Fed fans. Who would you rather Fed played in the QF. Wawrinka or Tsisipas?

Tsits, I think Fed want revenge and he is usually pretty good at getting it. I also believe Tsits looks pretty banged up and exhausted.

Plus, if Fed does lose, Tsits will be gaining massive confidence going forward and has a better chance at beating Nadal.
 
stan
obama-bent-over-cutouts-bending-over-png-282_358.png
 
Wawrinka easily. People are citing 2015 but forgetting 2010-11 when Fed beat him here, and Stan is much closer to that level than championships winning form. Fed can expose his movement - with Tsitsipas he’ll recover better and it’ll be a slug fest and I don’t back Fed to come through that without war scars
 
It’s actually a tough choice. However, I think regardless of who it is, Federer will win. Fed playing great and he’s fresher by far. I can’t see the winner of this, having enough left to knock fed out.

I see a fedal semi, which will be intriguing
 
Wawrinka even though I think Stan would be the tougher opponent in Tuesday's conditions. If he can't beat Stan from the baseline, he can't challenge Nadal.
 
I'm routing for Stan. I think Fed would have a good chance against him despite the loss in 2015. Tsitipas would worry me.
 
Looks like they might make it easier for Fed by playing over 5 hours. Stan is older and may feel the effect more, but sometimes younger guys don't deal with this problem well, so I don't know who would be better for Fed.
 
JustBob said:
The 34 y/o is a stud built like a truck.

The 20 y/o still doesn't have a "tennis body" required for numerous marathon matches.
Click to expand...

Dude, the 34 year old body doesn't recover at anywhere near the rate of the 20 year old body. It's just science. Most of these 30 something athletes have to ice bath, take inflamatories etc as a pre/post game ritual just to get their bodies right to play. The 20 year olds can just roll out of bed. This is an incredible turn of events for Fed to get a nearly as old guy he knows inside out fresh off a 5 hour 9 minute torture fest he was ground down in. Wrawinka didn't look like nearly the fresher in that match either. He's probably going to be stiff and sluggish for several days after that. It would be incredible if he beat Fed after that.
 
Regardless of the Fed outcome, I'm impressed with Stan - thought he was done with deep Slam runs. I'll always appreciate Stan because he was really the ONLY player of the Fed-Djokovic-Nadal (and at one time Murray) era to seriously challenge the elite of his generation in terms of actually winning multiple Slams during their reign. Sure, it was only a three-year run, but it was a heck of a lot more than any other contemporaries did.
 
Stilljonesing said:
Dude, the 34 year old body doesn't recover at anywhere near the rate of the 20 year old body. It's just science. Most of these 30 something athletes have to ice bath, take inflamatories etc as a pre/post game ritual just to get their bodies right to play. The 20 year olds can just roll out of bed. This is an incredible turn of events for Fed to get a nearly as old guy he knows inside out fresh off a 5 hour 9 minute torture fest he was ground down in. Wrawinka didn't look like nearly the fresher in that match either. He's probably going to be stiff and sluggish for several days after that. It would be incredible if he beat Fed after that.
Click to expand...

No 20 y/o can roll out of bed and keep grinding match after match. Ask yourself why players peak later and later. At 20, their bodies are simply not ready to endure the physical rigors of modern tennis, day in, day out. Zverev still has that issue. It took Murray years to get his body ready for the grind it takes to win a slam.

That said, this is one long match, so yeah the kid probably recovers faster, but if the next match goes over say... 3 hours, then the 20 y/o is at a disadvantage. Especially against Fed, who will use all his skills to "kill his legs".
 
I wanted Stan to win for a number of reasons:

1. I like Stan more.
2. Stan is less of a threat to Fed than Tsitsipas.
3. Stan’s recovery time from a grinding match is much longer than the much younger Tsitsipas.

I would have given Tsitsipas a 65% chance to beat Fed. I think that a gassed Stan has maybe a 40% chance to beat Fed. I think a fresh Stan would be a coin flip with Fed.

I am picking Fed in 5 sets over Stan. As far as I am concerned, Fed is already playing with house money. I didn’t think that he’d make the QF. If somebody would have told me a year ago that Fed would go as far at the 2019 FO as he would at 2018 Wimbledon, I would have told him to check himself into a lunatic asylum.
 
Pheasant said:
I wanted Stan to win for a number of reasons:

1. I like Stan more.
2. Stan is less of a threat to Fed than Tsitsipas.
3. Stan’s recovery time from a grinding match is much longer than the much younger Tsitsipas.

I would have given Tsitsipas a 65% chance to beat Fed. I think that a gassed Stan has maybe a 40% chance to beat Fed. I think a fresh Stan would be a coin flip with Fed.

I am picking Fed in 5 sets over Stan. As far as I am concerned, Fed is already playing with house money. I didn’t think that he’d make the QF. If somebody would have told me a year ago that Fed would go as far at the 2019 FO as he would at 2018 Wimbledon, I would have told him to check himself into a lunatic asylum.
Click to expand...

We are on the same wavelength.
 
JustBob said:
No 20 y/o can roll out of bed and keep grinding match after match. Ask yourself why players peak later and later. At 20, their bodies are simply not ready to endure the physical rigors of modern tennis, day in, day out. Zverev still has that issue. It took Murray years to get his body ready for the grind it takes to win a slam.

That said, this is one long match, so yeah the kid probably recovers faster, but if the next match goes over say... 3 hours, then the 20 y/o is at a disadvantage. Especially against Fed, who will use all his skills to "kill his legs".
Click to expand...

I didn't say this match, this was one of the most grueling ever, I just ment in general. These 30 something year old athletes have so much more things they have to do just to get ready to play like ice baths, anti inflamitory drugs even when they were legal etc. The 30 somethings have to take measures just to play your average match that the 20 year old doesn't because the 35 year old body simply do not recover like they did at 20 years old. That's just the fact. Are players different from a genetic standpoint and some more reseliant sure, but even for that same guy his 35 years old his body does not function or heal it self like it did when he was 20 years old or like most if not nearly all other 20 year olds.
 
Federer-Wawrinka match-up has been played to death, so i would'av prefered Tsitsipas, simply because it's still a relatively fresh match-up.
 
I was looking at it as sort of a lose - lose situation. Both of them scare me.
 
Stilljonesing said:
I didn't say this match, this was one of the most grueling ever, I just ment in general. These 30 something year old athletes have so much more things they have to do just to get ready to play like ice baths, anti inflamitory drugs even when they were legal etc. The 30 somethings have to take measures just to play your average match that the 20 year old doesn't because the 35 year old body simply do not recover like they did at 20 years old. That's just the fact. Are players different from a genetic standpoint and some more reseliant sure, but even for that same guy his 35 years old his body does not function or heal it self like it did when he was 20 years old or like most if not nearly all other 20 year olds.
Click to expand...

This would only make sense if recovery was only based on age, and it's not, that's my point. Strength/endurance/stamina is built after years of training and enduring the physical toll of playing on the pro tour. So, for the last time, a 20 y/o's body is not physically ready to endure that. That's the advantage older players have.

And it's the same in every sport. When college/junior athletes get to the top level, it always takes them a couple of years of strength and conditioning for their body to be in peak condition for the rigors of playing in the pros.

So yeah, Tsitsipas might feel a little fresher tomorrow morning because he's younger, but I guarantee you that Wawrinka will still be able to go 5 the next match and that Tsitsipas would be dead tired after 3 because he doesn't have the leg strength/endurance/stamina Wawrinka has.
 
WhiskeyEE said:
Wawrinka even though I think Stan would be the tougher opponent in Tuesday's conditions. If he can't beat Stan from the baseline, he can't challenge Nadal.
Click to expand...
I don't think Fed can trouble the current Nadal from the baseline, Nads is looking pretty good.
 
Stan. He's a known quantity for Fed. It's clay though so who knows. I'm happy if Fed loses to Stan anyway
 
JustBob said:
This would only make sense if recovery was only based on age, and it's not, that's my point. Strength/endurance/stamina is built after years of training and enduring the physical toll of playing on the pro tour. So, for the last time, a 20 y/o's body is not physically ready to endure that. That's the advantage older players have.

And it's the same in every sport. When college/junior athletes get to the top level, it always takes them a couple of years of strength and conditioning for their body to be in peak condition for the rigors of playing in the pros.

So yeah, Tsitsipas might feel a little fresher tomorrow morning because he's younger, but I guarantee you that Wawrinka will still be able to go 5 the next match and that Tsitsipas would be dead tired after 3 because he doesn't have the leg strength/endurance/stamina Wawrinka has.
Click to expand...

Wawa also knows this could be his last shot at a major. He has shown he can push you till the end even if exhausted. Tsits has many more years to go, and with his "competition" post today, he is just now learning what it takes to win at the highest of levels.

Wawa is ready for Fed, I hope Fed prepares accordingly.
 
Wawrinka but only because he played a 5 set match today against someone young enough to be his son. Hopefully it took it's toll.
 
JustBob said:
This would only make sense if recovery was only based on age, and it's not, that's my point. Strength/endurance/stamina is built after years of training and enduring the physical toll of playing on the pro tour. So, for the last time, a 20 y/o's body is not physically ready to endure that. That's the advantage older players have.

And it's the same in every sport. When college/junior athletes get to the top level, it always takes them a couple of years of strength and conditioning for their body to be in peak condition for the rigors of playing in the pros.

So yeah, Tsitsipas might feel a little fresher tomorrow morning because he's younger, but I guarantee you that Wawrinka will still be able to go 5 the next match and that Tsitsipas would be dead tired after 3 because he doesn't have the leg strength/endurance/stamina Wawrinka has.
Click to expand...

I think we are talking about different things. Building up muscle mass, cardio, and strenght is not the same thing as how you cells heal, repair and rebuild themselves. If all things like training regimens, diet, sleep, sports recovery science etc were equal, your body will never recover at 35 the same like you did at 20. I'm 40 now and I played college tennis I like to think I have some idea. I could train the exact same way and it would take me longer to recover, it's just not the same. I notice it in hard work outs that 2 days later I'm still sore where as 20 years ago I would bounce back quicker. I just think the older guys have less quit in them and are willing to push through a lot more **** be it they are conditioned mentally more to take it or they want to prove they still have it where as the younger guys fold quicker. I also follow the NBA and it's more prevalent in that sport IMO where they track minutes played, steps etc and limit the time on the court for older players.
 
Stilljonesing said:
If all things like training regimens, diet, sleep, sports recovery science etc were equal, your body will never recover at 35 the same like you did at 20.
Click to expand...

There have been 34 Tour de France winners aged 30+, the average winner's age is 28.5 and there has never been a winner under 22 (well 21 and 344 days). I mean, according to your theory, surely when you have to ride hundreds of kilometers every day and recovery is of the utmost importance, a 20 y/o should have the advantage no? Well he doesn't. And that's true in every sport where strength/endurance/stamina are at a premium.

Tennis, in the past 15 years, has become an increasingly physical sport. The tennis schedule is grueling, and a slam is like a marathon, not a sprint. You can't compare what's required to play college tennis to the demands of the pro tour. The problem isn't recovering from one match, it's recovering from the accumulation of hours and hours spent on court. And you can't say "all else being equal" because they are not equal. You can't just dismiss years of training in the pros for the sake of an "age only" argument, when your 20 y/o has barely grown into his body. There's a reason the days of teenagers having success on the pro tour are long gone, and why you see more older players having success.

But if you argument is "if we're just talking about recovering from one long match and ignoring everything else, then the 20 y/o has the advantage!", then I'd ask what's the point in even making that argument? That's meaningless in real (tennis) life.
 
Fedforever said:
Honestly I think this is a no-lose situation for Fed fans. Great if he wins - if he doesn't we can just assume he would have lost to Rafa anyway.
Click to expand...
And? I don’t see how that is a non-losing situation. Losing against Wawrinka is a worse loss than losing to Nadal. Also I want to see another Fedal battle on clay badly, no matter who wins in the end, just because of the tension and for finally having another chance after so many years.
 
JustBob said:
There have been 34 Tour de France winners aged 30+, the average winner's age is 28.5 and there has never been a winner under 22 (well 21 and 344 days). I mean, according to your theory, surely when you have to ride hundreds of kilometers every day and recovery is of the utmost importance, a 20 y/o should have the advantage no? Well he doesn't. And that's true in every sport where strength/endurance/stamina are at a premium.

Tennis, in the past 15 years, has become an increasingly physical sport. The tennis schedule is grueling, and a slam is like a marathon, not a sprint. You can't compare what's required to play college tennis to the demands of the pro tour. The problem isn't recovering from one match, it's recovering from the accumulation of hours and hours spent on court. And you can't say "all else being equal" because they are not equal. You can't just dismiss years of training in the pros for the sake of an "age only" argument, when your 20 y/o has barely grown into his body. There's a reason the days of teenagers having success on the pro tour are long gone, and why you see more older players having success.

But if you argument is "if we're just talking about recovering from one long match and ignoring everything else, then the 20 y/o has the advantage!", then I'd ask what's the point in even making that argument? That's meaningless in real (tennis) life.
Click to expand...


No one is arguing the prime age of athletes (or people in general) is around 27. I completely agree with that. That window of years is usually the best mix of athletic ability, experience etc. Again, I think you completely confuse having a built up muscular body, expereince, mental toughness/ will power. I don't expect a 20 year old to have the muscles built up, experiene, or mental toughness will power of someone 27. I also don't think 27 is 35 like the context of our conversation where athletes clearly are on the decline. This is not the same thing as to how the body actually repairs and heals itself. Go to a doctor and ask him if a 20 year old body recovers and repairs itself better than it does at the age of 34 which was our context. There is no way it does and no matter how large or conditioned you have built your body to that point.
 
Terry Tibbs said:
Mate he's not exhausted, he's only 20!
Click to expand...

I keep seeing posts where Tsitsi is exhausted in tournaments. Makes me laugh, Hes bloody 20 YO.
Im pretty sure Nadal was playing a lot more tournaments at 20, going deeper in tournaments.
They can handle it at that age.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

The_18th_Slam
  • Poll Poll
Djokovic fans: Who would you rather Djokovic played in the FO final?
Replies
14
Views
765
Tenez101
Tenez101
liriel
Predictions - who will return to form from the injury? Like I'd miss Tsisipas on clay
Replies
9
Views
374
The Big Foe fan
The Big Foe fan
Lleytonstation
Tsits or Fed? Which would Nadal rather face?
2
Replies
54
Views
2K
I Am Finnish
I Am Finnish
imageFAM
Nadal fans. Who would you rather Nadal to face in the QF? Nishikori or Paire?
Replies
9
Views
483
Pantera
P
M
Federer Fans - What Would You Rather See
Replies
10
Views
926
RF20Lennon
RF20Lennon
Back
Top