World Tour Finals: Day 4, Wednesday Nov. 12, Order of Play

[Denis]

Saw the highlight reel of Berdych v. Cilic. Pretty sure the Cough Drop (Marin) will be a one slam wonder.

And Wawrinka.

I think Wawrinka deserves a bit more credit for being named a one slam wonder. He is a great player with a great game. It's already very good of him to win a Slam in this era.

 

[pavlik89]

Novak Djokovic vs Stan Wawrinka ATP World Tour Finals 2014 Highlights HD

http://www.tennishdhighlights.com/atp-masters/world-tour-finals/

 

[MargaretMcAleer]

Quite frankly I feel the doubles competition is more exciting to watch than some of the performances by the singles players at this year's YEC.

 

[tented]

Saw the highlight reel of Berdych v. Cilic. Pretty sure the Cough Drop (Marin) will be a one slam wonder.

And Wawrinka.

I think Wawrinka deserves a bit more credit for being named a one slam wonder. He is a great player with a great game. It's already very good of him to win a Slam in this era.

That's a bit much, considering this is the guy who couldn't get past the first round three tournaments in a row leading up to the Paris Masters -- then lost in the second round there.

And just got beaten 6-3, 6-0 after starting the match up a break, 2-0.

 

[Denis]

And Wawrinka.

I think Wawrinka deserves a bit more credit for being named a one slam wonder. He is a great player with a great game. It's already very good of him to win a Slam in this era.

That's a bit much, considering this is the guy who couldn't get past the first round three tournaments in a row leading up to the Paris Masters -- then lost in the second round there.

And just got beaten 6-3, 6-0 after starting the match up a break, 2-0.

Stan has always been on and off. Your memory is just too short. And his powerful singlehander is a one of a kind.

 

[tented]

I think Wawrinka deserves a bit more credit for being named a one slam wonder. He is a great player with a great game. It's already very good of him to win a Slam in this era.

That's a bit much, considering this is the guy who couldn't get past the first round three tournaments in a row leading up to the Paris Masters -- then lost in the second round there.

And just got beaten 6-3, 6-0 after starting the match up a break, 2-0.

Stan has always been on and off. Your memory is just too short. And his powerful singlehander is a one of a kind.

No, my memory is not too short. I was merely providing examples of his most recent results. We can go back as far as you wish, and see he can't be considered a "great" player because, as you point out, he has always been on and off.

How can a guy who's 1-2 in Masters finals (i.e., only been in three finals), and made it to only one GS final be great? Federer, Nadal, and Djokovic are great; Stan is not.

 

[Denis]

^he sure isn't in that league. But labeling him a one slam wonder is doing him short.

 

[Denis]

Your guy didn't fare much better btw last three tourneys he played. Losing to a 17 year old.

 

[tented]

Your guy didn't fare much better btw last three tourneys he played. Losing to a 17 year old.

That has nothing to do with anything we're discussing: Wawrinka.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

^he sure isn't in that league. But labeling him a one slam wonder is doing him short.

Ok, let us get out of that league. How do you think he compares to Roddick, another
person whom some call one slam wonder. I think Roddick deserves more props than Stan.

 

[Denis]

^he sure isn't in that league. But labeling him a one slam wonder is doing him short.

Ok, let us get out of that league. How do you think he compares to Roddick, another
person whom some call one slam wonder. I think Roddick deserves more props than Stan.

I think Wawrinka has a more distinct and entertaining game. But yeah they are in the same league I'd say as roddicks results are better.

 

[Denis]

Your guy didn't fare much better btw last three tourneys he played. Losing to a 17 year old.

That has nothing to do with anything we're discussing: Wawrinka.

Just saying, a streak like that happens to the best of us.

 

[Riotbeard]

Your guy didn't fare much better btw last three tourneys he played. Losing to a 17 year old.

That has nothing to do with anything we're discussing: Wawrinka.

Just saying, a streak like that happens to the best of us.

Also Stan had a good year run of going deep in slams culminating with this year's Aussie Open. Has a very good shot at two semis at two WTF's in a row, and a masters. So far, I would Stan's career is quite different and ahead of Cillic's, but pretty far behind Roddick. I think 1 slam 1 wonder is unfair, but it's not that far from the truth, unless he has another top 10 year after this.

Jury is still out on both of them. I see Cillic at least so far as a true one slam wonder much more, because there was no trajectory of really strong slam results, etc. The level he produced came out of nowhere. Stan on the other hand had had a career year in 2013. So there was a real trajectory and build the AO. Stan also had his best Wimby result of all time this year. Weak American Summer and fall though for sure.

Rafa fans are just mad that Rafa does not have the this so called important title of two of each slams...

 

[tented]

Rafa fans are just mad that Rafa does not have the this so called important title of two of each slams...

This has nothing to do with being a Rafa fan, and everything to do with Wawrinka not being a "great" player. This is an objective truth, borne out in his results over the years: a 29-year-old, who has been on the tour for 12 years, and has a 1-3 record in Masters finals, and one GS final.

 

[pavlik89]

Novak Djokovic vs Stan Wawrinka ATP World Tour Finals 2014 HD FULL MATCH

http://www.tennishdhighlights.com/atp-masters/world-tour-finals/

 

[DarthFed]

Rafa fans are just mad that Rafa does not have the this so called important title of two of each slams...

This has nothing to do with being a Rafa fan, and everything to do with Wawrinka not being a "great" player. This is an objective truth, borne out in his results over the years: a 29-year-old, who has been on the tour for 12 years, and has a 1-3 record in Masters finals, and one GS final.

One GS title and with that alone you could argue he is a great player or has had a great career. But "great" is open to interpretation. I have Stan as something less than a Roddick but clearly more than a Gaudio career wise.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

Rafa fans are just mad that Rafa does not have the this so called important title of two of each slams...

This has nothing to do with being a Rafa fan, and everything to do with Wawrinka not being a "great" player. This is an objective truth, borne out in his results over the years: a 29-year-old, who has been on the tour for 12 years, and has a 1-3 record in Masters finals, and one GS final.

That looks like a Freudian slip as you are unwilling to grant him the title that he earned.

 

[tented]

Rafa fans are just mad that Rafa does not have the this so called important title of two of each slams...

This has nothing to do with being a Rafa fan, and everything to do with Wawrinka not being a "great" player. This is an objective truth, borne out in his results over the years: a 29-year-old, who has been on the tour for 12 years, and has a 1-3 record in Masters finals, and one GS final.

One GS title and with that alone you could argue he is a great player or has had a great career. But "great" is open to interpretation. I have Stan as something less than a Roddick but clearly more than a Gaudio career wise.

One GS title could constitute a "very good" or "above average" career, but "great"? Absolutely not. :nono

 

[tented]

Rafa fans are just mad that Rafa does not have the this so called important title of two of each slams...

This has nothing to do with being a Rafa fan, and everything to do with Wawrinka not being a "great" player. This is an objective truth, borne out in his results over the years: a 29-year-old, who has been on the tour for 12 years, and has a 1-3 record in Masters finals, and one GS final.

That looks like a Freudian slip as you are unwilling to grant him the title that he earned.

We all know he won the title. There was no Freudian slip. I'm merely pointing out he has only ever made it to one final.

 

[Kieran]

Rafa fans are just mad that Rafa does not have the this so called important title of two of each slams...

This has nothing to do with being a Rafa fan, and everything to do with Wawrinka not being a "great" player. This is an objective truth, borne out in his results over the years: a 29-year-old, who has been on the tour for 12 years, and has a 1-3 record in Masters finals, and one GS final.

One GS title and with that alone you could argue he is a great player or has had a great career. But "great" is open to interpretation. I have Stan as something less than a Roddick but clearly more than a Gaudio career wise.

Which would make for a very generous interpretation of the word "great..."