TripleATeam
G.O.A.T.
And he'd win!
2019 Australian Open 2R - [16] Milos Raonic vs. Stan Wawrinka
- Thread starter Enceladus
- Start date
-snake-
Hall of Fame
He isn't:
https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/ind...ings-about-raonic.634868/page-2#post-13016843
(refer to post #53)
Last edited:
Im(moral) Winner
G.O.A.T.
Stan is not dropping in the rankings since he lost in the same round as last year and most below him have as well
Kyle Venema
New User
That post is a joke. He has represented Canada many times at Davis Cup. He is not the most social or outgoing guy but from all accounts he is a nice guy.
Whoever wrote that has some serious hate for no reason other than he is a servbot. Fans need to lighten up
underground
G.O.A.T.
Man Stan was hitting so well in the TB and Raonic just shuts the gates with the aces I really dislike the guys game
Dear Gary, I disagree with you 100%. Every style of play has it's merit/beauty and it is up to the level of execution. If Raonic wins a slam, he deserves it; if Simon wins a slam he also deserves it.
vive le beau jeu !
Talk Tennis Guru
i wanted stan to win that one...
Red Rick
Bionic Poster
Dear Gary, I agree with you 100%, although this does not change the fact that Zverev winning will make me puke in my mouth a lot
I Am Finnish
Bionic Poster
i wanted stan to win that one...
mightyjeditribble
Legend
i wanted stan to win that one...
Well, I would have liked that too, but it wasn't going to happen, was it? Closer than I thought it would be tbh.
vive le beau jeu !
Talk Tennis Guru
This dislike for Raonic is reaching Nickelback proportions. I'm not so sure it isn't more about making sure you're in with the cool kids.
One the loudest haters kept posting about being shocked at how well he is volleying. Well if you actually paid attention instead of just staying in the echo chamber reinforcing your preconceived notions, you would know he has been working on that, among other things. No one has ever claimed he would become Fred Astaire on the court, but the man has improved, and is more than a servebot. It's amazing what you see when you let your eyes see what is there, rather than convince yourself of what you think is there.
One the loudest haters kept posting about being shocked at how well he is volleying. Well if you actually paid attention instead of just staying in the echo chamber reinforcing your preconceived notions, you would know he has been working on that, among other things. No one has ever claimed he would become Fred Astaire on the court, but the man has improved, and is more than a servebot. It's amazing what you see when you let your eyes see what is there, rather than convince yourself of what you think is there.
tennis_pro
Bionic Poster
The h2h proves this.
Doctor/Lawyer Red Devil
Talk Tennis Guru
And you know what? This is not the first time he knocked out TTW's "longtime" favorite.He drives his TTW haters into despair.
You've got to love the guy just for that, even if you think he gives you no other reason.
abmk
Bionic Poster
Raonic has variety in his game with ability to play from the baseline as well as at the net.
His movement is obviously a weak point and so is returning, but his serving at times blanks out the rest of his abilities.
Dartagnan64
G.O.A.T.
So to be a TTW superstar you have to have a great 1HBH and to be a TTW mug you need to have a big serve and crappy BH. That's what I'm getting from this thread. Cuz all the other crap about boring tennis and limited game is just BS. I watched Raonic hit big serves, great volleys and overheads and his inside out FH is one of the best in the game. Whereas I saw Stan just hang behind the baseline hitting groundies which to me is far more limited than Raonic.
Raonic and Anderson are probably the most well rounded of the servebots. But they can't do a lot about foot speed. As they always say, you can't coach speed. I don't hold it against them. They at least are watchable. But the heir apparent to Stan is Shapo, the classic attacking baseliner.
Raonic and Anderson are probably the most well rounded of the servebots. But they can't do a lot about foot speed. As they always say, you can't coach speed. I don't hold it against them. They at least are watchable. But the heir apparent to Stan is Shapo, the classic attacking baseliner.
PeteD
Legend
Poisoned Slice
Bionic Poster
swordtennis
G.O.A.T.
This was a missile strike match went to sleep in the 4th as stan was about to win it and he lost. Unreal. Miloz really dug deep he has good hands and very solid skills. His serve is one of best. Brutal.
NoleFam
Bionic Poster
And you know what? This is not the first time he knocked out TTW's "longtime" favorite.
You've got to love the guy just for that, even if you think he gives you no other reason.
Haha. I love that gif.
. I have no problem with Raonic. I have no problem with Wawrinka either but I approve of your message.
Big_Dangerous
Talk Tennis Guru
And you know what? This is not the first time he knocked out TTW's "longtime" favorite.
You've got to love the guy just for that, even if you think he gives you no other reason.
Wasn't that in Monte Carlo like 5-6 years ago?
Doctor/Lawyer Red Devil
Talk Tennis Guru
I believe it was. Only found the video a few days ago myself.
Poisoned Slice
Bionic Poster
Red Rick
Bionic Poster
What's with the pain in the arse font?
Poisoned Slice
Bionic Poster
I'm a fan of the tasteful thickness of it. I can't believe you prefer the standard font.
Red Rick
Bionic Poster
It reminds me of those godawful times when I was 12 and had typing lessons
Poisoned Slice
Bionic Poster
I'm done, you win.
I might have been up for continuing if it was automatic. Couldn't be annoyed changing every time I want to post. Yeah, I'm sure there is a way but I couldn't be annoyed editing files or whatever else.
ak24alive
Legend
You guys with your new age funky crap fonts.
For it to be an instant hit all you need to do is bring back the @Federer and Del Potro classic.
Poisoned Slice
Bionic Poster
ak24alive
Legend
The tasteless ''look at me'' vibe of it. Ewww.
vive le beau jeu !
Talk Tennis Guru
Picmun
Hall of Fame
Picmun
Hall of Fame
Federer and Del Potro
Bionic Poster
Gary Duane
Talk Tennis Guru
For sure he has more flexibility than Karlovic and Isner, and that's reflected in his return stats. Even so he is stuck at around 16% of return games, career, so he's among a whole bunch of players who are so low returning that you can't even find them in the ATP all time list of returners. A bit of mental math tells you that even winning 95% of service games, too high even for him, you're going to top out at a max of around 55% of games, and that's just not high enough for a guy who wants to compete in slams. That's a pretty solid principle, although you can find a few guys who won one major who were on the borderline. Wawrinka is an exception who comes to mind, but I've never figured out the enigma who is Stanimal.
You look at Raonic for career on HC and see 91/15. That's going to pretty much peak at way under 55% of games. On that stat alone I'd wager against him winning a major, though with that giant serve the odds are a bit more in his favor. That's the biggest reason I don't enjoy watching him. Besides his game being one-dimensional, I see him as a player who will spoil the chances of other players I want to win.
I thought Ivanisevic would never win a major, so I was obviously wrong about him, but earlier in his career on HCs Goran was in the low 20s in return games, more like Roddick I guess.
KohlschreiberFan
Rookie
I used to think I didn't like Raonic's style until I started paying attention. I think he's superior at the net, and it's fun to see a young-ish player who's not afraid to come to the net.
Archsree
Rookie
I think zverev will take him out
abmk
Bionic Poster
For sure he has more flexibility than Karlovic and Isner, and that's reflected in his return stats. Even so he is stuck at around 16% of return games, career, so he's among a whole bunch of players who are so low returning that you can't even find them in the ATP all time list of returners. A bit of mental math tells you that even winning 95% of service games, too high even for him, you're going to top out at a max of around 55% of games, and that's just not high enough for a guy who wants to compete in slams. That's a pretty solid principle, although you can find a few guys who won one major who were on the borderline. Wawrinka is an exception who comes to mind, but I've never figured out the enigma who is Stanimal.
You look at Raonic for career on HC and see 91/15. That's going to pretty much peak at way under 55% of games. On that stat alone I'd wager against him winning a major, though with that giant serve the odds are a bit more in his favor. That's the biggest reason I don't enjoy watching him. Besides his game being one-dimensional, I see him as a player who will spoil the chances of other players I want to win.
Got upto 18.3% return games in 2016 (his best year), injuries dragged him down in 17 and in 18.
I'm not talking about him winning a major ...he definitely needs return to improve to get to that.
was just talking about that he can be aggressive from the baseline (a pretty good FH) and also play some good ball at the net.
You are in the minority. Pretty sure most expected Goran to win Wimbledon at one stage or the other. and how he got it <<one of the most amazing moments in tennis >>
SF in Wim 90 (l to Becker in 4 sets), F in Wim 92 (beat Lendl in 4 sets, Edberg in 5 sets, Sampras in 4 sets and lost to Agassi in 5 sets), F in Wim 94 (beat Becker in 3 sets, lost to Sampras in 3 sets), SF in Wim 95 (beat Martin in 4 sets, lost to Sampras in 5 sets), F in Wim 98 (beat Krajicek in 5 sets, lost to Sampras in 5 sets) ....
finally won in Wim 01 (beat Henman in 5 sets, Rafter in 5 sets)
Beacon Hill
Hall of Fame
Interesting stats and analysis. I disagree that his game is one dimensional. He has an excellent forehand (CC, DTL, IO and II), excellent overhead, very good volleys (including good touch), very good backhand slice, decent (though inconsistent) backhand DTL. He wins points with his serve, from the back court and from the front court. He has a more well-rounded game than most players.For sure he has more flexibility than Karlovic and Isner, and that's reflected in his return stats. Even so he is stuck at around 16% of return games, career, so he's among a whole bunch of players who are so low returning that you can't even find them in the ATP all time list of returners. A bit of mental math tells you that even winning 95% of service games, too high even for him, you're going to top out at a max of around 55% of games, and that's just not high enough for a guy who wants to compete in slams. That's a pretty solid principle, although you can find a few guys who won one major who were on the borderline. Wawrinka is an exception who comes to mind, but I've never figured out the enigma who is Stanimal.
You look at Raonic for career on HC and see 91/15. That's going to pretty much peak at way under 55% of games. On that stat alone I'd wager against him winning a major, though with that giant serve the odds are a bit more in his favor. That's the biggest reason I don't enjoy watching him. Besides his game being one-dimensional, I see him as a player who will spoil the chances of other players I want to win.
I thought Ivanisevic would never win a major, so I was obviously wrong about him, but earlier in his career on HCs Goran was in the low 20s in return games, more like Roddick I guess.
Gary Duane
Talk Tennis Guru
By one dimensional I don't mean variety of skills but rather weak defensive skills. That makes watching hard for me because I know that in a good match nothing is likely to happen until the TB. In other words, you know bots are almost always going to hold, which is why they are bots, but if a guy is under 20% of return games - and there are a LOT of players like that with good serves - you know you are going to have to wait something like 5 games on average to see a break, and that's going to go way lower against another big server.
In contrast, you knew Djokovic, not ever one of my favorite players, was going to break 4 out of 10 times on HCs in 2011, and in 2008 Nadal was going to break every other game on clay. That makes the whole set come alive because a break can happen at any time.
That didn't make 2011 Novak particularly multi-dimensional, or Nadal on clay in 2008, but it did mean you didn't have to wait until a TB for something to happen.
Whereas with a player like Fed, on a good night, you know there is at least a 1/4 chance of him breaking in any return game, and with Djokovic and Murray at their peak it was closer to 1/3 - and by the way, 1/3 for Fed when he was young, best years.
The other side of it is variety. I sometimes enjoy watching Karlovic, who almost never breaks, because it's exciting to see him coming in so much, and why older Zverev was sometimes so fun to watch on good days, because he was coming in so much.
Raonic comes in a good bit, so that part of his game is interesting for sure.
I actually have the most problem with players who just move side to side and only come in to shake hands at the net, even if they have strong defensive skills.
Gary Duane
Talk Tennis Guru
Oh, I miscommunicated. I didn't mean that most never expected him to grab a major. I meant that later in his career, when his return skills fell, at THAT point it was a surprise. For instance, I don't think anyone expected him to win W the year he won it, and in games won during that W he was close to the bottom of any major in the OE. He skated through by some miracle. Wouldn't you have expected him to be much more likely in previous years, when he did not win?
In fact, as I went through and looked at all his stats I was surprised at how much more complete his game was earlier in this career than I had realized. Important also is keeping mind that in general there were more DFs in the 90s due to older rackets and strings. You compare Fed and Sampras and it jumps out at you that Sampras's serve was obviously more powerful, so then you think, "But why did he DF way more often?" My answer is PARTIALLY that a lot of his DFs were throw-away, probably, like who cares if you throw in a DF on 40/0, and most of the time it's not too costly at 30/15. But besides that I'm convinced that the biggest change we've seen in serving is not speed, or success on first serve, but the higher margin for error on the 2nd serve, made possible by poly.
Beacon Hill
Hall of Fame
OK. We just have a different view of what "one dimensional" means.
Gary Duane
Talk Tennis Guru
Yup. A few years back I thought he was almost a lock for a major. Again, somewhere around 55% of games seems to be the threshold for good years showing likelihood of winning a major, but for more generally up around 58% or higher. It's a numbers thing. Like this year I'm looking for something like 90/26 from Fed to show a good chance for a major, whereas 91/29 on HC would be almost a lock, with of course the problem that in the past Novak has gone even higher.
That's why it was good to see Fed boost his games tonight against Fritz. Nothing guarantees a major, but games in the mid 60s or higher in the first week is always a very good sign. 70% tonight against Fritz.
Gary Duane
Talk Tennis Guru
I'm not sure. I just showed you how it could be used in two very different ways: bot, weak return skills, baseliner with strong return skills and decent service game who plays pong.
My favorite players are dangerous on return but also have a good variety of skills. So we may actually agree to some extent.
Picmun
Hall of Fame
Similar threads
- Poll
- Poll
- Poll
- Poll
