How will Wawrinka finish up his career?

[DarthFed]

^ He has had by far the 2nd best slam results over the course of the last 2 years. That's the 8 biggest tournaments where he's badly outperformed all but the best player in the world who he happened to beat at AO last year and beat like a drum at RG this year (thus the real reason you hate him). That's not luck or inconsistency.

He has been mediocre aside from slams but that doesn't matter as much. On the flip side Roger and Murray have done poorly at slams these past two years but pretty good outside of them (in Murray's case it's only this year he's done well in lesser events). Now do you think there is any chance in hell Stan would take Roger's or Murray's last 2 years? You're simply putting too much stock in lesser events.

 

[herios]

^ He has had by far the 2nd best slam results over the course of the last 2 years. That's the 8 biggest tournaments where he's badly outperformed all but the best player in the world who he happened to beat at AO last year and beat like a drum at RG this year (thus the real reason you hate him). That's not luck or inconsistency.

He has been mediocre aside from slams but that doesn't matter as much. On the flip side Roger and Murray have done poorly at slams these past two years but pretty good outside of them (in Murray's case it's only this year he's done well in lesser events). Now do you think there is any chance in hell Stan would take Roger's or Murray's last 2 years? You're simply putting too much stock in lesser events.

Aside the slams, Stan did very well in Monte Carlo as well. That was also very compelling win.

 

[Front242]

Sorry but disagree. Roger bent over meekly in the 3rd set of MC. He played well enough before set 3 but it was almost like he gave up after set 2. Embarrassing 3rd set. Stan didn't have to do anything special other than keep knocking the ball over the net on the other side.

Considering that was Roger's best chance in recent years to win that Masters event he should be quite rightly ashamed of that 3rd set. Major opportunity blown.

 

[herios]

Sorry but disagree. Roger bent over meekly in the 3rd set of MC. He played well enough before set 3 but it was almost like he gave up after set 2. Embarrassing 3rd set. Stan didn't have to do anything special other than keep knocking the ball over the net on the other side.

Considering that was Roger's best chance in recent years to win that Masters event he should be quite rightly ashamed of that 3rd set. Major opportunity blown.

LOL. And that is why I think Roger is done as far as slams is concerned. He will find a way to lose if he comes close. He is spooked by the opportunity.

 

[Front242]

^ Sadly, I think you're dead right. Last 2 slam finals his level has gone way down compared to what it was before it. And no, it's not just the opponent as we've seen how well he did against him just a few weeks ago.

 

[Kirijax]

No need to belittle Wawrinka's lone Masters title. He played well and earned it. Wish he could do that more often at Masters tournaments. He's too quiet at the Masters.

 

[Front242]

If you can find the full match somewhere, go back and watch set 3 again Stan didn't have to do anything at all to win that set. Just plain simple truth. One of the worst 3rd sets Roger has played in recent years. Seems to me Stan's game wanders so much in terms of quality he needs the best of 5 format to play himself into form.

 

[Kirijax]

If you can find the full match somewhere, go back and watch set 3 again Stan didn't have to do anything at all to win that set. Just plain simple truth. One of the worst 3rd sets Roger has played in recent years. Seems to me Stan's game wanders so much in terms of quality he needs the best of 5 format to play himself into form.

I did. Doesn't change my opinion. Just because Federer played like crap on that day doesn't mean Wawrinka didn't have anything to do with it.

 

[Murat Baslamisli]

I believe Stan is a different animal than most other players in that when he is on fire, he beats everyone. Literally. You just cannot solve his game. There are solutions to a Murray on fire , for example. Not Stan . He powers through you and you just say too good. All top guys have experienced that. The problem is how often does Stanimal show up? Who knows...I wish he showed up more. He is so darn unpredictable. He can lose to anyone on any given day. Or beat anyone.

I would like him to win at least one more slam and a couple more masters. Will he? No clue.

 

[Kirijax]

I believe Stan is a different animal than most other players in that when he is on fire, he beats everyone. Literally. You just cannot solve his game. There are solutions to a Murray on fire , for example. Not Stan . He powers through you and you just say too good. All top guys have experienced that. The problem is how often does Stanimal show up? Who knows...I wish he showed up more. He is so darn unpredictable. He can lose to anyone on any given day. Or beat anyone.

I would like him to win at least one more slam and a couple more masters. Will he? No clue.

I would like to see him win a few Masters. It's odd that he has more Slams than Masters. Almost Cilician. :snicker

 

[El Dude]

Stan also has more Slams than ATP 500s - he only won his first earlier this year.

A strange animal that Stan.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

Stan has at least one more GS in him.

 

[Riotbeard]

Stan also has more Slams than ATP 500s - he only won his first earlier this year.

A strange animal that Stan.

I thought he won rotterdam last year. Has time gone that slow...

 

[Kirijax]

Stan also has more Slams than ATP 500s - he only won his first earlier this year.

A strange animal that Stan.

I thought he won rotterdam last year. Has time gone that slow...

Yeah, that was this year, way back in February! Wawrinka has 2 Slams, 1 Masters, 1 500 and 6 250s. That's it. He won three titles last year and three so far this year.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

Stan also has more Slams than ATP 500s - he only won his first earlier this year.

A strange animal that Stan.

Well, Cilic also has won more Slams than ATP 1000s or ATP 500s. :snicker

So, Stan is not all that strange.:exclamation:

 

[dante1976]

Stan also has more Slams than ATP 500s - he only won his first earlier this year.

A strange animal that Stan.

Well, Cilic also has won more Slams than ATP 1000s or ATP 500s. :snicker

So, Stan is not all that strange.:exclamation:

That is exactly why they are in the "same league" of lucky winners
There is no consistency, just a couple of lucky "ball bashing" at the right time
It happens a lot in all kinds of sports, for example "steaua" and "red star" were European champions (yeah I know, younger generations have to google them ) but such a winners are exactly that... lucky and nothing more
Everything else is just pure hype.
You might as well call Roberta Vinci "Animal" and Flavia Pennetta "Terminator" but both of them still be a lucky winners

 

[Riotbeard]

Stan also has more Slams than ATP 500s - he only won his first earlier this year.

A strange animal that Stan.

Well, Cilic also has won more Slams than ATP 1000s or ATP 500s. :snicker

So, Stan is not all that strange.:exclamation:

That is exactly why they are in the "same league" of lucky winners
There is no consistency, just a couple of lucky "ball bashing" at the right time
It happens a lot in all kinds of sports, for example "steaua" and "red star" were European champions (yeah I know, younger generations have to google them ) but such a winners are exactly that... lucky and nothing more
Everything else is just pure hype.
You might as well call Roberta Vinci "Animal" and Flavia Pennetta "Terminator" but both of them still be a lucky winners

You are grossly misusing the wink emoticon. None of your meaning implies wink (as if you didn't mean what you say or are joking).


Stan has been very consistent at slams unlike Cilic. In general, no he is not consistent like the big 4, but he is not a flash in pan like Cilic. Stan will have at least 2+ of year of making the WTF.

 

[Riotbeard]

Delpo also has won more slams than masters...

 

[Riotbeard]

I think all of the big 4 have won more slams or masters than 500s or 250s. Except Andy...

 

[Murat Baslamisli]

Stan also has more Slams than ATP 500s - he only won his first earlier this year.

A strange animal that Stan.

Well, Cilic also has won more Slams than ATP 1000s or ATP 500s. :snicker

So, Stan is not all that strange.:exclamation:

That is exactly why they are in the "same league" of lucky winners
There is no consistency, just a couple of lucky "ball bashing" at the right time
It happens a lot in all kinds of sports, for example "steaua" and "red star" were European champions (yeah I know, younger generations have to google them ) but such a winners are exactly that... lucky and nothing more
Everything else is just pure hype.
You might as well call Roberta Vinci "Animal" and Flavia Pennetta "Terminator" but both of them still be a lucky winners

Nobody in the history of tennis won a slam by "luck".