Barclays ATP WTF 2014 SF: [3] Stan Wawrinka vs [2] Roger Federer

Which Swiss man makes the final

  • Wawrinka in 2

    Votes: 1 1.7%

  • Wawrinka in 3

    Votes: 5 8.6%

  • Federer in 2

    Votes: 39 67.2%

  • Federer in 4

    Votes: 13 22.4%
  • Total voters
    58
  • Poll closed .
Djokovic2011 said:
Funny how so many posters on here call Novak a pusher and Federer the ultimate aggressive player in men's tennis when most of what I saw from him in that final set was pushing like a pregnant woman without any morphine. You just gotta love TTW at times.
Click to expand...

Yet you think this "pusher Fed" is going to beat Djokovic? :confused:

You are too funny. So back and forth all of the time. Stick to an opinion!
 
Hood_Man said:
:lol:

Man, what a blessing to have witnessed THAT live! So much drama, so many backhands, and so many bad tempers :twisted:

Was there any mention by the commentary team about what caused Fed to lose his temper at the start of the third set (aside from being break point down of course)? There were some pretty badly behaved members of the crowd up in the cheap seats, I'm wondering if that was getting to them both.
Click to expand...

Wow, yeah, must've been awesome to witness that drama in person! :)
What a match!
 
kishnabe said:
Sorry....no one outchokes Almagro. Please re-watch Almagro Ferrer AO........choking is beyond belief.


Stan choked badily...so many missed at net. Choking in the 2nd set smash into net. Choking on MP....Choking on the first 2 points in the breaker...
Click to expand...

+1...Almagro is in his own league
 
SpicyCurry1990 said:
Missing the 2nd volley wasn't the choke, Im saying the choke was not even trying to win a baseline rally in one of the THREE chances he had when he set up those chances all due to winning baseline rallies. If he felt nervous and played MP differently from a regular point where he found success with a tactic that is exactly what a choke is.

Like I said losing due to an error isn't always a choke. In both FO finals of 2012 and 2014 Djoko it DF because he went for big 2nd serves knowing he needs to establish point control to have a chance vs Nadal on clay. Tossing in a makeable second would likely be a less than 50% chance to win the point and making a big second serve is likely more than 50%. Also Novak wasn't in winning position really in either of those matches since even if he got the serve in and won the point, he'd still only be at deuce and have a long way to go to even win that set, much less the match.

In contrast I think touching the net on a fairly routine volley to lose the 2013 FO SF to Nadal I think you could call a choke and I think Novak played his best match of the three in 2013, so like I said being a choke and playing well don't have to be exclusive.



I do agree Stan did his best and put up a brilliant performance and many would be lucky to push Fed as hard as he did. However, I don't think a great performance and a choke are mutually exclusive and in fact go together because you need to play really well to get into a winning position (the only time a choke is possible).

I rarely like to use the word choke myself as it usually devalues what the opponent had to do to take it away from you, but I think there are cases where it is warranted and this one fits.

Wawrinka outplayed Federer for most of the match and placed himself into a position to win and then ended up costing himself that position by choosing to use a tactic that is not his strongest and giving Fed the chance to answer without having to do anything exceptional. It makes sense to maybe try that on one match point, but to do it 3/3 times especially when each time he GOT match point by winning a baseline rally (twice by winners) seems like a mistake due to a momentary lapse in judgement - i.e. a choke.
Click to expand...
If Djoko deciding to go big on a 2nd serve is a good tactic, because it ensures him the highest chance of winning the point (not sure, I agree that it does, but let's leave it at that), then why is Stan's tactic of coming forward behind a serve a choke, if he perhaps felt that he was too tight to hit baseline shots? At the net you react, at the backcourt, you have time to think. Huge difference.

And he did play S&V multiple times successfully earlier in the match – if I were to guess, I would say he was 6 out of 8 on S&V by the time he tried it on the first MP. If I'm right, that's a pretty good percentage to lean on.
(and yes, Djoko running into the net was a choke in that instance of an otherwise very winnable match at that point in time).
 
Djokovic2011 said:
Funny how so many posters on here call Novak a pusher and Federer the ultimate aggressive player in men's tennis when most of what I saw from him in that final set was pushing like a pregnant woman without any morphine. You just gotta love TTW at times.
Click to expand...

Bad comment, 30+ net approaches = pusher. From the baseline fed couldn't compete with wawa for most of the match, he didn't really get short balls. Fed's 1st serve percentage meant that fed would be in loads of baseline exchanges.

Federer is a chess player with his second serve, most players with that low a % of first serve would have watched the returns fly by.
 
The Green Mile said:
He thought a backhand from Wawa was out, and didn't here the umpire call it in. Only two points later did Federer realise it.
Click to expand...
Ahh, that would make sense.
marc45 said:
a lot of drinking?
Click to expand...
That would also make sense.
tennisaddict said:
The umpire did a wrong over rule and he did not ensure Fed heard it.

It was strange because I thought Stan hit it well out and the linesman called it so. Fed was walking back when the umpire over ruled with a quick 'Correction' . But he should have made sure Fed knew about it.

Towards the end, we saw Stan get upset with a fan who was sitting close by heckle him during serve.

Are you going to make a summary post about your day ? Looking forward.
Click to expand...
I had a feeling someone was heckling him. There was an incredibly obnoxious guy sitting a few rows behind me screaming "Allez RODGE!" every 30 seconds, so it doesn't surprise me that there were more than a few bad eggs.

I wouldn't know where to begin on reporting that, it was so dramatic that I just feel drained :lol: I might do a funny observations list at some point.
RF20Lennon said:
Awesome! would love to see some pics :)

Basically the passing shot that Wawrinka hit was out but overruled by the Umpire as in but he didn't make it clear and thus Federer didn't realize and couldn't challenge.
Click to expand...

I didn't take any :oops: I couldn't take my eyes off the ants that were playing tennis in front of me, or so they appeared to me from that distance anyway :lol:

Apologies for any grammar errors in any of that, I'm typing this on my phone with weary eyes.
 
Chanwan said:
If Djoko deciding to go big on a 2nd serve is a good tactic, because it ensures him the highest chance of winning the point (not sure, I agree that it does, but let's leave it at that), then why is Stan's tactic of coming forward behind a serve a choke, if he perhaps felt that he was too tight to hit baseline shots? At the net you react, at the backcourt, you have time to think. Huge difference.
Click to expand...

Because if he felt he was too tight to play baseline shots that is giving into the pressure and changing his tactic for the situation, not his highest percentage play. Again he had just won a baseline exchange to set up each of the 3 match points. Completely changing that tactic up to go to one that is not his optimal and doing it 3 times?

Djoko going bigger on 2nd serve is not a deviation from what he would normally do against Rafa on clay (and had done successfully and as a result hit a few other doubles as well) because Rafa controls any rallys from neutral positions so well that it really lowers your chances to win the point with a weaker 2nd serve to give him immediate control.

And he did play S&V multiple times successfully earlier in the match – if I were to guess, I would say he was 6 out of 8 on S&V by the time he tried it on the first MP. If I'm right, that's a pretty good percentage to lean on.
(and yes, Djoko running into the net was a choke in that instance of an otherwise very winnable match at that point in time).
Click to expand...

Like I said, it was a good mix-up to go for maybe once, but to try that over and over again after winning baseline points to set up the match points? He wasn't willing to try to take the point in a long exchange the way he had done so many times to get into that position because as u are saying he was getting tight and nervous in a winnable situation.
 
Sysyphus said:
Wow, yeah, must've been awesome to witness that drama in person! :)
What a match!
Click to expand...

It truly was. I'm glad I was so far back as well, there's an incredible atmosphere when you're that far away, you don't have to be as silent as you do at the front (although being at ground level for Novak/Kei was awesome too).

If anyone hadn't seen a tennis match between these top guys live, I implore you to do so. You see everything; their behavior when things don't go their way, the effort they put into looking effortless, and you also realise just how forced a lot of these unforced errors are as well.

That and being surrounded by tennis fans is cool as well :)
 
Akward when they meet for the davis cup and gonna team up together after this kind of match. Wawrinka must be fuming when he was so close but yet again the champ finds a way to win. Waw has always been in the shadow of the champ and that must hurt.
 
SpicyCurry1990 said:
Because if he felt he was too tight to play baseline shots that is giving into the pressure and changing his tactic for the situation, not his highest percentage play. Again he had just won a baseline exchange to set up each of the 3 match points. Completely changing that tactic up to go to one that is not his optimal and doing it 3 times?

Djoko going bigger on 2nd serve is not a deviation from what he would normally do against Rafa on clay (and had done successfully and as a result hit a few other doubles as well) because Rafa controls any rallys from neutral positions so well that it really lowers your chances to win the point with a weaker 2nd serve to give him immediate control.



Like I said, it was a good mix-up to go for maybe once, but to try that over and over again after winning baseline points to set up the match points? He wasn't willing to try to take the point in a long exchange the way he had done so many times to get into that position because as u are saying he was getting tight and nervous in a winnable situation.
Click to expand...
We'll have to disagree on this one. Was it a bit of a choke? Perhaps. But not big enough for it to warrant so many posters calling it a massive choke and comparing him with Almugro.
Again, if he felt tight, it very well could have been the highest percentage play. Plus his winning percentage on S&V was about 75 % at that point in my estimate.
But sure, it could still have been better if he hadn't done it on all 3 - what's done is done.
 
Seriously for once I wanted Federer to lose a match and he couldn't do it.

For efforts like this haters will always cling to H2H's. Fed could have lost today an kept his H2H with Djoko with still a 2 match difference. But because he fought hard he will get bashed for tomorrow's defeat
 
mike danny said:
Seriously for once I wanted Federer to lose a match and he couldn't do it.

For efforts like this haters will always cling to H2H's. Fed could have lost today an kept his H2H with Djoko with still a 2 match difference. But because he fought hard he will get bashed for tomorrow's defeat
Click to expand...

Look at the bright side. Federer gets 400 points and half a million dollars more for making the final.

Think of it as a prep match for Davis Cup or AO.

I dont care about h2h. A losing h2h with Novak is not going to hurt his legacy.
 
Chanwan said:
We'll have to disagree on this one. Was it a bit of a choke? Perhaps. But not big enough for it to warrant so many posters calling it a massive choke and comparing him with Almugro.
Again, if he felt tight, it very well could have been the highest percentage play. Plus his winning percentage on S&V was about 75 % at that point in my estimate.
But sure, it could still have been better if he hadn't done it on all 3 - what's done is done.
Click to expand...

lol agreed its nowhere near Almagro, but that is just people speaking in hyperbole and happens anytime something exciting happens. But as frame of reference you could call that Almagro match possibly the greatest choke in tennis history (maybe not because the stakes were only a slam QF and not a title, but in terms of exactly how it happened).

However its definitely big enough to call it a choke because of what you keep saying. If he "felt tight" in a winnable situation and hence changed up his play that is what choking is, giving up a winning situation due to tightness and playing different from normal. I'm not sure on the S&V % but the announcers were very surprised by it to so I would expect that is not accurate and again its not his preferred tactic so even if it was there is a reason his match ending S&V % would have "regressed to the mean" after the 3 missed match points to be 6/11 (by your measurements that I have not verified).

Any time someone losses a big close match there will be a group calling it a choke and group trying to say its not. I usually fall in the latter, but I think this instance has enough evidence for the former.

In any case like you said whats done is done. Good win by Fed to escape regardless and we have the best possible final to look forward to.
 
tennisaddict said:
Look at the bright side. Federer gets 400 points and half a million dollars more for making the final.

Think of it as a prep match for Davis Cup or AO.

I dont care about h2h. A losing h2h with Novak is not going to hurt his legacy.
Click to expand...
I know. But haters are still going to bring it up.

Still untill the AO gotta enjoy it while I still can. The losing H2H against all 3 of his biggest rivals will not be used unill end of january at least, now that he leads both Nole an Murray.
 
mike danny said:
Seriously for once I wanted Federer to lose a match and he couldn't do it.

For efforts like this haters will always cling to H2H's. Fed could have lost today an kept his H2H with Djoko with still a 2 match difference. But because he fought hard he will get bashed for tomorrow's defeat
Click to expand...

Looking it at that way, maybe it was a little dumb. But still, federer does not think that way. He wants to win and reach another final. If he didn't believe in himself he wouldn't be where he is.

I think this was maybe the best thing that could happened. Remember in shanghai when he rose from the dead against Mayer? That gave him a hell of a boost and he mauled his compitition, especially djokovic in the final. He needed this again to give him that confidence to beat djokovic.

Will be an interesting match tomorrow. I like both players very much but I wouldn't feel hurt if Djokovic wins it. He is such a great player and deserves more of the best titles, federer has plenty and more over already. Federer has nothing to proove anymore. He is already wiping the floor with pretty much everyone at the tour at 33 years of age, that pretty much sais everything about him as a player and why he is the greatest. No one in history has done what federer is doing now.
 
Last edited:
RF-18 said:
Looking it at that way, maybe it was a little dumb. But still, federer does not think that way. He wants to win and reach another final. If he didn't believe in himself he wouldn't be where he is.

I think this was maybe the best thing that could happened. Remember in shanghai when he rose from the dead against Mayer? That gave him a hell of a boost and he mauled his compitition, especially djokovic in the final. He needed this again to give him that confidence to beat djokovic.

Will be an interesting match tomorrow. I like both players very much but I wouldn't feel hurt if Djokovic wins it. He is such a great player and deserves more of the best titles, federer has plenty and more over already. Federer has nothing to proove anymore. He is already wiping the floor with pretty much everyone at the tour at 33 years of age, that pretty much sais everything about him as a player and why he is the greatest. No one in history has done what federer is doing now.
Click to expand...
If Federer had Agassi's 2003 AO draw at one of the slams this year he would have won one by now.
 
mike danny said:
Seriously for once I wanted Federer to lose a match and he couldn't do it.

For efforts like this haters will always cling to H2H's. Fed could have lost today an kept his H2H with Djoko with still a 2 match difference. But because he fought hard he will get bashed for tomorrow's defeat
Click to expand...

Yeah but players care more about winning matches, atp points and money than H2H. H2H is more for the trolls ;-)
 
Fed pushed way too much against Stan. But maybe that was his strategy? He thought Stan would eventually just turn into an error machine and fold? Didn't happen.

And even Mourier couldn't rob Fed from winning today! Poor umpiring, yet again from Mourier. Just get rid of that guy please. :(

Anybody still in doubt of Fed's mental toughness? First Mayer match, and now this!
 
Boom-Boom said:
Yeah but players care more about winning matches, atp points and money than H2H. H2H is more for the trolls ;-)
Click to expand...
It is irrelelant anyway. Fed is 33 and is guaranteed a winning record over his rivals in their prime.

I don't know what's more to doubt about his greatness anymore. He leads his 6 year younger rivals in the H2H. He leads his own generation and now he leads Nadal's as well.

Haters can't use the losing H2H vs rivals for at least 2 more months.
 
SpicyCurry1990 said:
lol agreed its nowhere near Almagro, but that is just people speaking in hyperbole and happens anytime something exciting happens. But as frame of reference you could call that Almagro match possibly the greatest choke in tennis history (maybe not because the stakes were only a slam QF and not a title, but in terms of exactly how it happened).

However its definitely big enough to call it a choke because of what you keep saying. If he "felt tight" in a winnable situation and hence changed up his play that is what choking is, giving up a winning situation due to tightness and playing different from normal. I'm not sure on the S&V % but the announcers were very surprised by it to so I would expect that is not accurate and again its not his preferred tactic so even if it was there is a reason his match ending S&V % would have "regressed to the mean" after the 3 missed match points to be 6/11 (by your measurements that I have not verified).

Any time someone losses a big close match there will be a group calling it a choke and group trying to say its not. I usually fall in the latter, but I think this instance has enough evidence for the former.

In any case like you said whats done is done. Good win by Fed to escape regardless and we have the best possible final to look forward to.
Click to expand...

Of cours it wasn't a choke. A choke is a missed penalty. Serve & volley on matchpoint is the opposite of a choke, even more on second serve. It's risky but brave and put pressure on the opponent. However Fed deals rather good with pressure and was astute enough so make Stan volley, even with some floating wicked slice on the one that seemed most easy for Stan to put away. Overall Wawrinka got a little tense when serving for the match but no choke whatsoever.
 
Boom-Boom said:
Of cours it wasn't a choke. A choke is a missed penalty. Serve & volley on matchpoint is the opposite of a choke, even more on second serve. It's risky but brave and put pressure on the opponent. However Fed deals rather good with pressure and was astute enough so make Stan volley, even with some floating wicked slice on the one that seemed most easy for Stan to put away. Overall Wawrinka got a little tense when serving for the match but no choke whatsoever.
Click to expand...

Stan is indeed impressive IMO. He never chokes matches like Berdych! If he loses, he at least loses with style, not with some stupid hesitations!
 
Boom-Boom said:
Of cours it wasn't a choke. A choke is a missed penalty. Serve & volley on matchpoint is the opposite of a choke, even more on second serve. It's risky but brave and put pressure on the opponent. However Fed deals rather good with pressure and was astute enough so make Stan volley, even with some floating wicked slice on the one that seemed most easy for Stan to put away. Overall Wawrinka got a little tense when serving for the match but no choke whatsoever.
Click to expand...

Not sure what "A choke is a missed penalty." means, but, to me, a choke can be physical or mental, but one result is, you try to do something that you can normally do frequently under "normal" conditions, but, because of the importance of the occasion, you don't execute-and that can be mental. I like Stan, and I feel bad for him-nor do I like serve and volley, which I have long enjoyed, getting "punished" in a big spot 3 different times. But the fact of the matter is, # 1, he was doing something he doesn't normally do, and, if you make it, it's courageous, if you don't, you're gonna face questions, and, # 2, on 1 of the match points, the one where he served and volleyed on the second serve, THAT volley is one I'm confident he would make, say, 80% of the time, it wasn't that hard, but he absolutely, positively, choked on it, IMO.
 
Boom-Boom said:
Of cours it wasn't a choke. A choke is a missed penalty. Serve & volley on matchpoint is the opposite of a choke, even more on second serve. It's risky but brave and put pressure on the opponent. However Fed deals rather good with pressure and was astute enough so make Stan volley, even with some floating wicked slice on the one that seemed most easy for Stan to put away. Overall Wawrinka got a little tense when serving for the match but no choke whatsoever.
Click to expand...

LOL @ somebody saying a player who has five match points and cannot convert on any of them has not choked the match away. :confused:

Wawrinka choked IMO. He should have won that match. He was the superior player for the majority of it.
 
SpicyCurry1990 said:
lol agreed its nowhere near Almagro, but that is just people speaking in hyperbole and happens anytime something exciting happens. But as frame of reference you could call that Almagro match possibly the greatest choke in tennis history (maybe not because the stakes were only a slam QF and not a title, but in terms of exactly how it happened).

However its definitely big enough to call it a choke because of what you keep saying. If he "felt tight" in a winnable situation and hence changed up his play that is what choking is, giving up a winning situation due to tightness and playing different from normal. I'm not sure on the S&V % but the announcers were very surprised by it to so I would expect that is not accurate and again its not his preferred tactic so even if it was there is a reason his match ending S&V % would have "regressed to the mean" after the 3 missed match points to be 6/11 (by your measurements that I have not verified).

Any time someone losses a big close match there will be a group calling it a choke and group trying to say its not. I usually fall in the latter, but I think this instance has enough evidence for the former.

In any case like you said whats done is done. Good win by Fed to escape regardless and we have the best possible final to look forward to.
Click to expand...
getting tight is normal though, trying to deal with it in the best possible way is what constitutes a great player imo. My final word on this, Wawa's own:
"For sure that game at the end I was nervous," said Wawrinka. "It was not easy to play from the baseline. He was normally just pushing his slice backhand return. I was like, 'Okay, I'm going to try to take it, try not to wait for a mistake, try to go for it.'

"I think there were only few points that made the difference. I was playing great tennis. [I was] really happy with the way I was playing. But I had some big opportunities in the third set. I should have taken them, especially serving for the match with two match points."
 
Damn, rough match for the Stanimal to lose. Wish I'd seen the whole thing. But I saw the good stuff. S&V on match points reminded me of Novak trying that in the AO final. Bottom line: if you're not comfortable up there you're gunna have a bad time! ;)
 
REALLY REally poor sporstsmanship of WAWA to hit several passing shots right at Federer and almost hitting him. BAD really bad and NOT nice. what if roger gets hurt or gets really mad at him and blows up the davis cup.
 
OK OK I know what happened. Roger was wearing RED color of Swiss shirt and shoes and Stan wearing that ugly blue green yellow, he had no chance.............
 
jelle v said:
How many of those were S&V... zero I believe..
Click to expand...

Half, according to this

Stan Wawrinka had finally arrived at match point against Roger Federer, primarily due to his perfection at the net in the third set.

Wawrinka had ventured to the net 13 points so far in the deciding set, and amazingly had won every single one of them. He was successfully taking the fight forward, winning all seven of his serve-and-volley points, and all six approaching during the rally.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

jm1980
  • Poll Poll
2014 Dubai SF: [1] Novak Djokovic vs. [4] Roger Federer
9 10 11
Replies
517
Views
43K
fatichar
fatichar
The Green Mile
  • Poll Poll
2016 Brisbane Final - [1] Roger Federer vs. [4] Milos Raonic
7 8 9
Replies
445
Views
26K
Beacon Hill
Beacon Hill
Enceladus
  • Poll Poll
2019 ATP Rotterdam Final - [WC] Stan Wawrinka vs. Gael Monfils
2 3
Replies
117
Views
8K
stringertom
stringertom
aldeayeah
  • Poll Poll
AO 2014 SF: Tomas Berdych (7) vs Stanislas Wawrinka (8)
8 9 10
Replies
450
Views
27K
cucio
cucio
Meles
  • Poll Poll
2015 ATP WTF RR: Wawrinka (4) vs. Nadal (5)
12 13 14
Replies
658
Views
39K
veroniquem
veroniquem
Back
Top