Wawrinka

[sid]

Is he a one year wonder?
discuss

 

[tented]

You beat me to it! I was going to post a prediction that he will never win anything over a 500-level tournament again.

 

[sid]

Hi tented,Stan seems to have gone backwards after such a great year,i starting to think that one year was a one off.

 

[El Dude]

A bit premature, I think. At least we have to call him a two-year wonder, as he was pretty good in 2013 too - no big tournament wins, but good enough overall results to finish #8. Also, he has already won two titles this year and a SF finish at the AO with a better overall win-loss pct so far than last year. So I think this is way too soon, simply after a loss to a very talented player.

I think this idea is based upon unreasonable expectations. It was always highly unlikely that Stan could win another Slam, and probably not another Masters. But he'll remain a top 10ish player through this year at least. He's having a late career peak, something we might see from more players going forward.

 

[Kirijax]

Wawrinka's career line:

crap crap crap crap WONDERFUL (get a lot of ponts) crap crap crap crap crap STUPENDOUS (get a lot of points) crap crap crap crap crap STUNNING (get a lot of points) crap crap crap crap....etc.

 

[Denis]

A bit premature, I think. At least we have to call him a two-year wonder, as he was pretty good in 2013 too - no big tournament wins, but good enough overall results to finish #8. Also, he has already won two titles this year and a SF finish at the AO with a better overall win-loss pct so far than last year. So I think this is way too soon, simply after a loss to a very talented player.

I think this idea is based upon unreasonable expectations. It was always highly unlikely that Stan could win another Slam, and probably not another Masters. But he'll remain a top 10ish player through this year at least. He's having a late career peak, something we might see from more players going forward.

Couldn't agree more.

Good player and good for him that he already had such good results, beating Nadal in a slam final. Another masters will be difficult considering the field, but who knows.

Btw, I don't think tented and Sid have 'unreasonable expectations' of Stan, they just don't like him. So they'll start a thread like this.

 

[JesuslookslikeBorg]

do we stick a fork in stan ?..is he done ?.

 

[tented]

Btw, I don't think tented and Sid have 'unreasonable expectations' of Stan, they just don't like him. So they'll start a thread like this.

First of all, one person starts a thread, not two. Nor did we "plan" this thread together.

Second, I don't dislike Stan. I did not, nor have I ever indicated such a thing. Approaching tennis from this perspective tells us more about you than anything else. There are plenty of players I don't like, and I've made it quite clear who they are. There's no deception going on here.

Third, for me to have "unreasonable expectations" would mean I expect him to do well. I've never encountered such a phrase indicating anything other than positive results.

Fourth, has he won a GS or Masters 1000 in the last year? No. Has he even been in such a final since MC last year? No. In fact, the best he's done at every MS since winning here last year was one quarterfinal (Cincinnati), and he has only ever been in one other MS final -- back in 2008 -- and lost.

It isn't a big leap to think that a 30-year-old who has only ever been in two Masters finals, and one GS final, will never be in another one again, nevertheless win.

And, once again, making such a prediction has nothing to do with whether or not I like him. It's based on the numbers.

 

[Moxie]

^ I also thought it was a bit unfair of Denisovich to jump to the conclusion that sid and you, tented, didn't like Wawrinka. The thread title is merely "Wawrinka," which is neutral, and we've seen far more opinionated thread titles about other players, for and against. Sid offered a topic for discussion, and tented gave the first opinion.

Wawrinka has made a late-career surge, with a couple of good/great seasons, but has also had a lot of disappointing results since the AO and MC wins last year. Failing to get out of the 2nd round of MC this year seems a good time to discuss him. It bears remembering that offering an opinion in either direction about a player might better be taken on face-value, rather than being dismissed as someone just "not liking" a player. It hinders interesting conversation if we take individual opinions to be personality-driven. We're all entitled to an opinion without someone else trying to qualify or invalidate it based on some perceived agenda.

Let's face it: we can pat Stan on the back, but aren't we all wondering if he's passed his sell-by date?

 

[tented]

^ I also thought it was a bit unfair of Denisovich to jump to the conclusion that sid and you, tented, didn't like Wawrinka. The thread title is merely "Wawrinka," which is neutral, and we've seen far more opinionated thread titles about other players, for and against. Sid offered a topic for discussion, and tented gave the first opinion.

Wawrinka has made a late-career surge, with a couple of good/great seasons, but has also had a lot of disappointing results since the AO and MC wins last year. Failing to get out of the 2nd round of MC this year seems a good time to discuss him. It bears remembering that offering an opinion in either direction about a player might better be taken on face-value, rather than being dismissed as someone just "not liking" a player. It hinders interesting conversation if we take individual opinions to be personality-driven. We're all entitled to an opinion without someone else trying to qualify or invalidate it based on some perceived agenda.

Exactly. It's the same as the countless times Fedal fans have buried and exhumed Federer and Nadal: early losses, such as Roger's at Wimbledon a couple of years ago or Rafa's to Rosol and Darcis, prompt discussions concerning their futures. They aren't fueled by like or dislike; they're standard sports-driven speculation. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

^ I also thought it was a bit unfair of Denisovich to jump to the conclusion that sid and you, tented, didn't like Wawrinka. The thread title is merely "Wawrinka," which is neutral, and we've seen far more opinionated thread titles about other players, for and against. Sid offered a topic for discussion, and tented gave the first opinion.

Wawrinka has made a late-career surge, with a couple of good/great seasons, but has also had a lot of disappointing results since the AO and MC wins last year. Failing to get out of the 2nd round of MC this year seems a good time to discuss him. It bears remembering that offering an opinion in either direction about a player might better be taken on face-value, rather than being dismissed as someone just "not liking" a player. It hinders interesting conversation if we take individual opinions to be personality-driven. We're all entitled to an opinion without someone else trying to qualify or invalidate it based on some perceived agenda.

Exactly. It's the same as the countless times Fedal fans have buried and exhumed Federer and Nadal: early losses, such as Roger's at Wimbledon a couple of years ago or Rafa's to Rosol and Darcis, prompt discussions concerning their futures. They aren't fueled by like or dislike; they're standard sports-driven speculation. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.

Except when Bill Clinton has it.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

As Kirijax pointed out, Stan's problem is more about maintaining consistency and not so much about rising to his peak. So, I believe that he will still do some great things at sporadic points of time.
He will probably reach couple more SFs in slams and may be two more finals in Masters and win a couple of 500s.

I still think he will do well (meaning SF or better) in atleast one of Madrid or Rome. However,
he is playing in the new Swiss tourney in the week before RG (got some appearance fee) leading
to three continuous weeks of play before RG. Hence, I bet that he won't make any noise at RG.
That is rather unfortunate as I think his game suits clay courts better.

 

[Great Hands]

I think it's fair to question Stan at this point given that his form in 2013-2014 promised much, but he hasn't really built on it. Other players (not naming any names! ) are given a hard time constantly, so I don't see why Stan should be exempt.

I hinted at this in another thread, but why do people think Stan struggles so much with consistency? Is it just that his game is lower percentage? Or is it mental? Could he improve this aspect of his game by, say, consciously looking to play the percentages a bit more if his winners are misfiring, and thus maybe be able to 'guts' out a few more wins when he's not at his best?

 

[Kieran]

Wawrinka! There's a name to conjure with. Changed it after winning Oz last season to Stanley Wow!, but it hasn't brought him any luck. I think Stan will find some spite late on in the year, or next year, because he can be a stubborn git at times, but the form he had late in 2013, and to this stage last year?


Nah... :nono

 

[JesuslookslikeBorg]

stan is practising the flugelhorn too much and it is affecting his tennis somewhat.

 

[sid]

A bit premature, I think. At least we have to call him a two-year wonder, as he was pretty good in 2013 too - no big tournament wins, but good enough overall results to finish #8. Also, he has already won two titles this year and a SF finish at the AO with a better overall win-loss pct so far than last year. So I think this is way too soon, simply after a loss to a very talented player.

I think this idea is based upon unreasonable expectations. It was always highly unlikely that Stan could win another Slam, and probably not another Masters. But he'll remain a top 10ish player through this year at least. He's having a late career peak, something we might see from more players going forward.

Couldn't agree more.

Good player and good for him that he already had such good results, beating Nadal in a slam final. Another masters will be difficult considering the field, but who knows.

Btw, I don't think tented and Sid have 'unreasonable expectations' of Stan, they just don't like him. So they'll start a thread like this.

I don't dislike Stan @tall,ive said many times he has a amazing backhand.

 

[Billie]

How can a player who has been in top 10 for several years be labelled a one year wonder? I don't understand it. A chance presented itself to him to win one of the 4 biggest titles in tennis and he took it. He needed a bit of luck to win it, like all players not named Nole, Rafa and Roger (even they need a bit of luck sometimes), and he did it. I would say that he has had a great career and it's not over yet.

 

[Fiero425]

How can a player who has been in top 10 for several years be labelled a one year wonder? I don't understand it. A chance presented itself to him to win one of the 4 biggest titles in tennis and he took it. He needed a bit of luck to win it, like all players not named Nole, Rafa and Roger (even they need a bit of luck sometimes), and he did it. I would say that he has had a great career and it's not over yet.

That's the way people think of Nole; some kind of "also ran" that just carries the bags for Roger and Rafa! Even the press and so called expert commentators defer to the "Top 2" not a Top 3 deep down! When Roger fell off a bit, was changing rackets and trying to get over injures, he dropped to a solid #3, then dipped a toe for about a minute at #6! The endorsements and magazine covers never even slowed down! Nole had the best year in '11 and it's still thought of as him being a "1 hit wonder!" :nono uzzled :angel: :dodgy: :cover

 

[Billie]

How can a player who has been in top 10 for several years be labelled a one year wonder? I don't understand it. A chance presented itself to him to win one of the 4 biggest titles in tennis and he took it. He needed a bit of luck to win it, like all players not named Nole, Rafa and Roger (even they need a bit of luck sometimes), and he did it. I would say that he has had a great career and it's not over yet.

That's the way people think of Nole; some kind of "also ran" that just carries the bags for Roger and Rafa! Even the press and so called expert commentators defer to the "Top 2" not a Top 3 deep down! When Roger fell off a bit, was changing rackets and trying to get over injures, he dropped to a solid #3, then dipped a toe for about a minute at #6! The endorsements and magazine covers never even slowed down! Nole had the best year in '11 and it's still thought of as him being a "1 hit wonder!" :nono uzzled :angel: :dodgy: :cover

What do they know then?

I think everybody has been aware of how good Nole is for a while now. You can't do anything about endorsements, those last for years once you sign them. But Nole has done pretty well for himself, despite trying to earn a living in the toughest era.

When he is on, Wawrinka has such a beautiful and strong BH and FH. It's hard to maintain good form for a long period of time. That is his biggest problem, imo. But from time to time he shines and surprises everybody. In winning a major, he has done better than most of the players on ATP tour. Maybe he strikes again and wins something big soon, I wouldn't be surprised.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

Stan is separating from his wife . I know that some will say this is personal matter and we are discussing tennis here. But in real life, everything is connected. The trouble in the family situation might possibly explain his early exits in the last three Masters tourneys. He was actually quite consistent from the beginning of this year until before IW (winning Chennai, Rotterdam, and reaching SF at AO.

The couple have separated once before and then rejoined.