A comparision of Wawrinka vs Murray at HC slams

[abmk]

HC Slams:

Wawrinka:

2 HC slams
beat at AO 2014: Djokovic, Berdych, Nadal
beat at USO 2016: Delpo, Nishi, Djokovic

No other slam finals, but 2 SFs each at AO and USO (AO 15, AO 17, USO 13, USO 15)

14-13 record vs top 10 at HC slams
21-19 record vs top 20 at HC slams

Murray

1 HC slam:
beat at USO 2012: Cilic, Berdych, Djokovic

5 slam finals at AO, 1 slam final at USO
1 SF each at AO and USO

10-15 record vs top 10 at HC slams
20-18 record vs top 20 at HC slams


Stan's peak/prime level is higher at the AO IMO, while Murray's is higher at the USO.
Does Stan's extra slam and better record vs top 10 trump Murray's slightly better consistency in terms of reaching SFs/Fs?


We know Murray's record at the YEC is clearly better and he beats Stan by a mile as far as HC Masters go. Its the comparision at HC slams that is interesting.

 

[Kralingen]

Perhaps a peak for peak HC match, say in 2013 where Murray was defending USO champion, could shed some light on this?

 

[BGod]

That 14-13 record against Top 10 for Stan is impressive. Especially considering his 13 losses:

13 & 15 AO five set losses to Novak
13 USO five set loss to Novak, 14 USO five set loss to Nishikori

He had another retirement to Novak and two losses to Fed

That's 7 of his 13 and before the double knee surgery. He also had five set losses to Raonic and Youzhny. I keep reminding people many of Wawrinka's losses in Slams were in 5 sets or tight 4 sets. Murray meanwhile usually got beat convincingly. That's a key difference people seem to forget.

I take Wawrinka pound for pound over Murray any day at 3 of the 4 Slams.

 

[Jokervich]

Peak for peak Stan was better on all surfaces apart from grass, but he rarely showed up, so Murray looks better on paper. Peak Stan was better against peak Djokovic and Nadal than Murray ever was.

 

[Roddickulous1]

Peak for peak Stan was better on all surfaces apart from grass, but he rarely showed up, so Murray looks better on paper. Peak Stan was better against peak Djokovic and Nadal than Murray ever was.

Against Djo? Yes
Against Ned? No

 

[ND-13]

Peak for Peak, Stan is a better player. Andy Murray was consistent in his grinding and pushing , so got better results over a period.

Results = Murray
Quality = Wawrinka

 

[metsman]

Perhaps a peak for peak HC match, say in 2013 where Murray was defending USO champion, could shed some light on this?

backray.

2010 is a better example of Stan's ability to play bully ball but Murray back then was easier to bully as well. Favor 12 Murray over any Stan at the USO, if nothing else you do have to be pretty consistent to beat Murray and I don't trust Stan to do that at the USO.

 

[Deleted member 748597]

Peak for Peak, Stan is a better player. Andy Murray was consistent in his grinding and pushing , so got better results over a period.

Results = Murray
Quality = Wawrinka

@Mainad

 

[abmk]

Peak for peak Stan was better on all surfaces apart from grass, but he rarely showed up, so Murray looks better on paper. Peak Stan was better against peak Djokovic and Nadal than Murray ever was.

Murray beat Nadal in AO 10 and USO 08. Stan only beat Nadal at AO 14. Nadal played better in the former 2 than in the latter honestly.

 

[bjsnider]

Murray's results are much more affected by injuries than Stan. Just when Murray was about to ascend to the #1 ranking in 2012/13, he needed back surgery, and then by the time he got back to the top, his hip blew out.

 

[abmk]

backray.

2010 is a better example of Stan's ability to play bully ball but Murray back then was easier to bully as well. Favor 12 Murray over any Stan at the USO, if nothing else you do have to be pretty consistent to beat Murray and I don't trust Stan to do that at the USO.

I'd take 2008 USO Murray before the final vs Stan as well.

 

[Jokervich]

Murray beat Nadal in AO 10 and USO 08. Stan only beat Nadal at AO 14. Nadal played better in the former 2 than in the latter honestly.

Wasn't Nadal injured in the first one and absolutely exhausted in the second one after Wimbledon + Olympics?

 

[abmk]

That 14-13 record against Top 10 for Stan is impressive. Especially considering his 13 losses:

13 & 15 AO five set losses to Novak
13 USO five set loss to Novak, 14 USO five set loss to Nishikori

He had another retirement to Novak and two losses to Fed

That's 7 of his 13 and before the double knee surgery. He also had five set losses to Raonic and Youzhny. I keep reminding people many of Wawrinka's losses in Slams were in 5 sets or tight 4 sets. Murray meanwhile usually got beat convincingly. That's a key difference people seem to forget.

I take Wawrinka pound for pound over Murray any day at 3 of the 4 Slams.

7 of 13 Stan losses to top 10 were in straights
5 of 15 Murray losses to top 10 were in straights

Nishi wasn't top 10 yet at the time of USO 14.
So wawa's 3 losses in 5 sets were the Djoko ones - AO 13/USO 13/AO 15

Murray OTOH: Nadal AO 07/Djoko Ao 12/Nishi USO 16/Tpas USO 21

 

[abmk]

Wasn't Nadal injured in the first one and absolutely exhausted in the second one after Wimbledon + Olympics?

AO 14: nadal got injured after going down a set and a break
AO 10 : Nadal only got injured towards end of 2nd set. Murray had already taken the 1st set and about to take the 2nd one.
USO 08: not his freshest, but still a significantly better performance than the AO 14 final

 

[Kralingen]

backray.

2010 is a better example of Stan's ability to play bully ball but Murray back then was easier to bully as well. Favor 12 Murray over any Stan at the USO, if nothing else you do have to be pretty consistent to beat Murray and I don't trust Stan to do that at the USO.

I think ‘13 USO Stan was a bit underrated actually, that SF match vs Djokovic he was more convincing than Novak in the sets he won and had some big chances to go up 2-0. To me it was a confirmation of his level vs Murray against an (admittedly erratic) Djokovic in the very next match.

of course Murray was better in ‘12 USO and I think it’d be a lot closer between the two. That reminds me:

USO ‘12 Murray vs USO ‘13 Wawrinka
AO ‘12 SF Murray vs AO ‘14 QF/F Wawrinka
AO ‘13 SF Murray vs AO ‘13 4R Wawrinka
FO ‘16 SF Murray vs FO ‘15 F Wawrinka

those would all be quite fun and all likely be close 4 setters or 5 setters imo. It’s a very close H2H all considered.

 

[metsman]

I think ‘13 USO Stan was a bit underrated actually, that SF match vs Djokovic he was more convincing than Novak in the sets he won and had some big chances to go up 2-0. To me it was a confirmation of his level vs Murray against an (admittedly erratic) Djokovic in the very next match.

of course Murray was better in ‘12 USO and I think it’d be a lot closer between the two. That reminds me:

USO ‘12 Murray vs USO ‘13 Wawrinka
AO ‘12 SF Murray vs AO ‘14 QF/F Wawrinka
AO ‘13 SF Murray vs AO ‘13 4R Wawrinka
FO ‘16 SF Murray vs FO ‘15 F Wawrinka

those would all be quite fun and all likely be close 4 setters or 5 setters imo. It’s a very close H2H all considered.

yeah Stan did produce some huge tennis at times in the SF but was just way too inconsistent to have actually won provided Djokovic kept the pressure on (which he did, barely, even in the sets he did win Stan didn't really produce the kind of redlined tennis that he did in his other good slam runs). Djokovic himself was very erratic as you said, besides the 2nd set one guy was noticeably poor in each set and in the 2nd Stan really let the UFE creep into his game after building a lead. Of course Murray is not exactly perfectly reliable, Cilic should have had him done and dusted in 2012, but honestly Cilic when he's not mugging might have a bit more potent and consistent baseline game than Stan in quicker conditions. I guess it's more that I don't see any evidence of Stan really putting together a complete performance at the USO and I trust peak Murray not to lose vs an erratic opponent.

Stan vs Murray is a good matchup for sure, neither seems to have a decisive matchup factor going for them and it probably just comes down to who is more solid on the day. Murray's variety is one thing he has vs Stan Djoker maybe doesn't, but I think Stan at his best is more than patient enough to play that rope a dope game. He is more than confident in his ability from the back to not get himself into no man's land unless you have peak Federer esque baiting powers.

 

[Poisoned Slice]

yeah Stan did produce some huge tennis at times in the SF but was just way too inconsistent to have actually won provided Djokovic kept the pressure on (which he did, barely, even in the sets he did win Stan didn't really produce the kind of redlined tennis that he did in his other good slam runs). Djokovic himself was very erratic as you said, besides the 2nd set one guy was noticeably poor in each set and in the 2nd Stan really let the UFE creep into his game after building a lead.

Stan vs Murray is a good matchup for sure, neither seems to have a decisive matchup factor going for them and it probably just comes down to who is more solid on the day. Murray's variety is one thing he has vs Stan Djoker maybe doesn't, but I think Stan at his best is more than patient enough to play that rope a dope game. He is more than confident in his ability from the back to not get himself into no man's land unless you have peak Federer esque baiting powers.

Murray's variety a bit of a poseur, you ask me.

 

[metsman]

Murray's variety a bit of a poseur, you ask me.

it is a rather mellifluous slice.

 

[tudwell]

I was looking at these stats a couple weeks ago. Matches vs. top 5 players is even more in Stan’s favor: 9-11 compared to 4-11.

Not sure I agree Murray’s peak is higher at the US Open. Maybe as far as one-off single-match performances go, Stan doesn’t have anything as good as Murray’s 08 semi, but he’s 8-6 against top 10 players there and 5-5 against the top 5. (Murray’s 5-7 and 2-4 respectively.)

I also looked at a handful of other one- or two-time hardcourt slam champions and Stan’s 14 top-10 wins is by far the highest I saw. It’s fitting, I think, that he has more hard court slams than Murray, Roddick, Hewitt, Cilic, etc. because he’s quite a bit better against the best players in the world.

 

[vive le beau jeu !]

Wasn't Nadal injured in the first one and absolutely exhausted in the second one after Wimbledon + Olympics?

he was both in both, as always... how is that even a question? @helterskelter

 

[D.Nalby12]

Murray's 10-15 record against Top 10 says a lot. Being consistent is one thing but having peak level to get things done against best players is another. Stan Wawrinka despite having very few deep runs - he still scored more Top 10 wins than Murray. Clearly shows his peak level was much better.

 

[metsman]

I was looking at these stats a couple weeks ago. Matches vs. top 5 players is even more in Stan’s favor: 9-11 compared to 4-11.

Not sure I agree Murray’s peak is higher at the US Open. Maybe as far as one-off single-match performances go, Stan doesn’t have anything as good as Murray’s 08 semi, but he’s 8-6 against top 10 players there and 5-5 against the top 5. (Murray’s 5-7 and 2-4 respectively.)

I also looked at a handful of other one- or two-time hardcourt slam champions and Stan’s 14 top-10 wins is by far the highest I saw. It’s fitting, I think, that he has more hard court slams than Murray, Roddick, Hewitt, Cilic, etc. because he’s quite a bit better against the best players in the world.

Roddick/Hewitt are both probably a little better at AO than Stan is at USO, while being around as good at USO as Stan is at AO. Stan obviously has little chance of beating peak/prime Fed at a HC slam.

 

[abmk]

Not sure I agree Murray’s peak is higher at the US Open. Maybe as far as one-off single-match performances go, Stan doesn’t have anything as good as Murray’s 08 semi, but he’s 8-6 against top 10 players there and 5-5 against the top 5. (Murray’s 5-7 and 2-4 respectively.)

Even for a single tournament run, USO 12 for Murray goes above USO 16 for Stan. He beat a better Djoker and wasn't MPs down vs anyone like Stan was vs Dan Evans.
Murray of course beat Berdych and Cilic, while Stan beat delpo and Nishi.

 

[D.Nalby12]

I was looking at these stats a couple weeks ago. Matches vs. top 5 players is even more in Stan’s favor: 9-11 compared to 4-11.

Not sure I agree Murray’s peak is higher at the US Open. Maybe as far as one-off single-match performances go, Stan doesn’t have anything as good as Murray’s 08 semi, but he’s 8-6 against top 10 players there and 5-5 against the top 5. (Murray’s 5-7 and 2-4 respectively.)

I also looked at a handful of other one- or two-time hardcourt slam champions and Stan’s 14 top-10 wins is by far the highest I saw. It’s fitting, I think, that he has more hard court slams than Murray, Roddick, Hewitt, Cilic, etc. because he’s quite a bit better against the best players in the world.

4-11 record for someone who made 7 Slam final is nothing but pathetic. Shows how big opportunist Murray was. He never wasted cake draw. He is not mentally weak player that media portrayed him often.

 

[tudwell]

even for a single run, USO 12 for Murray goes above USO 16 for Stan. He beat a better Djoker and wasn't MPs down vs anyone like Stan was vs Dan Evans.

Fair enough. That’s was definitely Wawrinka’s weakest slam run. Still, his numbers against the top guys are great there. He’s also got an overall higher win percentage there than any other slam. I think he’s shown a higher level at Roland Garros and the Australian, but he’s also consistently least bad at the US Open, compared to the other slams.

 

[tudwell]

Roddick/Hewitt are both probably a little better at AO than Stan is at USO, while being around as good at USO as Stan is at AO. Stan obviously has little chance of beating peak/prime Fed at a HC slam.

Don’t agree at all that Roddick at the Australian is equivalent to Wawrinka at the US. Hewitt maybe.

 

[metsman]

Kind of depends honestly how much you weigh Murray's AO consistency. His 12/13 runs were decent enough but keep in mind his signature win is beating 13 SF Fed in 5, however even Dave back when his main vice was DD at the gentleman's club rather than KK beat probably a bit better/more potent Federer and then followed that up with a performance against Fed that at least matches Murray's 2012 losing performance while exceeding the rest. And Dave is a guy who most consider a very flawed player who without fail is gonna screw it up in big matches, which is a bit unfair but not entirely untrue (the guy did straight up melt in the heat match after beating Federer despite that being back when he was decently fit), but it's more about Murray's game not being anything special in those conditions against good opponents, much less elite ones, because we really can take people like Nalbandian and put their best performances up there with Murray.

 

[Rebel-I.N.S]

I was looking at these stats a couple weeks ago. Matches vs. top 5 players is even more in Stan’s favor: 9-11 compared to 4-11.

Not sure I agree Murray’s peak is higher at the US Open. Maybe as far as one-off single-match performances go, Stan doesn’t have anything as good as Murray’s 08 semi, but he’s 8-6 against top 10 players there and 5-5 against the top 5. (Murray’s 5-7 and 2-4 respectively.)

I also looked at a handful of other one- or two-time hardcourt slam champions and Stan’s 14 top-10 wins is by far the highest I saw. It’s fitting, I think, that he has more hard court slams than Murray, Roddick, Hewitt, Cilic, etc. because he’s quite a bit better against the best players in the world.

For context, Murray’s 11 defeats against Top 5 at HC slams -

Nadal, AO 07 in 5
Fed, USO 08 in 3
Fed, AO 10 in 3
Djoko x 5 at AO (various)
Fed, AO 14 in 4
Djoko, USO 14 in 4
Tsitsipas, USO 21 in 5

—-

Is this correct?

Omitting the loss against Stefanos (Hiprray asterisk), 07-16 was right in the middle of the Big 3 prime era.

Anyone got a breakdown of Stan’s 9 HC slam Top 5 victories…? (He has two vs Murray at USO from memory).

 

[killerboss]

They are at the level where Murray's generic consistency and far superior acheivements outside slams makes him the clear winner in the whole Murray vs Wawrinka thing. Or you might as well say Gaudio is better or as good as Roddick for all the sense that would make. They'd have to be at around maybe 7-10 slams before this type of generic consistency doesn't matter in my opinion.

Honestly I don't know if Wawrinka's "big game" thing is even that more impressive than Murray's. A few more slam wins against big 3 yeah but he ain't ever took a year end no 1 of a big 3 member by beating a big 3 member to do it at that.

 

[Hitman]

Peak for peak Stan was better on all surfaces apart from grass, but he rarely showed up, so Murray looks better on paper. Peak Stan was better against peak Djokovic and Nadal than Murray ever was.

I don't know about that. Murray at his absolute peak on HC was a very tough nut to crack also.

 

[Red Rick]

Lol wasn't this the last match before Murray's back surgery?

 

[Poisoned Slice]

Lol wasn't this the last match before Murray's back surgery?

Never let the truth get in the way of a good Murray bashing yarn.

 

[tudwell]

For context, Murray’s 11 defeats against Top 5 at HC slams -

Nadal, AO 07 in 5
Fed, USO 08 in 3
Fed, AO 10 in 3
Djoko x 5 at AO (various)
Fed, AO 14 in 4
Djoko, USO 14 in 4
Tsitsipas, USO 21 in 5

—-

Is this correct?

Omitting the loss against Stefanos (Hiprray asterisk), 07-16 was right in the middle of the Big 3 prime era.

Anyone got a breakdown of Stan’s 9 HC slam Top 5 victories…? (He has two vs Murray at USO from memory).

At the Australian:
Novak and Nadal in 2014
Nishikori in 2015
Medvedev in 2020

At the US:
Murray in 2010
Berdych and Murray in 2013
Novak in 2016
Novak in 2019

For comparison, Murray’s are:
Nadal at 2008 USO
Nadal at 2010 AO
Novak at 2012 USO
Federer at 2013 AO

So Stan definitely met more non-Big 3 top-5 players.

 

[Kralingen]

Lol wasn't this the last match before Murray's back surgery?

I was baiting (peak for peak LOL) but it does count for something imo

mury fans could use the FO ‘16 match as a counter example tho

 

[Rebel-I.N.S]

Wasn't Nadal injured in the first one and absolutely exhausted in the second one after Wimbledon + Olympics?

Lol.

At the Australian:
Novak and Nadal in 2014
Nishikori in 2015
Medvedev in 2020

At the US:
Murray in 2010
Berdych and Murray in 2013
Novak in 2016
Novak in 2019

For comparison, Murray’s are:
Nadal at 2008 USO
Nadal at 2010 AO
Novak at 2012 USO
Federer at 2013 AO

So Stan definitely met more non-Big 3 top-5 players.

Also worth pointing out that Murray’s consistency of ranking from 08-16 (i.e occupying the top 4) basically prevented him from meeting anyone else other than Big 3.

 

[Kralingen]

Honestly I don't know if Wawrinka's "big game" thing is even that more impressive than Murray's. A few more slam wins against big 3 yeah but he ain't ever took a year end no 1 of a big 3 member by beating a big 3 member to do it at that.

To be fair, Wawrinka winning the USO final that year was the reason Murray had a shot at YE #1 in the first place

 

[mike danny]

Perhaps a peak for peak HC match, say in 2013 where Murray was defending USO champion, could shed some light on this?

I think Murray had back problems here.

 

[mike danny]

Murray's results are much more affected by injuries than Stan. Just when Murray was about to ascend to the #1 ranking in 2012/13, he needed back surgery, and then by the time he got back to the top, his hip blew out.

There's no evidence he would've got to no.1 in that period. Federer and Nadal were both better than him.

 

[Wurm]

Perhaps a peak for peak HC match, say in 2013 where Murray was defending USO champion, could shed some light on this?

Murray's back was soon to go under the knife and he was in the midst of an emotional hangover from having won Wimbledon.

 

[-snake-]

They are at the level where Murray's generic consistency and far superior acheivements outside slams makes him the clear winner in the whole Murray vs Wawrinka thing. Or you might as well say Gaudio is better or as good as Roddick for all the sense that would make. They'd have to be at around maybe 7-10 slams before this type of generic consistency doesn't matter in my opinion.

Honestly I don't know if Wawrinka's "big game" thing is even that more impressive than Murray's. A few more slam wins against big 3 yeah but he ain't ever took a year end no 1 of a big 3 member by beating a big 3 member to do it at that.

Lol at this brainwashed post. Mury never beat multiple top 3 players at any slam and comparing a one time winner like GG with Stan is even worse.


Merry's "big game" got him 0 AOs and in all his wins he avoided Fedal.

 

[bjsnider]

There's no evidence he would've got to no.1 in that period. Federer and Nadal were both better than him.

I don't believe so.

 

[killerboss]

Lol at this brainwashed post. Mury never beat multiple top 3 players at any slam and comparing a one time winner like GG to Stan is even worse.


Merry's "big game" got him 0 AOs and in all his wins he avoided Fedal.

Murray would need to do it back to back since he was a top 4 player most of his career unlike Wawrinka. I believe someone pointed this out akready. Beat Djokovic and Federer back to back to win Wimbledon, 29 wins agains big 3 players in total, far more than Wawrinka. Nobody did compare Gaudio to Wawrinka.

Merry's "big game" got him 0 AOs and in all his wins he avoided Fedal.

Still beat them in slams though.

To be fair, Wawrinka winning the USO final that year was the reason Murray had a shot at YE #1 in the first place

It was his mainly his generic consistency the whole year that got him his shot at year end #1. It's why Wawrinka's only got to #3 in the world as well, he doesn't have this generic consistency.

 

[-snake-]

Murray would need to do it back to back since he was a top 4 player most of his career unlike Wawrinka. I believe someone pointed this out akready. Beat Djokovic and Federer back to back to win Wimbledon, 29 wins agains big 3 players in total, far more than Wawrinka. Nobody did compare Gaudio to Wawrinka.



Still beat them in slams though.



It was his mainly his generic consistency the whole year that got him his shot at year end #1. It's why Wawrinka's only got to #3 in the world as well, he doesn't have this generic consistency.

No, he didn't. The Olympics insn't a slam so it doesn't count. If Merry were "much more talented" than the top 10 from his era, he should've been able to take down multiple top 3 guys at least once in his career. He never did. And most of Stan's relevant wins at the slams were vs Mury and Joe so lol at your logic. He only has 1 vs Fed just like him.

 

[killerboss]

No, he didn't. The Olympics insn't a slam so it doesn't count. If Merry were "much more talented" than the top 10 from his era, he should've been able to take down multiple top 3 guys at least once in his career. He never did. And most of Stan's relevant wins at the slams were vs Mury and Joe so lol at your logic. He only has 1 vs Fed just like him.

You realise he's beaten Federer and Nadal in slams right? And unlike Wawrinka he'd have to beat them back to back since he was ranked top 4 most of his career as someone has already pointed out on the thread.

 

[-snake-]

You realise he's beaten Federer and Nadal in slams right? And unlike Wawrinka he'd have to beat them back to back since he was ranked top 4 most of his career as someone has already pointed out on the thread.

He never pulled it off, that's the bottom line. Back to back or not, Wawrinka did it and Mury couldn't. Bonus: DP beat Fedal in 2009. What was Mury's excuse for his failure in 2008? He had to face the same guys and got rekt in the final. But I know, DP's win was a "fluke", because he never was as CoNsIsTeNt as AM. No one deserves a title or brownie points for being consistent. You have to show up in the final, that's all there is to it.

 

[mike danny]

I don't believe so.

Well, in 2013 Nadal was the man to beat so where was Murray going to gain points? And in 2012 he didn't even finish ranked above Fed.

 

[Nicklo22]

Gotta give the edge to Murray , all those masters , YEC , Olympics and more slam finals are more worth than the extra slam Stan has .

 

[helterskelter]

he was both in both, as always... how is that even a question? @helterskelter

Always injured, always tired, but always also rusty. Don't people know anything these days?!?

 

[Zetty]

Murray has been better at both the AO and USO. At the AO Wawa has only gone SF or later three times. Murray has been in the final there five times. I'd honestly say he's a better performer at the AO than even the USO. Just unfortunate.

 

[-snake-]

Murray has been better at both the AO and USO. At the AO Wawa has only gone SF or later three times. Murray has been in the final there five times. I'd honestly say he's a better performer at the AO than even the USO. Just unfortunate.

Closeted AM devotee.