21Youngstars ZH97 He lost that match that you’re referring to. He won their epic QF match the following year at AO.

21Youngstars ZH97 Oh, without question! I don’t anyone would deny that was his breakthrough. Not only was it the first time he was able to truly compete with a Big 4 guy at the majors, but it was the first time that anyone had come close to beating Novak at AO in years (not including Rafa in 2012 Final). Rafa coming close was understandable, but no one else had truly come close to sniffing a win over Djokovic at AO since 2010, so it was undeniable that Stan has arrived after that 2013 match. And then he came pretty darn close again later that year at US Open, right? Wasn’t he 2 sets to 1 up or something? And then the “crowning” moment of his arrival was his similarly epic defeat of Novak in 2014, as the first guy to beat him there in 4 years. Obviously the title match against Rafa would normally be considered his “crowning” moment as a truly great player, but it was unfortunately hampered by Nadal’s injury. I don’t agree with the people who think that Rafa would have been “guaranteed” to win that match if he didn’t get hurt, but that’s just me. Stan convincingly won he first set before the injury happened. To me that is anything but a guarantee for Nadal. But anyway, yes, I fully agree with you that the 2013 loss to Novak at AO was his “arrival”. Only a truly great player could push prime Novak that far at AO. And only an ALL-TIME great player could take it a step further and actually dethrone Novak en route to the title the following year. He then cemented his all-time great and hall-of-fame status by winning 2 of the other 3 majors, knocking off #1 Djokovic at both.

Stan is utterly amazing,he has beaten the Big3 and Murray so many times in grandslam and he is the only one can beat prime Nole in AO(his favourite tournament)

'People forget before the 2013 U.S. Open....' Stfu, those kinds of comments are the product of a small-minded person. Who are these 'people' who keep forgetting events in history all the time? Are they living under rocks? Pretty sure a great number of tennis fans can remember alllll the way back to 2013. C'mon man, people might for matches from like 1953, 1974, but not less than a decade ago.

I started following him since the AO 2013 epic match against Djokovic... That match I think one of the best matches in the history of the game

Thang Vuong The other thing was that Wawrinka's approaches are a lot better than Federer's as well, so Murray doesn't get as many looks at passing shots. Wawrinka was just too strong. Normally Murray is able to comfortably beat Stan, who plays stylishly but prior to 2013 was inconsistent. Here, he was nailing even his second serves, able to pass when Murray came to net, hit winners off both wings even when Murray hit solid shots, etc.

InsideOutBH Novak denied by MAESTRO BACKHAND, Stan Wawrinka champion of French Open.

Thang Vuong what choice does he have? if not the backhand, then the forehand. and i'd say his got the best backhand in tennis. there isn't a two hander on that level either.

sultanabran1 Stan is one of my favorite players , but there is one sure way to put him under pressure, because of his returning style i.e. bunting the return, he is very susceptible to a person who is capable of doing serve and volley which Murray is.

Thang Vuong murray problem wasn't wawrinka's backhand, it was wawrinka's FOREHAND

Why hasn't Stan been so big yet at the US Open? Are the courts vastly different compared to the Aussie Open?

Onmysheet He made the semis, should have beaten Djokovic in the semis, but choked. He's done ok, but I think he needs slightly slower courts to line up his shots.

Update....

@@Onmysheet he won the tournament in 2016 you mug!

I made that comment just before the 2016 tournament. Think before you insult people.

Ferdous Alam Djokovic US Open 2019 and Andy Murray US Open 2010 (I think)

Rafa was injured in 2014 tho

Murray in RG 2017

@@omerrasiuk2449 After the first set

@@omerrasiuk2449 fake as always

i hope he beats Murray!

whats the reference about? big stan fan here

@@h4rder10 pretty sure its a reference to the movie split

Tell me why

@@htzdhuy This was his first GS SF, establishing him as a GS Contender, and he almost beat Djokovic in the semis. Twice in 2013 he almost beat Djokovic, establishing him as a GS Contender, once again. This lead to his confidence increasing, and he beat Djokovic at 2014 AO QF 9-7 in the fifth, and beat Berdych in an equally tight four sets, and beat an injured Nadal in 4 sets in the final.

Murray has never been number 1? Wow that's surprising. I thought he'd have been at least once. I guess he just got a bad draw with Rafa, Roger, and Novak all potential top 5 all time players

Murray reached #1 so I guess it's only Stan now

Don Killuminati Federer played mid 2000, so I doubt it.

Ferdous Alam Murray beat federer as a teenager when fed was in his prime in 06 his best year only lost to Nadal and Murray that year and Murray was well raw. 2008-2016 Murray easily would’ve won more slams early 2000s because other than federer he’s better than the players around that time at the top Hewitt safin Roddick nalbandian Ferrero Murray is way better then them

Head just always isn't in it plus his style is much more aggressive/risky than other top players so if he's off he can't beat the top guys

He's a late bloomer unfortunately. Roger, Rafa and Nole all got their first slams in their late teens, early 20s. Stan got his first in his late 20s

Stan is my favorite player but he can be mentally fragile which he fully admits. Plus he has the bad habit of being tentative when he's leading.

Could argue Murray is an underachiever actually. Should’ve won more slams. Also he’s getting back into singles soon. 🤪

@@ShellysAshes He's a little of both. He's an underachiever in that if he actually adapted his game to a more aggressive style he would have seen more success. He's an overachiever in the sense that he somehow won 3 slams playing the most passive/defensive tennis without actually attacking more then 30-40% of the time.

lol

youre everywhere xd

@@TheSuperJiJo I have a tennis addiction XD.

He isnt part of the big 3 but is of big 4. Gap between Peak murray and stan overall is a lot bigger than between murray and big 3

rroscop Your post is garbage, all of them playing their best beats Wawrinka. Wawrinka is a really good player, but people overrate the shit out of him, and act like he can win ten grand slams, the guy has no consistency whatsoever. Federer, Nadal, and Djokovic playing their best beats Wawrinka 9 times out of 10. Wawrinka playing his best still gives Murray troubles, but Murray playing his best would still beat him more times than not.

StaleyCobain 1995 Clearly you're not watching these matches of Stan vs. the top players, otherwise you would see how Stan just overpowers these guys when he's playing well. But you got one part right, Stan is not consistent, and that's the only reason he doesn't have more GS's. That was the point of my post, I'm not saying Stan is a better player, just that he can beat any of the top 4 if he's playing his game (which he often is not, and why he lost to Gasquet today). He's taken his game to the next level in the past 2 years, and has embarrassed, not just beat, the top 4 on multiple occasions. Its a joke to say that an aging Fed or Rafa have a chance against Stan in top form (I'm a huge Fed fan)...Go watch French open vs. Fed, or Italian Open vs. Rafa...they were hitting the ball well, but they were completely humiliated.. there's just no answer for Stan's firepower. Novak at his best would test Stan, but will definitely come up short in the end as even he can't grind out Stan's big shots. Hopefully Stan gets the consistency figured out, it's been nice to see a player with some variation take out the top players with ease, just let me know if you need me to provide more examples of this.

Scott Robey To be fair to djokovic, nadal and federer, look at their h2h with wawrinka. Most of the time (!) they kick the shit out of stan when they are on their game.

rroscop i've been watching tennis since 2005 and i've been and i agree with you 100%. the reason why wawrinka didn't achieve much in his career was his game plan before he's magnus norman become his coach, he was jus a poacher, a bad one actually, just standing five meters behind the baseline. his court coverage is OK, but his shots are not suited to to defensive play like nadal or murray. now that he became an aggressive player, people can see the damage he can make make, the power in his shots is simply too much for any defensive baseliner to withstand

seidl01 Since the beginning of 2014: Wawrinka vs Djocovic 2:2; Wawrinka vs Federer 2:3; Wawrinka vs Nadal 2:0. That's the 6:5 record against the Big Three in the last year and a half...

😂😂yeah really!

Think your talking pish mate since Murray has a far superior record against Stan

@@JohnMccann-ld3yr i can tell u names of players that are barely heard of that have better head to head vs stan. stan's record against all the top players and many semi-top players is rubbish. but guess what he's still The Man.

Agreed. it's becoming the big 3 now

Agree. I love Murray too but it’s not the big 4 anymore. It’s the big 3, with Murray in a league of his own below those guys. Still had a fabulous career though, even Federer and Djokovic would probably trade some titles for one of Murray’s Olympic golds. Also I think there’s a chance Murray will have one more period of peak form yet as he looks like he’s over his injury issues now.

@@ShellysAshes Olympics are not even considered as a big title in this sport. It is not a Major or neither a best of 5 sets format accross 7 matches like the Majors. Though Federer has already got a gold. Maybe you are new to this sport. Then how many times Djokovic played in those Olympics? Bet it's not even 5 attempts yet. While Murray got 0 Australian Open and 0 Roland Garros (French) in over 10 attempts at both. Pitiful. Even Wawrinka has been a champion there.

@@loyedloyed6602 Federer has not got olympic gold in singles, nor has Djokovic. They both want the career golden slam so everything I said is true. Djokovic was in floods of tears after losing to Delpo at Brazil 2016, so it clearly meant a hell of a lot to him. The tone of your post makes you sound like an angry and ignorant little fool.

@@ShellysAshes Djokovic cried at the Davis cup many times and the recent Hopman/ATP cup too. But it doesn't make those big titles or does it just because someone cried there? What a foolish logic. Nobody is above the game and it's law. Just see for yourself who is an ignorant fool. While petty stuffs like golden slam, super slam or even golden masters has no relevancy in this sport. Those are just fanboy made terms just like you are one of them. Only the Career slam (winning all 4 Majors) and the Calendar slam (winning all 4 Majors in the same season) are valid or legit in nature as far as history of this sport is concerned. Perhaps you should go back to school and learn about tennis sport or it's history. But since you mentioned i know the singles and doubles part. But Federer has won an Olympic gold. Those are not exactly individual tournaments like the Majors but it's for the country in the first place. That's why doubles or singles doesn't matter in the end of the day in such events which also including the Davis cup and Hopman/ATP cup. Nadal got two Olympic golds too. Just shows how much clue you have got about sporting events or how it really works. Read this excerpt from Federer on what he thought of the prospects of playing in Tokyo Olympics. www.ubitennis.net/2017/12/havent-set-tokyo-olympics-goal-roger-federer/

you re kiding right?

Radu Vlad just felt like it

Beavis and Butthead face

Stan couldnt take 1 set off Nadal untill AO 2014 where nadal played with an injured back.

He wasn’t going to beat Nadal in the final.

yeah runs like th one at 6:05 totally proove this lol

meh stan can pulverise murray any day he wants

@@h4rder10 mmm look at the head to head fucktard

@@JohnMccann-ld3yr lol stan is inconsistent af. he doesnt have a good h2h against anyone let alone andy. on his day stan's on another level.

@@JohnMccann-ld3yr 4-3 in best of 5 sets in favour of Wawrinka and 3-1 in the past decade. There you go. Murray is just a shit where it really matters or counts in the men's game. The Scotsman is only better in the measly best of 3 setters which the women play too.

He was relative to the big 3 for 8 years.

jk

NEVER

yeah, right ...

yup

he looked really "sluggish" when he out powered del Potro, Nishikori and Djokovic last week.

Look mate the point wasn't to bash Wawa. Don't worry, I'm a big fan so do relax. It was a simple observation. Might I remind you as well that ageing and winning titles are not mutually exclusive. That's one of the bewildering things about tennis these days. "Grand Slam confidence" is available in such limited quantities, that older guys crowd out younger players for longer, even while slowing down. That being said, Stan's movement is increasingly going to be factor, moreso than the rest, given his lacking the natural athleticism that the other guys have. Doesn't mean he won't still overpower much of them when he's on. I'm not holding my nose.

Hmm I'd argue that his movement hasn't lost anything so far. As far as I see it, Stan is one of the fittest guys out there. He never was as athletic as Djokovic or Federer in his prime nor is he now, but his movement in general is imo still as good as 2013. Otherwise he wouldn't be able to hit that damn backhand on the run so bloody well. Btw. I didn't want to offend you in any shape or form, it was just funny timing to write something like that and 10 days later he wins the US Open ;)