What can we make of Djokovic vs Wawrinka?

[Zain786]

Novak has serious problems playing Stan in the grand slams and since 2014 it is 3-1 and 4-3 overall. Novak has lost three times to Stan in the majors and as far as I am aware this is the most a double digit slam holder has lost to someone out of Fedal.

Federer vs Non Djokodal players = 11 - 1

Nadal vs Non Fedovic players = 3 - 1

Djokovic vs Non Fedalovic players - 1-2 and 1-3

Will Stan continue with this consecutive run of beating Novak in majors, he is the second player after Nadal to defeat Novak in successive years in the slams from 2014-2016. Does Novak have a mental block against him?

 

[KINGROGER]

He's a good player who can hit hard and consistent so he trouble Djokovic, who specialises in pigeons and grandads.

I shudder to think what the H2H would look like had Federer and Djokovic peaks aligned. Probably 20-3 or something silly.

 

[Deleted member 735320]

I have said before and will say again, Stan is a male Hana Mandlikova. On any given day he can beat any player. Three fortnights he has strung together wins to claim major titles in Melbourne, Paris and New York. (Likewise, HM won those same titles in 1980 & 87, 1981 and 1985. She was runner up at Wimbledon in 1981 & 86 and NY in 1980 and 1982. She made 4 major finals in a row from 1980 NY to 1981 W winning the middle 2. He has won all three of his finals. I love watching him every match but SO many times he disappoints and rarely shines in the Masters level events and so often he isn't losing to the Big 4 but to lesser players. I think this could bode well for him to catch fire and surprise at Wimbledon. I seriously doubt this will happen but he does have a very good serve and if he's smoking watch out.

 

[mike danny]

Bad match-up. That's all.

 

[Doctor/Lawyer Red Devil]

Who are non-Fedal players, I don't understand where are 1-2 and 1-3 for Djokovic coming from.

It's 19-5 in Djokovic's favor and he leads Stan in Slam meetings as well. Don't see why should we ignore two Slam meetings between them in 2013 where Stan wasn't any worse than since 2014. What I am disappointed with is that Djokovic, the best front runner in tennis, lost to him at Slams three times after winning the opening set. Instead of hitting the gas he allowed Stan to settle as the match went on.

 

[Winners or Errors]

When Wawrinka is on, Djokovic doesn't have the tools to beat him. He can overwhelm Djokovic.

If Djokovic met him earlier in a slam, I'm pretty sure Djokovic's chances of winning would be higher. Meeting an in-form Wawrinka in the late rounds of slams has proven difficult for him.

 

[dominikk1985]

He's a good player who can hit hard and consistent so he trouble Djokovic, who specialises in pigeons and grandads.

I shudder to think what the H2H would look like had Federer and Djokovic peaks aligned. Probably 20-3 or something silly.

to be fair even past prime fed was owning wawrinka most of the time. I think it is a style Thing and also a matter of stan running hot at the wrong time a few times for djokovic. stan has a big game and when he is on it is not easy to beat him.

 

[Djokovic2011]

Personally I'm hoping the US Open curse that befell Murray, Nadal and Nishikori after they beat Djokovic there will also befall Wawrinka. Fingers(and everything else for that matter) crossed.

 

[pc1]

Novak has serious problems playing Stan in the grand slams and since 2014 it is 3-1 and 4-3 overall. Novak has lost three times to Stan in the majors and as far as I am aware this is the most a double digit slam holder has lost to someone out of Fedal.

Federer vs Non Djokodal players = 11 - 1

Nadal vs Non Fedovic players = 3 - 1

Djokovic vs Non Fedalovic players - 1-2 and 1-3

Will Stan continue with this consecutive run of beating Novak in majors, he is the second player after Nadal to defeat Novak in successive years in the slams from 2014-2016. Does Novak have a mental block against him?

My guess is that Djokovic's strength is his ability to handle even the most powerful groundstrokes and that Wawrinka is one of the few with the great power to hit through Djokovic, especially on the backhand side. Also I think Novak is so consistent and hits at a reasonable height that he gets Stan into a groove where he can hit out consistently unlike Nadal whose forehand topspin bounces ridiculously high and is bothersome to anyone.

 

[SinjinCooper]

Stan plays like the best player in the world, sometimes.

Stan beats Djokovic, sometimes.

Either can happen any time, but you wouldn't want to have to rely on it. As is reflected in their overall 80/20 split in favor of Djokovic. Don't try to make anything of it, just enjoy the high quality tennis when the dice roll comes up favorable.

 

[vive le beau jeu !]

5 five-setters for this rivalry... is that the open era co-record ?
(along with edberg-lendl, federer-nadal, connors-mcenroe... did some pair of players play 6 or more ?)

 

[pc1]

5 five-setters for this rivalry... is that the open era co-record ?
(along with edberg-lendl, federer-nadal, connors-mcenroe... did some pair of players play 6 or more ?)

I think Laver and Rosewall played at least six five set matches. The last one was the famous 1972 WCT final.

Gonzalez and Rosewall played at least six five setters.

 

[NatF]

I think Laver and Rosewall played at least six five set matches. The last one was the famous 1972 WCT final.

Gonzalez and Rosewall played at least six five setters.

The sheer number of matches in those days means it's likely from that era before the Open Era. Bit of an unfair comparison imo

 

[pc1]

The sheer number of matches in those days means it's likely from that era before the Open Era. Bit of an unfair comparison imo

Probably but he did ask who played the most five setters. There were no restrictions on amount of matches played. I've heard Hoad and Gonzalez played a number of five setters on their tour according to Kramer. They had to reduce it to three sets so they wouldn't wear themselves out but I don't have the stats for that.

 

[mike danny]

Stan plays like the best player in the world, sometimes.

Stan beats Djokovic, sometimes.

Either can happen any time, but you wouldn't want to have to rely on it. As is reflected in their overall 80/20 split in favor of Djokovic. Don't try to make anything of it, just enjoy the high quality tennis when the dice roll comes up favorable.

Djokovic has lost both GS finals he played against Stan. And neither was particularly close.

I think Stan finds Djokovic a favorable match-up. It's 3-1 to Stan in the majors since 2014.

 

[Mainad]

Personally I'm hoping the US Open curse that befell Murray, Nadal and Nishikori after they beat Djokovic there will also befall Wawrinka. Fingers(and everything else for that matter) crossed.

Maybe it befell Federer too eventually? After beating him in 2009 he never beat him again or won another US Open title.

 

[Mainad]

Djokovic has lost both GS finals he played against Stan. And neither was particularly close.

I think Stan finds Djokovic a favorable match-up. It's 3-1 to Stan in the majors since 2014.

This!

When Stan is on (and he usually is if he manages to get to a Slam final) he just seems to know how to hit through Djokovic. It's just a good match-up for him.

That said, he knew how to hit though Nadal as well so maybe he's a bad match-up for most potential opponents in a Slam final?

 

[NatF]

Probably but he did ask who played the most five setters. There were no restrictions on amount of matches played. I've heard Hoad and Gonzalez played a number of five setters on their tour according to Kramer. They had to reduce it to three sets so they wouldn't wear themselves out but I don't have the stats for that.

Sure but I think rivalries in those days are a bit different due to the smaller pool of players. Obviously you're correct but I think he was thinking more Open Era. Once you played 100-150 matches I think the comparison becomes a little one sided

I still do wish I could see some of those encounters...

 

[heninfan99]

Bad match-up. That's all.

The Stanimal played the highest level of tennis for two weeks here and there the last few years. I hope he can continue.

One bad match-up doesn't get you to #3 in the world and 3 slams and Davis Cup and etc.

 

[buscemi]

Looking at these numbers, I think that the Edberg-Lendl rivalry is really underrated. 27 matches, 14-13 in favor of Edberg, with the deciding match being the final one, Edberg beating Lendl in a fifth set tiebreaker at the 1992 U.S. Open en route to his final Major title. As noted above, the two played 5 five-set matches, which is tied for the Open Era record. Lendl actually won 4 out of their 7 matches in finals, while Edberg won 5 out of their 9 matches at Majors. And it was Edberg who took Lendl's #1 ranking in 1990.

This matchup gets overshadowed by a lot of other matchups, including some involving these very players (e.g., Lendl-Connors, Lendl-McEnroe, and Edberg/Becker), but this was a good one.

 

[mike danny]

The Stanimal played the highest level of tennis for two weeks here and there the last few years. I hope he can continue.

One bad match-up doesn't get you to #3 in the world and 3 slams and Davis Cup and etc.

Stan is a very good player. But he is also a bad match-up for Djokovic. I mean look at Nole's pedigree:

12 slams, 223 weeks at no.1, 5 WTF, 30 masters.

vs Stan's:

3 slams, no weeks at no.1, has never been even no.2, just 1 masters title and not even a WTF final.

And yet, 2-0 for Stan in slam finals.

Bad match-up.

 

[mike danny]

Looking at these numbers, I think that the Edberg-Lendl rivalry is really underrated. 27 matches, 14-13 in favor of Edberg, with the deciding match being the final one, Edberg beating Lendl in a fifth set tiebreaker at the 1992 U.S. Open en route to his final Major title. As noted above, the two played 5 five-set matches, which is tied for the Open Era record. Lendl actually won 4 out of their 7 matches in finals, while Edberg won 5 out of their 9 matches at Majors. And it was Edberg who took Lendl's #1 ranking in 1990.

This matchup gets overshadowed by a lot of other matchups, including some involving these very players (e.g., Lendl-Connors, Lendl-McEnroe, and Edberg/Becker), but this was a good one.

Lendl-Connors quickly got lopsided once Connors got too old and Lendl entered his prime/peak.

 

[pc1]

Sure but I think rivalries in those days are a bit different due to the smaller pool of players. Obviously you're correct but I think he was thinking more Open Era. Once you played 100-150 matches I think the comparison becomes a little one sided

I still do wish I could see some of those encounters...

Yes. I would love to see Gonzalez and Hoad in their primes. Two huge power servers who had excellent movement and strokes. I'd like to see more Laver and Rosewall of course but we at least have on video some of the matches.

 

[heninfan99]

Again, you don't get to #3 by beating just one guy you get the #3 by beating many top guys.
To win a slam you have to win 7 matches, times that by 3 for Stan. Surely you remember his beat down of Nadal in the Aussie final? Another bad match-up? HAHAHAHA

It is clear now that if Stan plays his best in a slam and the rest of the top 10 play their best (save Federer) Stan wins.

You're confusing pedigree with consistency. Ultron is very consistent, no question.

Stan is a very good player. But he is also a bad match-up for Djokovic. I mean look at Nole's pedigree:

12 slams, 223 weeks at no.1, 5 WTF, 30 masters.

vs Stan's:

3 slams, no weeks at no.1, has never been even no.2, just 1 masters title and not even a WTF final.

And yet, 2-0 for Stan in slam finals.

Bad match-up.

 

[6august]

Not really. Let's see.

AO 14: Djoker actually had a break in the 5th set first, then choked and lost.

RG 15: Needless to say more.

USO 16: He was in poor form after RG, had strange draw before the final. The point here is before beating Nole, Waw also beat inform Nishi and Dolpo while Nole simply could lose to any tough opponent since Wimby. Not necessary a bad match-up.

If they met at AO or RG this year, Nole would clearly be the favorite.