How will Wawrinka finish up his career?

[El Dude]

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

This is goofy. Wawrinka and Cilic are two completely different birds. Or rather, they are similar in that both are erratic players who are able to, at times, play like a truly great player. But Wawrinka is, overall, significantly better.

You could argue that every winner is lucky to some degree. I don't see an inordinate amount of luck on Stan's part with his two Slam titles.

What I think you are confusing here is "luck" with what is really the case, which is inconsistency. Stan is an inconsistent player, capable of beating anyone on a good day, but also capable of losing to lesser players (e.g. Robin Haase, Federico Delbonis, Adrian Mannarino) on a bad day. But to say that he has won two Slams because of luck is, well, goofy!

 

[dante1976]

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".

Pennetta USO 2015 & Wawrinka AO 2014 to name a few recent lucky winners
INJURY of their opponents, Kvitova collapsed at 1:0 and 3:1 in 2nd set + Vinci beats Serena and that is literary 1 in a 1.000.000 type of win so what is it called then? "Animal"? "The man"?
Just deal with the fact that luck is crucial part of every sport out there
You all know that, I certainly know that but hey, let's hype, speculate and confront our opinions till the end of time

 

[Riotbeard]

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".

Pennetta USO 2015 & Wawrinka AO 2014 to name a few recent lucky winners
INJURY of their opponents, Kvitova collapsed at 1:0 and 3:1 in 2nd set + Vinci beats Serena and that is literary 1 in a 1.000.000 type of win so what is it called then? "Animal"? "The man"?
Just deal with the fact that luck is crucial part of every sport out there
You all know that, I certainly know that but hey, let's hype, speculate and confront our opinions till the end of time

Nobody disputes luck is a factor, but since you aren't on every thread about every other player saying their lucky, then by reasoned deduction you are saying Stan is particularly lucky, which you have not at all proved.

 

[Kirijax]

Luck certainly plays a part. Especially when you look at the One Slam Wonders. For players like Cilic or Pennetta. A lot of things had to go right for it to happen.

 

[El Dude]

If I remember correctly, Stan was up over Rafa a set and a break (6-3, 2-0) before Rafa felt a twinge in his back.

 

[Riotbeard]

If I remember correctly, Stan was up over Rafa a set and a break (6-3, 2-0) before Rafa felt a twinge in his back.

Not to mention beating the 3 time defending champion in a grueling five setter. And he was lucky this year at the F.O. to have to face the world number 2 in the semi's and number 1 in the finals...

 

[Murat Baslamisli]

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".

Pennetta USO 2015 & Wawrinka AO 2014 to name a few recent lucky winners
INJURY of their opponents, Kvitova collapsed at 1:0 and 3:1 in 2nd set + Vinci beats Serena and that is literary 1 in a 1.000.000 type of win so what is it called then? "Animal"? "The man"?
Just deal with the fact that luck is crucial part of every sport out there
You all know that, I certainly know that but hey, let's hype, speculate and confront our opinions till the end of time

There is zero luck in any of the examples you gave up there. Did you want me to write the stories of Pennetta or Wawrinka for you, at what age they started playing, how many hours they practiced as a child, what they were doing while their friends were partying, when they won their first tournament, how long it took to make it to top 120 to be able to enter a Grand Slam tournament?

That "luck" you are talking about took years . Why aren't you winning slams? Is it because you are "unlucky"?

There is no such things as a lucky slam winner. Even to win the lottery you have to get out of your behind and go buy a ticket.

 

[dante1976]

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

Pennetta USO 2015 & Wawrinka AO 2014 to name a few recent lucky winners
INJURY of their opponents, Kvitova collapsed at 1:0 and 3:1 in 2nd set + Vinci beats Serena and that is literary 1 in a 1.000.000 type of win so what is it called then? "Animal"? "The man"?
Just deal with the fact that luck is crucial part of every sport out there
You all know that, I certainly know that but hey, let's hype, speculate and confront our opinions till the end of time

There is zero luck in any of the examples you gave up there. Did you want me to write the stories of Pennetta or Wawrinka for you, at what age they started playing, how many hours they practiced as a child, what they were doing while their friends were partying, when they won their first tournament, how long it took to make it to top 120 to be able to enter a Grand Slam tournament?

That "luck" you are talking about took years . Why aren't you winning slams? Is it because you are "unlucky"?

There is no such things as a lucky slam winner. Even to win the lottery you have to get out of your behind and go buy a ticket.

Meh standard "internet warrior" type of logic You just have an answer for everything do you? And that "Rocky" type of logic is pretty old school btw
Just for an example, did Zuckerberg spill his sweat, blood and tears or he was just lucky? Not to mention tons of soccer players that don't even play, they all sitting on benches and are millionaires!?
Oh and btw Stan somehow manages to beat Thiemo de Bakker... you wanna know how Thiemo's eventual win would be called Luck!

 

[Murat Baslamisli]

Pennetta USO 2015 & Wawrinka AO 2014 to name a few recent lucky winners
INJURY of their opponents, Kvitova collapsed at 1:0 and 3:1 in 2nd set + Vinci beats Serena and that is literary 1 in a 1.000.000 type of win so what is it called then? "Animal"? "The man"?
Just deal with the fact that luck is crucial part of every sport out there
You all know that, I certainly know that but hey, let's hype, speculate and confront our opinions till the end of time

There is zero luck in any of the examples you gave up there. Did you want me to write the stories of Pennetta or Wawrinka for you, at what age they started playing, how many hours they practiced as a child, what they were doing while their friends were partying, when they won their first tournament, how long it took to make it to top 120 to be able to enter a Grand Slam tournament?

That "luck" you are talking about took years . Why aren't you winning slams? Is it because you are "unlucky"?

There is no such things as a lucky slam winner. Even to win the lottery you have to get out of your behind and go buy a ticket.

Meh standard "internet warrior" type of logic You just have an answer for everything do you? And that "Rocky" type of logic is pretty old school btw
Just for an example, did Zuckerberg spill his sweat, blood and tears or he was just lucky? Not to mention tons of soccer players that don't even play, they all sitting on benches and are millionaires!?
Oh and btw Stan somehow manages to beat Thiemo de Bakker... you wanna know how Thiemo's eventual win would be called Luck!

So you are saying you are just unlucky eh? For your info, Zuckerberg was writing code and building a network between his father's office and his home in high school. I guess you were "unlucky" you did not get in that action ...It is much easier to sit on your ass and watch others and call it luck, I am sure.

 

[Murat Baslamisli]

Pennetta USO 2015 & Wawrinka AO 2014 to name a few recent lucky winners
INJURY of their opponents, Kvitova collapsed at 1:0 and 3:1 in 2nd set + Vinci beats Serena and that is literary 1 in a 1.000.000 type of win so what is it called then? "Animal"? "The man"?
Just deal with the fact that luck is crucial part of every sport out there
You all know that, I certainly know that but hey, let's hype, speculate and confront our opinions till the end of time

There is zero luck in any of the examples you gave up there. Did you want me to write the stories of Pennetta or Wawrinka for you, at what age they started playing, how many hours they practiced as a child, what they were doing while their friends were partying, when they won their first tournament, how long it took to make it to top 120 to be able to enter a Grand Slam tournament?

That "luck" you are talking about took years . Why aren't you winning slams? Is it because you are "unlucky"?

There is no such things as a lucky slam winner. Even to win the lottery you have to get out of your behind and go buy a ticket.

Meh standard "internet warrior" type of logic You just have an answer for everything do you? And that "Rocky" type of logic is pretty old school btw
Just for an example, did Zuckerberg spill his sweat, blood and tears or he was just lucky? Not to mention tons of soccer players that don't even play, they all sitting on benches and are millionaires!?
Oh and btw Stan somehow manages to beat Thiemo de Bakker... you wanna know how Thiemo's eventual win would be called Luck!

I do not. I am not ashamed to admit it. I do have an answer for the likes of you that do not respect work.

 

[dante1976]

When someone collapses on the court and you "win" a match in which you were losing until that moment, what is it then? Hard work? Blood, sweat and tears? Maybe, just maybe, luck

You know what would be "like a boss" behavior? To tank/quit a match like that especially when your opponent is obviously injured, but that's not gonna happen ever 'cause of greedy sponsors and big money in sports
"Professionalism" is just a sweet sounding excuse

Hahaha good one for zuckerberg... yeah and tons of ppl around the world did same/better things even younger, so?
Who knows how many thousands of them works even harder/better but... he/just a mere couple of them got lucky

Yeah hard work (in general) usually pays of but sometimes someone got very lucky (in sports, in life generally, etc...) and that's it

 

[Murat Baslamisli]

Whatever you choose to believe brother. You seem to just look at end results of people's journeys and ignore how they got there. Me, I never believed in luck. I will leave you with a quote attributed to Jefferson but it is debateable who said it first. Either way, it works for me , philosophically speaking:

"I am a great believer in luck. The harder I work, the more of it I seem to have"

 

[Riotbeard]

When someone collapses on the court and you "win" a match in which you were losing until that moment, what is it then? Hard work? Blood, sweat and tears? Maybe, just maybe, luck

You know what would be "like a boss" behavior? To tank/quit a match like that especially when your opponent is obviously injured, but that's not gonna happen ever 'cause of greedy sponsors and big money in sports
"Professionalism" is just a sweet sounding excuse

Hahaha good one for zuckerberg... yeah and tons of ppl around the world did same/better things even younger, so?
Who knows how many thousands of them works even harder/better but... he/just a mere couple of them got lucky

Yeah hard work (in general) usually pays of but sometimes someone got very lucky (in sports, in life generally, etc...) and that's it

STOP WINKING!!!! :speechless:

 

[isabelle]

Stanimal "ll finish up his career struggling vs De Bakker, shame on him !!

 

[GameSetAndMath]

Stanimal "ll finish up his career struggling vs De Bakker, shame on him !!

Well, at least he got the job done (unlike in last year's quarterfinals when he lost and put the Swiss in deep trouble).

 

[herios]

The "inconsistent" Stan was consistent where matter the most, in slams. This year he has a W at RG, two SF at the USO and AO and a QF at W. This record is right up there with Roger and Andy, even better than them, who each scored a "slip": Roger at the AO and Andy at the USO.

 

[Great Hands]

To say Wawrinka was lucky to win his slams is silly. At the AO14, he beat the three-time defending champion, the only guy to beat Novak at the AO in the last 5 YEARS!
At the FO15, he demolished Fed, and then played one of the highest-level matches I've ever seen to beat world no.1 Djokovic. This is not luck!

Even with Cilic, people sometimes see his USO win as coming out of nowhere, as an anomaly, but he made the final 4 again this year, and was a set and 5-0 up against Murray in the QFs 2012 (the year Murray won it!) before choking. And he also caused an upset to beat then-world no.2 Murray there in 2009 and make the QFs, only losing to eventual champion Del Potro in 4 sets. So the signs were there that Cilic had great potential on the USO hard courts, and he showed it again this year.

 

[Great Hands]

To say Wawrinka was lucky to win his slams is silly. At the AO14, he beat the three-time defending champion, the only guy to beat Novak at the AO in the last 5 YEARS!
At the FO15, he demolished Fed, and then played one of the highest-level matches I've ever seen to beat world no.1 Djokovic. This is not luck!

Even with Cilic, people sometimes see his USO win as coming out of nowhere, as an anomaly, but he made the final 4 again this year, and was a set and 5-0 up against Murray in the QFs 2012 (the year Murray won it!) before choking. And he also caused an upset to beat then-world no.2 Murray there in 2009 and make the QFs, again only losing to eventual champion Del Potro. So the signs were there that Cilic had great potential on the USO hard courts, and he showed it again this year.

 

[Great Hands]

Wawrinka was not lucky to win his slams. At the AO14, he beat the three-time defending champion, thus becoming the only guy to beat Novak at the AO in the last 5 YEARS!
At the FO15, he demolished Fed, and then produced one of the highest-level performances I've ever seen to beat world no.1 Djokovic. This is not luck!

 

[kskate2]

Whatever you choose to believe brother. You seem to just look at end results of people's journeys and ignore how they got there. Me, I never believed in luck. I will leave you with a quote attributed to Jefferson but it is debateable who said it first. Either way, it works for me , philosophically speaking:

"I am a great believer in luck. The harder I work, the more of it I seem to have"

This sorta reminds me of a statement Martina made on TTC years ago when asked about winning a slam. She always says it takes many factors (skill, hard work, conditioning, mental toughness, etc.) She also said sometimes you need a little luck to give you that extra umph (like a fortunate draw, good weather, scheduling, etc). The last thing she said was in the end you have to beat a whole bunch of people to win a slam, period.