The Wawrinka and Hewitt

  • Thread starter Thread starter Deleted member 748597
  • Start date Start date
Red Rick said:
One look at Hewitts forehand should tell you he wasn't one of the earliest poly users lol.
Click to expand...

Wonder if he changed his technique at all once he switched. I don't remember any particularly sweeping changes off the top of my head. There's a bunch of slow mo vids from his late career showing the forehand technique but obviously none from 2001 or before he made the switch.
 
NatF said:
Certainly he had his best years after. Hard to know if it would have come sooner etc...though. Don't think he was ever going to be consistent.
Click to expand...

No, but maybe he would have found a great coach. It seems many of the better ones work with the young or successful players.
 
Aabye5 said:
No, but maybe he would have found a great coach. It seems many of the better ones work with the young or successful players.
Click to expand...

Yeah potentially. I wonder if a guy like Stefanki could have helped Blake, he managed to get Gonzo to play with controlled aggression for six months and Blake had a more complete game than Gonzo - better backhand, return and wheels. I think to some degree Blake was too much of a nice guy as well.
 
Nole Slam said:
Wawrinka

3 Slams

Hewitt

2 Slams
2 YECs
2 YE #1
80 weeks at #1

Stan's extra Slam is not enough because Hewitt is way ahead in the YEC count and the #1 stats. Therefore, Wawrinka cannot be greater than Hewitt.

Nadal's situation is kind of similar. But unlike the heavily declined Wawrinka, Nadal can still do something about it.
Click to expand...
It's Hewitt and easily.
 
Nole Slam said:
Wawrinka

3 Slams

Hewitt

2 Slams
2 YECs
2 YE #1
80 weeks at #1

Stan's extra Slam is not enough because Hewitt is way ahead in the YEC count and the #1 stats. Therefore, Wawrinka cannot be greater than Hewitt.

Nadal's situation is kind of similar. But unlike the heavily declined Wawrinka, Nadal can still do something about it.
Click to expand...
Wawrinka fast shots Hewitt slow shots
 
Mustard said:
Wawrinka was not as consistent though, compared to Hewitt's best years.
Click to expand...
The importance of being #1 and finishing YE#1 is incredibly underrated by users on this forum tbh. Peaking for a Slam is an amazing achievement, but finishing YE #1 is a different animal requiring consistency and versatility. For some reason being #1 has gone from the pro’s ultimate achievement (listen to Agassi or Sampras talk about how being #1 meant more than even a Slam) to a footnote on TTW. Bizarre eh?
 
Kralingen said:
The importance of being #1 and finishing YE#1 is incredibly underrated by users on this forum tbh. Peaking for a Slam is an amazing achievement, but finishing YE #1 is a different animal requiring consistency and versatility. For some reason being #1 has gone from the pro’s ultimate achievement (listen to Agassi or Sampras talk about how being #1 meant more than even a Slam) to a footnote on TTW. Bizarre eh?
Click to expand...

It's not a footnote, but I definitely think it's a bit different in this Big 3 era. Is Wawrinka's career that much worse than say, Andy Murray, just because Murray has the YE #1?
 
Kralingen said:
The importance of being #1 and finishing YE#1 is incredibly underrated by users on this forum tbh. Peaking for a Slam is an amazing achievement, but finishing YE #1 is a different animal requiring consistency and versatility. For some reason being #1 has gone from the pro’s ultimate achievement (listen to Agassi or Sampras talk about how being #1 meant more than even a Slam) to a footnote on TTW. Bizarre eh?
Click to expand...
It's Djokovic's fault since he passed Federer in that stat.
 
Kralingen said:
The importance of being #1 and finishing YE#1 is incredibly underrated by users on this forum tbh. Peaking for a Slam is an amazing achievement, but finishing YE #1 is a different animal requiring consistency and versatility. For some reason being #1 has gone from the pro’s ultimate achievement (listen to Agassi or Sampras talk about how being #1 meant more than even a Slam) to a footnote on TTW. Bizarre eh?
Click to expand...
Nole Slam said:
It's Djokovic's fault since he passed Federer in that stat.
Click to expand...

Being number one is the ultimate achievement. That's why Hewitt is an ATG and Murray isn't.
 
Aabye5 said:
It's not a footnote, but I definitely think it's a bit different in this Big 3 era. Is Wawrinka's career that much worse than say, Andy Murray, just because Murray has the YE #1?
Click to expand...
I would pretty unequivocally take Murray’s career over Wawrinka’s yes.

Peak level is a big thing (and certainly important) but the 2 Olympic Golds, 14 Masters, 11 Slam finals, YEC, and YE#1 are a tie breaker over the 1 masters that Stan has.
 
And yes I get the counter argument that one day it’s likely a Zverev/Tsitsipas/Medvedev will reach 100 weeks at #1 eventually. Competition is of course a big factor and Nadal has put in some great years only to be 2nd to another ATG in one of his peak seasons, for example.

However being #1 is not subjective. It requires health, consistency, and a level of discipline, professionalism, and innate competitiveness to bring it every single match that many of these player lack. I’m not talking about a <50 week #1 like Rios or Muzzah in a vacuum situation. I’m talking about people who have defended their #1 and fought to get it back once they lost it (Djokovic at ATP Cup 2020 vs Nadal is a great recent example of a match for de facto #1). Those matches used to be regarded as some of the biggest in the sport, keeping or losing #1. Now they are “not relevant to the GOAT debate”
 
Hewitt cashed in on the end of the Petros / Andre era, and long gone strong players like Courier, Becker, Edberg, Lendl, etc. And right before Fed and Nadal got strong enough to start dominating. Stan won all his slams right in the middle of the strongest 3 players of all time while beating some of these players at their peak strength. It's not even a contest. Peak Stan would have made peak Hewitt look like a journeyman in the same way Fed did in the 2004 US Open final
 
Aabye5 said:
It's not a footnote, but I definitely think it's a bit different in this Big 3 era. Is Wawrinka's career that much worse than say, Andy Murray, just because Murray has the YE #1?
Click to expand...
Because Murray has 14 or 13 master and one yec with 2 Olympic gold, you can atleast make comparison for Hewitt but against Murray there is no comparison
 
Devilito said:
Hewitt cashed in on the end of the Petros / Andre era, and long gone strong players like Courier, Becker, Edberg, Lendl, etc. And right before Fed and Nadal got strong enough to start dominating. Stan won all his slams right in the middle of the strongest 3 players of all time while beating some of these players at their peak strength. It's not even a contest. Peak Stan would have made peak Hewitt look like a journeyman in the same way Fed did in the 2004 US Open final
Click to expand...
Not on fast surface like us Open 2004
 
Devilito said:
Hewitt cashed in on the end of the Petros / Andre era, and long gone strong players like Courier, Becker, Edberg, Lendl, etc. And right before Fed and Nadal got strong enough to start dominating. Stan won all his slams right in the middle of the strongest 3 players of all time while beating some of these players at their peak strength. It's not even a contest. Peak Stan would have made peak Hewitt look like a journeyman in the same way Fed did in the 2004 US Open final
Click to expand...

Stan didn't even make old Hewitt look like a journeyman...
 
NAS said:
Because Murray has 14 or 13 master and one yec with 2 Olympic gold, you can atleast make comparison for Hewitt but against Murray there is no comparison
Click to expand...

Personally, I agree. But there are threads about whether or not he has had a better career.
 
Kralingen said:
The importance of being #1 and finishing YE#1 is incredibly underrated by users on this forum tbh. Peaking for a Slam is an amazing achievement, but finishing YE #1 is a different animal requiring consistency and versatility. For some reason being #1 has gone from the pro’s ultimate achievement (listen to Agassi or Sampras talk about how being #1 meant more than even a Slam) to a footnote on TTW. Bizarre eh?
Click to expand...
I think Hewitt made for a weak #1, much like Murray never held the top spot until all Big 3 fell off.

Then again, Stan was never really close to being no1 in the first place.
 
Kralingen said:
And yes I get the counter argument that one day it’s likely a Zverev/Tsitsipas/Medvedev will reach 100 weeks at #1 eventually. Competition is of course a big factor and Nadal has put in some great years only to be 2nd to another ATG in one of his peak seasons, for example.

However being #1 is not subjective. It requires health, consistency, and a level of discipline, professionalism, and innate competitiveness to bring it every single match that many of these player lack. I’m not talking about a <50 week #1 like Rios or Muzzah in a vacuum situation. I’m talking about people who have defended their #1 and fought to get it back once they lost it (Djokovic at ATP Cup 2020 vs Nadal is a great recent example of a match for de facto #1). Those matches used to be regarded as some of the biggest in the sport, keeping or losing #1. Now they are “not relevant to the GOAT debate”
Click to expand...
I blame Nadal. His fans devalue the weeks at #1 because of him.
 
Nole Slam said:
Wawrinka

3 Slams

Hewitt

2 Slams
2 YECs
2 YE #1
80 weeks at #1

Stan's extra Slam is not enough because Hewitt is way ahead in the YEC count and the #1 stats. Therefore, Wawrinka cannot be greater than Hewitt.

Nadal's situation is kind of similar. But unlike the heavily declined Wawrinka, Nadal can still do something about it.
Click to expand...
Wawrinka is not heavily declined....he's injured
 
Devilito said:
Hewitt cashed in on the end of the Petros / Andre era, and long gone strong players like Courier, Becker, Edberg, Lendl, etc. And right before Fed and Nadal got strong enough to start dominating. Stan won all his slams right in the middle of the strongest 3 players of all time while beating some of these players at their peak strength. It's not even a contest. Peak Stan would have made peak Hewitt look like a journeyman in the same way Fed did in the 2004 US Open final
Click to expand...
Let's not exaggerate.

Hip Hewitt straight setted Stan at 2013 Wimb.

And only Djokovic was at prime level when Stan himself was in his prime. Nadal was playing terribly and Fed was in his mid 30's.
 
Stan reached a higher peak and has more impressive slam title runs (in addition to 1 more slam) but I would like Hewitt's chances on a lower bounce, fast surface against him. The further it goes into the slow and high bouncing territory, advantage goes to Stan who was nearly unstoppable in those conditions once he got on a roll.
 
NatF said:
Both Safin and Hewitt were done after 2005. Safin blew out his knee in the clay season iirc. Fed's generation was decimated by injuries.
Click to expand...
They were injured for only few months. Even if they weren't injured Federer could have smashed them.

Hewitt was a great baseliner but he lacked the firepower to overcome Feds attacking shots
 
Hewitt has a much better career profile outside slams.
2 YEC
2 masters and many finals
80 weeks No 1 (i.e 40 more than Andy murray)
30 career titles

On the Otherhand
Stan has 0 WTF
1 Masters
Never reached No 2 forget about No 1
17 career titles.

If Big 3 doesn't exist Hewitt could have won more than 5 slams.

But same can't be said to stan as he wasn't a beast until 29. Even after his AO triumph he was vastly inconsistent on tour losing to top 20 players.

So Hewitt Had a better career if you look at all stats.

The only thing Stan will be remember for his exploits against djoker.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

D
  • Poll Poll
Is Murray really greater than Hewitt?
5 6 7
Replies
333
Views
11K
-snake-
-snake-
DIMI_D
  • Poll Poll
Wawrinka vs Hewitt who’s greater
4 5 6
Replies
290
Views
5K
President
President
P
Can zverev become greater than wawrinka ?
Replies
5
Views
205
ChrisJR3264
C
D
  • Poll Poll
Stan with the hypothetical Career Grand Slam vs Andy Murray
2
Replies
88
Views
2K
tennis_pro
tennis_pro
D
Nadal vs Djokovic
Replies
42
Views
2K
Phoenix1983
Phoenix1983
Back
Top