was Stan unlucky because Rafa pulled his back? No. Did it not affect the match? It did. So what's left? It was certainly an advantage Stan wouldn't have had. And I didn't use the word "lucky," you did.

Ok you said "sneak", which implied to me that he was lucky. I can certainly understand that excuse back in the day, but Stan has proved time and again that he can take out even the best. If you want to keep drinking the koolaid that he won the match just because of Rafa's back have at it. Frankly he's proved enough now to show that it was never as simple as that.

Not sure what that has to do with the mono thing. For my part I have always argued that he had mono. It's interesting to me that some (I can't remember if you're one of those) claimed that he never had mono at all! I'm not sure if that means he would have won the tournament if that hadn't happened. Novak has since proven that the AO is his major. He could easily have won it who knows. My argument regarding Roger's mono is that it completely disrupted his 2008 and we now know it was the beginning of the end of his dominance.

Let's not go down this path, this will take us inevitably to you know where.. and we both know that our views will never change on the elephant in the room The whole excuse thing is a bit tired anyway