Klizan gave up on the point, he was standing just about point blank at the net and Stan smashed a ball straight into him. He had all the time in the world to put that ball anywhere and went straight at Klizan full tilt. Then when Klizan is on the floor in pain, he walks over the net to check on him while the crowd boo'd him to hell.
Stan went right at Klizan, with all the time in the world. It looked pretty bad, because Klizan had pretty much conceded the point. Klizan was cool about though.
What stream are you watching? Message me (or anyone else who's watching a stream message me).Meanwhile, my stream of the fed match is getting about 22 pop up adds due to my inactivity
Most players don't stand flat footed when they're prey at the net...can you watch your opponent at the same time you're hitting the ball to see if he's a statue instead of guessing which way to move???Klizan gave up on the point, he was standing just about point blank at the net and Stan smashed a ball straight into him. He had all the time in the world to put that ball anywhere and went straight at Klizan full tilt. Then when Klizan is on the floor in pain, he walks over the net to check on him while the crowd boo'd him to hell.
Wawrinka's shot at Klizan was perfectly legitimate. What on Earth was Klizan doing edging forward and not contesting the point while the ball's in play? Wawrinka had every right to believe Klizan would still be out to hit a reflex winner off the Wawrinka forehand by guessing the right way.
Stan went right at Klizan, with all the time in the world. It looked pretty bad, because Klizan had pretty much conceded the point. Klizan was cool about though.
Klizan gave up on the point while at the net, Wawrinka hit it full in the groin at about 170kph
Body language. You you can safely crush it without harming the opponent. That was not a fake and bake.How is Wawrinka to know that Klizan would do something as stupid as give up on that point? Wawrinka had a short forehand that he was worried Klizan could guess the right way and stab for a winner. Klizan should have been fully aware that the ball's in play, the point's live and there's every chance it's going right through him.
Hard to tell, was only briefly watching the end of that match.I kind of think it took a little sting out of Klizan, like his zone was broken. What do you think?
I'm kidding, I was just ignoring the match cause of the Stanizan match.What stream are you watching? Message me (or anyone else who's watching a stream message me).
How is Wawrinka to know that Klizan would do something as stupid as give up on that point? Wawrinka had a short forehand that he was worried Klizan could guess the right way and stab for a winner. Klizan should have been fully aware that the ball's in play, the point's live and there's every chance it's going right through him.
Yup. A big win for Stan's psyche.
Keep in mind, the general rule is that the slam winners start slow and poorly.
Melzer was an easy opponent for Fed 6-7 years ago. Look at their slam matches in 2010. Fed was in pretty bad form at Wimb and he still straight setted him.
Stan is quite infamous for missing sitters, and at such a crucial stage of the match, it was obviously the safest play. It just looked worse than normal because Klizan had given up, and it actually hit him.Stan had plenty of time. Not saying it's an illegitimate shot, but he could have placed that anywhere and he knew full well what Klizan was doing. it was unnecessary.
Body language. You you can safely crush it without harming the opponent. That was not a fake and bake.
Stan had plenty of time. Not saying it's an illegitimate shot, but he could have placed that anywhere and he knew full well what Klizan was doing. it was unnecessary.
There's absolutely no way Wawrinka could know Klizan would not compete while the ball is live. Why had Klizan conceded the point with a live ball?