Wawrinka on Murray: "He's Way Ahead of Me"

[Krish872007]

One piece from Stan himself on this hotly debated TTW topic

And Happy Birthday Andy!! Thanks for all the memories:

Stan Wawrinka says Andy Murray is 'way ahead' of him with career achievements; unsure he will retire this year - Eurosport

Stan Wawrinka says Andy Murray is “way ahead” of him in terms of career achievements, and doesn’t expect the former world No. 1 to retire this year.

www.eurosport.com

Stan Wawrinka says Andy Murray is “way ahead” of him in terms of career achievements, and doesn’t expect the former world No. 1 to retire this year.
Wawrinka and Murray have both won three Grand Slam titles and at their best were two of the biggest threats to the ‘Big Three’ of Novak Djokovic, Rafael Nadal and Roger Federer.

On how his career stacks up against Andy's:

“For me, he was part of this Big Four era,” Wawrinka told Express Sport about Murray.
“From 18 years old until 30 he was always fighting with the Big Three, he was always there.
“Let’s put it that way, he won ‘only’ three because all the other [players] were taking but he was always in the final, he was always winning a lot. For me, his career is nothing compared to mine. He’s way ahead, he won many more titles, things than me, and his level was close to the Big Three for 10 years.”

On potential retirement:

It’s normal that we receive these questions," he added. "About him, I’m not sure that he’s going to stop this summer. I don’t think so but let’s see how it goes.
“I think when he announced stopping it’s a lot because of the emotion after losing a match but I’m not sure he will stop this summer.
“I think because he’s passionate about the game and I think of course he’s in a mixed feeling; when he’s winning or losing it’s not easy with the emotion. But I think as long as he’s passionate and feels competitive, he will keep going.”

 

[BauerAlmeida]

I think virtually everyone agrees Murray is ahead of Wawrinka, haven't seen anyone claiming otherwise (only peak level, but not career-wise).


What most people say is that Murray is closer to Stan than to the Big 3.

 

[fedfan24]

Typical PR answer. Of course Andy is more accomplished but doesn’t mean Stan didn’t peak higher, certainly did at 3/4 slams.

 

[RaulRamirez]

One piece from Stan himself on this hotly debated TTW topic

And Happy Birthday Andy!! Thanks for all the memories:

Stan Wawrinka says Andy Murray is 'way ahead' of him with career achievements; unsure he will retire this year - Eurosport

Stan Wawrinka says Andy Murray is “way ahead” of him in terms of career achievements, and doesn’t expect the former world No. 1 to retire this year.

www.eurosport.com

Stan Wawrinka says Andy Murray is “way ahead” of him in terms of career achievements, and doesn’t expect the former world No. 1 to retire this year.
Wawrinka and Murray have both won three Grand Slam titles and at their best were two of the biggest threats to the ‘Big Three’ of Novak Djokovic, Rafael Nadal and Roger Federer.

On how his career stacks up against Andy's:

“For me, he was part of this Big Four era,” Wawrinka told Express Sport about Murray.
“From 18 years old until 30 he was always fighting with the Big Three, he was always there.
“Let’s put it that way, he won ‘only’ three because all the other [players] were taking but he was always in the final, he was always winning a lot. For me, his career is nothing compared to mine. He’s way ahead, he won many more titles, things than me, and his level was close to the Big Three for 10 years.”

On potential retirement:

It’s normal that we receive these questions," he added. "About him, I’m not sure that he’s going to stop this summer. I don’t think so but let’s see how it goes.
“I think when he announced stopping it’s a lot because of the emotion after losing a match but I’m not sure he will stop this summer.
“I think because he’s passionate about the game and I think of course he’s in a mixed feeling; when he’s winning or losing it’s not easy with the emotion. But I think as long as he’s passionate and feels competitive, he will keep going.”

Very gracious of Stan, and in the main, I agree -- even though Stan (is/was) great to watch when bringing his A game.

I get the sense that Stan is very secure with his own career, elevating it from a very good one to a sure Hall of Famer.

 

[DSH]

Peak Wawrinka vs peak Murray in four GS events, who wins?

 

[Krish872007]

I think virtually everyone agrees Murray is ahead of Wawrinka, haven't seen anyone claiming otherwise (only peak level, but not career-wise).


What most people say is that Murray is closer to Stan than to the Big 3.

Not just ahead, it's the "way ahead" part. There are quite a few people on here who seem to put them very close together career-wise
Most people should agree that his best level is close to the Big 3, but even there it's contested

 

[Krish872007]

Peak Wawrinka vs peak Murray in four GS events, who wins?

That's a different conversation, but personally I would take Murray at Wimbledon and US Open at their absolute "peaks"
Australian Open - can argue in favour of Stan. I still like the version of Murray that turned up in 2012 and 2013 so it would be close
French Open - not sure. Maybe Stan given 2015 (but they played a pretty good match in 2016 which Andy won, Stan won the year after - neither of them played great at exactly the same time)

 

[fedfan24]

Peak Wawrinka vs peak Murray in four GS events, who wins?

AO: 7-3 Stan. 2013-2014 Stan ahead of 2012-2013 for Murray.
RG: 7-3 Stan. 2015 Stan > 2016 Murray.
W: 9-1 Murray.
USO: 6-4 Stan or 5-5. 2012-2013/2016 Stan close with 2008/2012 Murray.

 

[FlyingSaucer]

Typical PR answer. Of course Andy is more accomplished but doesn’t mean Stan didn’t peak higher, certainly did at 3/4 slams.

He has form as a self-deprecating guy.

 

[inflation_era]

Freudian slip? "his career is nothing compared to mine"

 

[BauerAlmeida]

Not just ahead, it's the "way ahead" part. There are quite a few people on here who seem to put them very close together career-wise
Most people should agree that his best level is close to the Big 3, but even there it's contested

I mean, they are in the same tier. Murray is ahead, but not enough to be in a different tier. In the end, in the most important metric they are tied. Djokovic has 4 more slams than Federer and they are in the same tier, wouldn't make much sense to put Murray in a different tier altogether if they are tied there.

 

[Poisoned Slice]

Well, of course.

 

[Razer]

Peak Wawrinka vs peak Murray in four GS events, who wins?

Outside of Wimbledon .... Safin, Wawrinka and Del Potro peaked higher that Andy Mooray....

 

[RS]

Boring TTW.

 

[RaulRamirez]

Here we go...
Even if we may not agree with Stan's own humble assessment, can we just praise Stan for being so respectful of Andy?

And...tennis is more than the top level that a player may have once, or occasionally, brought on his/her best day.
Stan certainly recognizes that, and how Murray was a top player for many years.

 

[Jonesy]

Way ahead would be if Murray had like 10 slams. He is just ahead.

 

[ojo rojo]

In before the Muzz detractors..

 

[thrust]

I mean, they are in the same tier. Murray is ahead, but not enough to be in a different tier. In the end, in the most important metric they are tied. Djokovic has 4 more slams than Federer and they are in the same tier, wouldn't make much sense to put Murray in a different tier altogether if they are tied there.

Novak, Roger, Rafa are in tier-1
Murray is in tier- 1.5
Stan is in tier 2

 

[The Blond Blur]

Better career = MurrayGOAT, Higher peak = Stanimal

/thread

 

[SonnyT]

On every slam won by Stan, he beat Djokovic. You could say Djokovic made him a hall of famer.

 

[ojo rojo]

On every slam won by Stan, he beat Djokovic. You could say Djokovic made him a hall of famer.

And Rafa

 

[zvelf]

One piece from Stan himself on this hotly debated TTW topic

Is this hotly debated? If it is, a lot of people are wrong.

Typical PR answer. Of course Andy is more accomplished but doesn’t mean Stan didn’t peak higher, certainly did at 3/4 slams.

Perhaps Stan peaked higher, but this is the typical "only slams matter" mentality. As if 3 matches trump the totality of 900+ other career matches.

Not just ahead, it's the "way ahead" part. There are quite a few people on here who seem to put them very close together career-wise
Most people should agree that his best level is close to the Big 3, but even there it's contested

Sure, Stan's best level is close to the Big 3, but he wasn't at his best level nearly as often as Murray was.

Way ahead would be if Murray had like 10 slams. He is just ahead.

Murray is ahead of Wawrinka by reaching 7 more slam finals, winning 13 more Masters titles, winning 30 more total titles, and having a gigantic 14% higher career match-winning percentage against the entire field. Murray also leads the h2h against Stan 13-9. But Wawrinka having a higher playing level in 3 matches makes some people say they are close to even? Murray being ahead by 30 titles is Hewitt's whole career's worth of titles or more titles than Courier ever won. 30 titles is almost double what Wawrinka himself has won. Wawrinka is a great player and a top 25 player of the Open Era, but he's not that close to Murray, at least pre-hip surgery Murray, in terms of having a consistent high level.

 

[ojo rojo]

Is this hotly debated? If it is, a lot of people are wrong.


Perhaps Stan peaked higher, but this is the typical "only slams matter" mentality. As if 3 matches trump the totality of 900+ other career matches.


Sure, Stan's best level is close to the Big 3, but he wasn't at his best level nearly as often as Murray was.


Murray is ahead of Wawrinka by reaching 7 more slam finals, winning 13 more Masters titles, winning 30 more total titles, and having a gigantic 14% higher career match-winning percentage against the entire field. Murray also leads the h2h against Stan 13-9. But Wawrinka having a higher playing level in 3 matches makes some people say they are close to even? Murray being ahead by 30 titles is Hewitt's whole career's worth of titles or more titles than Courier ever won. 30 titles is almost double what Wawrinka himself has won. Wawrinka is a great player and a top 25 player of the Open Era, but he's not that close to Murray, at least pre-hip surgery Murray, in terms of having a consistent high level.

 

[messiahrobins]

Well he is hardly going to say, 'I had a much better career than Andy and he will retire this year as he is past it'. FFS people seem to not understand PR

 

[Poisoned Slice]

Andy Murray truly is ahead of his time.

 

[fedfan24]

Is this hotly debated? If it is, a lot of people are wrong.


Perhaps Stan peaked higher, but this is the typical "only slams matter" mentality. As if 3 matches trump the totality of 900+ other career matches.


Sure, Stan's best level is close to the Big 3, but he wasn't at his best level nearly as often as Murray was.


Murray is ahead of Wawrinka by reaching 7 more slam finals, winning 13 more Masters titles, winning 30 more total titles, and having a gigantic 14% higher career match-winning percentage against the entire field. Murray also leads the h2h against Stan 13-9. But Wawrinka having a higher playing level in 3 matches makes some people say they are close to even? Murray being ahead by 30 titles is Hewitt's whole career's worth of titles or more titles than Courier ever won. 30 titles is almost double what Wawrinka himself has won. Wawrinka is a great player and a top 25 player of the Open Era, but he's not that close to Murray, at least pre-hip surgery Murray, in terms of having a consistent high level.

Yeah Stan was a bit more flakey , he would peak for 2-3 events a year but usually this was at the slams between that 2013-2017 period and he brought super high level, sometimes 9/10+. Murray was more of a solid 7-8/10 all year round with the very occasional 8.5/9.

 

[SonnyT]

Andy & Stan won 6 slams altogether. In five of those, they beat the same opponent, Novak Djokovic. Djokovic has gone a long way in making their careers.

That was why I used to plead Djokovic not face a close friend in the latter rounds of a slam.

 

[duaneeo]

Well duh. Stan only has a lone Masters (is he the only 3+ slam winner who's never won multiple Masters?), and never made it to the final of the YEC.

Peak/peak Wawrinka was a peak/prime Verdasco type of player...one who might score a slam win over a Big-3. No way should he be a 3-time slam champion. But for reasons still unexplained to this day, Stan started dominating Djokovic at the slams in 2014. And with 2014-2016 having no strong young guns and an injured/absent Nadal, it was the perfect time for him.

 

[Poisoned Slice]

Murray's so far ahead, some people actually think he's behind.

 

[NeutralFan]

AO: 7-3 Stan. 2013-2014 Stan ahead of 2012-2013 for Murray.
RG: 7-3 Stan. 2015 Stan > 2016 Murray.
W: 9-1 Murray.
USO: 6-4 Stan or 5-5. 2012-2013/2016 Stan close with 2008/2012 Murray.

I don't think we need hypothetical to know Stan peaked higher. Stan beats better players to win his slams and also had more weapons to hurt big 3.

 

[Poisoned Slice]

Stan is a great champion.

 

[Holmes]

Stan the Man

 

[DSH]

Better career = MurrayGOAT, Higher peak = Stanimal

/thread

 

[Mainad]

Way ahead would be if Murray had like 10 slams. He is just ahead.

46 titles vs 16? I suspect most people would agree that's way ahead. Stan just being honest and telling it like it is.

 

[NeutralFan]

46 titles vs 16? I suspect most people would agree that's way ahead. Stan just being honest and telling it like it is.

Both have same number of slams but Wawrinka has won 3 slams out of 4 and had tougher draws and opponents.

 

[sportsfan1]

Yes Murray has much better overall career stats. But the way stan beat prime novak at his very best in slams is something that I don't recall Murray doing much of. Once stan got going in bo5 against novak, the racquet was out of Novak's hands.
Stan for those few times was a threat (only one) that novak had to fear.

Yes Murray has the uso and wimby wins, but he struggled too often against novak.

 

[jackson vile]

Yes

 

[Krish872007]

I mean, they are in the same tier. Murray is ahead, but not enough to be in a different tier. In the end, in the most important metric they are tied. Djokovic has 4 more slams than Federer and they are in the same tier, wouldn't make much sense to put Murray in a different tier altogether if they are tied there.

I wasn't thinking about tiering specifically but fair enough.
You can still be way ahead of someone in the same tier I guess

 

[Krish872007]

Sure, Stan's best level is close to the Big 3, but he wasn't at his best level nearly as often as Murray was.

I meant Murray's level being lose to the Big 3, that may not have been clear in my sentence.
Am also not 100% convinced Stan peaked higher everywhere, but he did peak higher at the right times. The way he dialed it up to win his 3 Slams is, to this day, inexplicable vis-a-vis the rest of his career

 

[Mainad]

Yes Murray has much better overall career stats. But the way stan beat prime novak at his very best in slams is something that I don't recall Murray doing much of. Once stan got going in bo5 against novak, the racquet was out of Novak's hands.
Stan for those few times was a threat (only one) that novak had to fear.

Yes Murray has the uso and wimby wins, but he struggled too often against novak.

Your memory fails you. Murray faced prime Djokovic for most of his career and started notching up big title wins against him as far back as 2008, 7 years before Stan got his 1st big win against Djokovic at RG.

Murray has double digit victories over Djokovic including 2 Slams, a WTF and 5 Masters and took his number #1 ranking. Stan has just 6 wins albeit 2 of them were Slams. I think these figures indicate that Stan struggled against Djokovic a bit more.

 

[Olli Jokinen]

Peak Wawrinka vs peak Murray in four GS events, who wins?

Wawa wins AO + RG
Muzzah wins Wimby + USO
Yes.

 

[Rosstour]

I think virtually everyone agrees Murray is ahead of Wawrinka, haven't seen anyone claiming otherwise (only peak level, but not career-wise).

Tons of people here will say it. I see it all the time. They'll say that Peak Stanimal makes up for not having any time at #1 and far less hardware outside of the 3 Slams.

 

[RS]

Who played at a higher level?

1. Wawrinka AO 17 SF or Murray RG 15 SF
2. Wawrinka RG 15 final or Murray Oly 12 final
3. Murray Wim 12 final or Djokovic AO 14 QF
4. Agassi USO 04 QF or Wawrinka RG 15 final
5. Federer Wim 14 final or Djokovic RG 12 final
6. Murray AO 12 SF or Djokovic Wim 18 SF

 

[RS]

I don't think we need hypothetical to know Stan peaked higher. Stan beats better players to win his slams and also had more weapons to hurt big 3.

Wawrinka peaked higher against Djokovic as 4-5 is a much better record than 2-8 but there are other top players.

 

[fedfan24]

Who played at a higher level?

1. Wawrinka AO 17 SF or Murray RG 15 SF
2. Wawrinka RG 15 final or Murray Oly 12 final
3. Murray Wim 12 final or Djokovic AO 14 QF
4. Agassi USO 04 QF or Wawrinka RG 15 final
5. Federer Wim 14 final or Djokovic RG 12 final
6. Murray AO 12 SF or Djokovic Wim 18 SF

Wawrinka
Wawrinka
Djokovic
Wawrinka
Djokovic
Djokovic

 

[am1899]

46 titles vs 16? I suspect most people would agree that's way ahead. Stan just being honest and telling it like it is.

Good on Stan for doing so (not everyone would).

 

[Krish872007]

Your memory fails you. Murray faced prime Djokovic for most of his career and started notching up big title wins against him as far back as 2008, 7 years before Stan got his 1st big win against Djokovic at RG.

Murray has double digit victories over Djokovic including 2 Slams, a WTF and 5 Masters and took his number #1 ranking. Stan has just 6 wins albeit 2 of them were Slams. I think these figures indicate that Stan struggled against Djokovic a bit more.

Wawrinka also broke out in 2014, whilst the rest of the Big 3 / 4 were playing extraordinary tennis from 2008 through to 2013. To his credit he played extremely well to defeat Djokovic at the 2014 AO, and again in RG 2015 - but his record against more diminished versions of Federer / Nadal was not that great.

 

[RaulRamirez]

Your memory fails you. Murray faced prime Djokovic for most of his career and started notching up big title wins against him as far back as 2008, 7 years before Stan got his 1st big win against Djokovic at RG.

Murray has double digit victories over Djokovic including 2 Slams, a WTF and 5 Masters and took his number #1 ranking. Stan has just 6 wins albeit 2 of them were Slams. I think these figures indicate that Stan struggled against Djokovic a bit more.

I think Stan defeated Novak four times at slams: two at US Open (once in a final), one at AO, and one at RG (final).
Agreed, though, with most of your post.

 

[mike danny]

Obviously Murray is ahead of Stan, significantly so, but Stan very much nullifies Andy's ATG status, IMO.

 

[Mainad]

Obviously Murray is ahead of Stan, significantly so, but Stan very much nullifies Andy's ATG status, IMO.

Only if you take the view that it's all about the Slams. Others (like me) take whole career achievements into consideration.