Stan vs. Murray-Who is greater

[GameSetAndMath]

Andy's first Wimbledon was aided by premature upsets of both Roger and Rafa (both of whom were in his half). Andy's second Wimbledon he did not have to play Roger, Rafa or Novak. Andy's USO was aided by wind.

But, Stan fully deserved each one of his wins. Look at this USO, He beat three quality players in Del Potro, Kei Nishikori and Novak in the business end. In AO 2014, even though Rafa might have had some back issues, one should remember that it was Stan who took out #1 seed Novak. Similarly, in RG 2015 Stan defeated a hands down favorite in Nole.

While I do agree that Andy is more consistent in going deep, there is no question who is the big match player.

I agree with your last sentence about Andy and Stan's careers.

However, I disagreed with your first two paragraphs. I'm not saying which titles are more impressive than other but what I am saying is that all of Murray's and Wawrinka's slam titles are all equally important. Winning a major is tough so you can't really say which title was more impressive.

If we go by that criteria on the opponent the champions faced during the tournament, then I think Djokovic has the most impressive resume even though he has 5 less slams than Federer.

Roger and Novak don't have same number of slams.

Andy and Stan have the same number of slams. So, in this case it is fare to look at the quality of their slam wins to distinguish them.

Needless to say that I agree that Andy has much better record on the tour and in particular on the ATP Masters events.

 

[Fiero425]

Stan has made the HOF IMO, but he's hit his ceiling! He started too late and had bad slumps! He can "bring it," but his tour record is miserable compared to Murray; even though I prefer Wawrinka's game! :ras: :angel: :dodgy:

 

[El Dude]

Another way to put it is that Stan has a higher ceiling, Andy a higher floor. But the gap between their floors is much larger than their ceilings, which is why Andy's career is so much more consistent.

 

[sid]

Stan has made the HOF IMO, but he's hit his ceiling! He started too late and had bad slumps! He can "bring it," but his tour record is miserable compared to Murray; even though I prefer Wawrinka's game! :ras: :angel: :dodgy:

Going back years in Slams with these 2,Andy played Stan many times,maybe we should look @ who beat who first in matches,where thay did not win Slams v each other?I don't know the Stat's here maybe El dude can come up with some on this.

ps congrats to Stan on winning USO.

 

[shawnbm]

I hate such a comparison--apples and oranges.

 

[Fiero425]

Stan has made the HOF IMO, but he's hit his ceiling! He started too late and had bad slumps! He can "bring it," but his tour record is miserable compared to Murray; even though I prefer Wawrinka's game! :ras: :angel: :dodgy:

Going back years in Slams with these 2,Andy played Stan many times,maybe we should look @ who beat who first in matches,where thay did not win Slams v each other?I don't know the Stat's here maybe El dude can come up with some on this.

ps congrats to Stan on winning USO.

Wouldn't that open a whole new "can of worms" with Rafa and Roger the players analyzed! Not sure people want to take in that reality after so many years of making it one of the best all time rivalries ever! :nono :angel: :dodgy: :cover

- - http://fiero4251.blogspot.com/2016/08/fan-page-novak-nole-djokovic.html - -

 

[El Dude]

Stan has made the HOF IMO, but he's hit his ceiling! He started too late and had bad slumps! He can "bring it," but his tour record is miserable compared to Murray; even though I prefer Wawrinka's game! :ras: :angel: :dodgy:

Going back years in Slams with these 2,Andy played Stan many times,maybe we should look @ who beat who first in matches,where thay did not win Slams v each other?I don't know the Stat's here maybe El dude can come up with some on this.

ps congrats to Stan on winning USO.

Here's their head-to-head:

http://www.stevegtennis.com/head-to-head/men/Andy_Murray/Stanislas_Wawrinka/

9-7 overall for Murray. It is interesting to note that Stan won 3 of their first 4 matches, from 2005 to mid-2008, then Andy went 7-1 from late 2008 through 2012. Since Stan's breakthrough in 2013, he's up 3-1, although Andy has the last win at the French Open SF.

They've only ever met in one final, Doha in 2008, which Andy won.

 

[tennisville]

Career wise Murray is ahead but if we look surface wise, Stan has more hard and clay court majors. Andy has more grass court majors

 

[isabelle]

it'ld be funny to see Stan win Wimbly but he dislikes grass and he dislikes posh atmosphere so I don't think we'll see that one day

 

[DarthFed]

^ You can't count Stan out anywhere. We've made that mistake a couple times now. I was shocked he won 1 major let alone 3. With that said the slow courts still suit his game better but he just won a GS on a fairly fast hardcourt. I sure as heck won't count him out at Wimbledon or any other slam.

As for who is greater it is clearly Murray. This only becomes a real debate if Stan finishes with more slams.

 

[El Dude]

Stan should be a role model for all players who haven't done much by the time they're in their mid-to-late 20s. It is amazing to think that at the beginning of 2014, Stan was 28 years old--soon to be 29--had never won anything more than an ATP 250, and only just barely broken into the top 10. Since then, he's won three Slams, a Masters, three ATP 500s, been a fixture in the top 10, and really been the second or third best player during that period of time.

His career path is truly unique. Now maybe the ship has sailed for folks like Tsonga and Berdych, but even those two can look at Stan and say, "if he won two Slams in his 30s, maybe I can win one." But he should be especially inspirational for players like Kei, Milos, and Grigor. Kei and Milos have had much better careers so far than Stan had at the same age, and Grigor similar.