Mens Tennis Forums banner

1 - 20 of 32 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,251 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Wawrinka currently has a 9-9 record in the 9 Masters 1000 tournaments in the last year.

In comparsion, he is 20-3 in the 4 slam tournaments, and all three of the slam losses were 5 setters.

Should more top players like Nole and Murphy adopt this strategy as well to conserve energy for the slams?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,932 Posts
IMO, Wawrinka is just super focused at Slams and he is not motivated at other tournaments.If players like Nole/Murray are motivated to play Masters, there's no reason for them to tank, especially since they aren't doing bad at slams this year.There shouldn't be a conservation theory here since there are no Masters within a week of slams.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,522 Posts
Nah, those guys are good enough to do well in both slams and masters across all surfaces. Wawrinka isn't.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,805 Posts
Nah, those guys are good enough to do well in both slams and masters across all surfaces. Wawrinka isn't.
Murray has 1 grass slam and 1 hard slam where has Stan has 1 clay slam and 1 hard slam. What strange comment :lol:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,522 Posts
Murray has 1 grass slam and 1 hard slam where has Stan has 1 clay slam and 1 hard slam. What strange comment :lol:
Wawrinka has 1 SF in m1000 on HC... Cinci 2012, a tournament with several random results due to Olympic hangovers.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,805 Posts
okay, but he has 3 slam semis on HC including a victory in one of them. He's not incompetent there. :lol:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,522 Posts
okay, but he has 3 slam semis on HC including a victory in one of them. He's not incompetent there. :lol:
And my point was that Wawrinka isn't good enough to be consistent in both m1000s and slams :shrug:. His average level is basically like a rank 15-20 sort of player. Obviously in good form he is much more dangerous and fair play to him for bringing it mainly in the big tournaments.

Honestly I'm not even Stan-bashing here. Just stating pretty obvious stuff.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
26,225 Posts
Wawrinka isn't tanking the Masters events.

He simply is a much better player in best of 5. In best of 5, he's top 5. In best of 3, he's more like 5-15 in ranking. Mediocre.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
26,225 Posts
And my point was that Wawrinka isn't good enough to be consistent in both m1000s and slams :shrug:. His average level is basically like a rank 15-20 sort of player. Obviously in good form he is much more dangerous and fair play to him for bringing it mainly in the big tournaments.

Honestly I'm not even Stan-bashing here. Just stating pretty obvious stuff.
100%
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
62,012 Posts
Just curious, imagine as a thought experiment Djokovic, Federer, Murray and Nadal did the same. Throw in Nishikori, Berdych and Ferrer also for good measure, so we have the entire top-8 focusing on slams.

Who do you think would win the masters?
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
15,396 Posts
Wawrinka currently has a 9-9 record in the 9 Masters 1000 tournaments in the last year.

In comparsion, he is 20-3 in the 4 slam tournaments, and all three of the slam losses were 5 setters.

Should more top players like Nole and Murphy adopt this strategy as well to conserve energy for the slams?
Lol.

- Novak has 9 slam titles, while Wawrinka has 2.
- Novak has 17 slam finals, while Wawrinka has 2.
- Novak has 27 slam SFs, while Wawrinka has 4.
- Novak is in 21 consecutive slam QF streak, while Wawrinka is in 5.

And Novak is supposed to change what he is doing and follow Wawrinka? The OP Nolehater is trying to make it like Wawrinka is better slam player than No1e. :haha:

Are these MTF haters and anti Novak trolls for real. :facepalm:

Unbelievable. :mad:
 

·
~♥ Magnus Norman ♥~
Joined
·
3,328 Posts
Lol.

- Novak has 9 slam titles, while Wawrinka has 2.
- Novak has 17 slam finals, while Wawrinka has 2.
- Novak has 27 slam SFs, while Wawrinka has 4.
- Novak is in 21 consecutive slam QF streak, while Wawrinka is in 5.

And Novak is supposed to change what he is doing and follow Wawrinka? The OP Nolehater is trying to make it like Wawrinka is better slam player than No1e. :haha:

Are these MTF haters and anti Novak trolls for real. :facepalm:

Unbelievable. :mad:
Well, I don't agree with the OP, but presumably he's reasoning along the lines of "Wawrinka maximizes his talent for Slams, therefore performing at the best of his ability; if Djokovic did this, he would pretty much never lose a match at a Slam (because his 100% ability is that high)". OP is not crunching Novak's numbers in relation to Stan's numbers, but in relation to what his own might be.

Personally I think it's not going to work out that mathematically and neatly. There's always space for luck and for natural fluctuations (i.e., you can't command your very 100% best at will).
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
15,396 Posts
Well, I don't agree with the OP, but presumably he's reasoning along the lines of "Wawrinka maximizes his talent for Slams, therefore performing at the best of his ability; if Djokovic did this, he would pretty much never lose a match at a Slam (because his 100% ability is that high)". OP is not crunching Novak's numbers in relation to Stan's numbers, but in relation to what his own might be.

Personally I think it's not going to work out that mathematically and neatly. There's always space for luck and for natural fluctuations (i.e., you can't command your very 100% best at will).
No what OP is trying to do is to downplay, undermine and disrespect Djokovic's achievements. That is the only intention behind this thread.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,251 Posts
Discussion Starter #14
No what OP is trying to do is to downplay, undermine and disrespect Djokovic's achievements. That is the only intention behind this thread.
WTF? Not even bothering to read my original post. Had nothing to do with Djokovic's achievements or anyone else. Just trying to start an interesting discussion of whether its better to conserve energy for the slams (doesn't have to be Djokovic, I also mentioned Murray)

Can you possibly be a bigger tard?
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
15,396 Posts
WTF? Not even bothering to read my original post. Had nothing to do with Djokovic's achievements or anyone else. Just trying to start an interesting discussion of whether its better to conserve energy for the slams (doesn't have to be Djokovic, I also mentioned Murray)

Can you possibly be a bigger tard?
Nothing interesting to discuss here since Djokovic is much better slam player than Wawrinka. /THREAD

As said, the only intention behind this thread is to downplay Novak's slam acheivements comparing to a lesser, less accomplished and less talented player like Wawrinka.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,279 Posts
Or follow Del Potro's policy and just play in Olympics, once in 4 years. :haha:
 
  • Like
Reactions: Yolita

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,534 Posts
It's not easy to "adopt" Stan's tendencies, though. He's in a way blessed with the concentration issue, in that he's incapable of sustaining even the minimum level of focus week in week out, especially in ATP tournaments where you have to play every day if you go deep. It's not that he's very consciously tanking those smaller tournaments. When he lost to Ito in Tokyo last year, he was actually trying to win it. It was obvious. He's the face of Yonex, and didn't want to embarrass the Yonex execs who were there watching him play, and who had thrown a fabulous reception party for him a few days earlier. But he lost that one, making countless UEs. He looked absolutely embarrassed.

That's kind of hard to emulate unless you very consciously try to tank tournaments, you know. Most top guys simply don't lose to an Ito in the first round of a tournament.
 

·
Administrator | Chaos Theory
Joined
·
54,834 Posts
It's not easy to "adopt" Stan's tendencies, though. He's in a way blessed with the concentration issue, in that he's incapable of sustaining even the minimum level of focus week in week out, especially in ATP tournaments where you have to play every day if you go deep. It's not that he's very consciously tanking those smaller tournaments. When he lost to Ito in Tokyo last year, he was actually trying to win it. It was obvious. He's the face of Yonex, and didn't want to embarrass the Yonex execs who were there watching him play, and who had thrown a fabulous reception party for him a few days earlier. But he lost that one, making countless UEs. He looked absolutely embarrassed.

That's kind of hard to emulate unless you very consciously try to tank tournaments, you know. Most top guys simply don't lose to an Ito in the first round of a tournament.
Pretty much nailed it on the head. Stan is very rhythm dependent and BO5 gives him luxury to ease his way, find his game into the slams and deal with potential momentum swings he faces, because he likes to take on his shots and when they misfire, can come in spades, especially if he is not serving too well. It might also be interesting to know that when he has beaten Novak Djokovic at the AO14, RG15, he started both times a set down. When Stan was up a set in both AO 13 and USO13, he ended up losing in 5 sets. Doesn't mean Stan can't play well in Masters but he can easily find a player in form or just playing consistent and be able to play his normal game to win.
 
1 - 20 of 32 Posts
Top