What is it that Stanimal has over Djokovic which Roger and Rafa don’t have?

[Badabing888]

That is why Fed has never retired mid match. He takes to court, he finishes. Period. It’s not a mistake.

Rafa and Novak have both retired mid match and then in the press conferences afterwards said they didn’t want to talk about the injuries, like it is some noble achievement not to discuss something which was serious enough to make them quit. Hallo, by retiring mid match because of injury you’ve totally drawn the attention to them for being injured and unable to continue and away from their opponent.

 

[megamind]

The wolverine animal spirit.

you're telling me the rumors about stan are true?

 

[I Am Finnish]

No, the point should be/is that Stanimal has won 4/5 Slam matches played against Djokovic 2014-present.

All the time, Djokovic was in good form (no excuses, dude was on a tear in 2015 and ended up losing that FO final, won 4/5 most recent Slams and lost to him at UO '16. Was going to win AO '14 if not for Stan and now had won 4/5 again and still lost to Wawrinka).

From 2014-present Federer is 0-5 in majors against Djokovic, Nadal is 1-3 and Stanimal is 4-1 against this beast.

Now, inb4 "Djokovic wasn't at his best at this year's USO" who said stan is? No one knows. Regardless of excuses, Wawrinka is a surreal player in certain BIG matches, that can not be denied.

I said it Yesterday Wawrinka was ok but not great like in ao 13 & RG 15

 

[Fedr and three others]

What wawrinka has that fedal dont: a lower seeding which allows him to reach slumping Djokovic in early rounds before he crashes out.

 

[Cortana]

Easy answer: Peak Stan is just better than peak Nadal or Peak Federer.

He would be at 10+ slams if he could maintain that level.

 

[tennis_pro]

You mean "What is that Rafa has over Djokovic that Wawrinka doesn't have?"

Nadal has better numbers against Djokovic than Wawrinka.

Nadal leads the H2H over Djokovic 9-6 in Grand Slams (including 2-1 at the US Open).

Wawrinka is 4-4 against Djokovic in the H2H in Grand Slams.

9-6 >>>> 4-4.

Take away Nadal's wins against Djokovic in 2006-2008 and he's got a negative ratio.

Hell take away Nadal's FO wins and he's got less than Wawrinka lol.

Clay court things.

 

[Jackuar]

Stan is in Novak’s head. At this level, 99% is mental.
Fed owns Murray
Novak owns Fed
Rafa owns Fed
Stan owns Novak

Stan is the GOAT. Hence proved.

 

[ScottleeSV]

You mean "What is that Rafa has over Djokovic that Wawrinka doesn't have?"

Nadal has better numbers against Djokovic than Wawrinka.

Nadal leads the H2H over Djokovic 9-6 in Grand Slams (including 2-1 at the US Open).

Wawrinka is 4-4 against Djokovic in the H2H in Grand Slams.

9-6 >>>> 4-4.

Yes but some context is missing from those numbers. Nadal was about 5-0 or 6-0 ahead (or something) at the start of their careers. Djokovic eventually got good enough to at least match or better Nadal across the surfaces.

Wawrinka 4-4 is notable because Nadal and Federer have generally both creamed Wawrinka time and time again.

 

[MichaelNadal]

Honestly I just think Djokovics game of aggressive redirection plays right into what Stan wants to do

 

[BorgTheGOAT]

Cherry-picked stats, as you strategically avoid to include the whole career stats.

Since the beginning of their careers, H2H in Slams:

Nadal-Djokovic 9-6
Wawrinka-Djokovic 4-4

9-6 >>> 4-4

While you are generally correct one has to admit that in the last few years Stan did wat better than Nadal. Against Djokovic Post 2011, Nadal is 4-6 at slams and this is what we would generally consider peak/prime Djokovic. Nadal has lost his last three matches at slams against Djokovic while Wawrinka has won them. Adding that Nadal is way better player than Wawrinka in general, those stats are really astonishing. Nadal’s great H2H against Djokovic is to a large part due to the fact that he peaked earlier and had the luxury to play pre-prime Nole a couple of times.

 

[Flash O'Groove]

When I saw the draw and that Stan could meet and did meet Novak in round 4 then my gut feeling was Stan could win. He was back to near his best post knee surgery. And of course Novak with his sore shoulder, despite getting through the first 3 rounds in straight sets. Forget head to head for now which Novak leads; he’s now lost 4 big grand slam matches v Stan, 2 in the final of course. It’s like Stan is Novak’s kryptonite. Winning those 4 Slams, which he lost to Stan and he would be on 20 and also a double career slam winner.

Something about Novak’s game that brings out the best in Stan? Definitely the rhythm Novak gives Stan, but also Stan’s backhand. Novak just seems to give him the same ball or height on that side to crush balls deep and winners; take control of rallies. Roger and Rafa rarely do and mix it up much better v Stan.

What are your thoughts?

Djokovic's game suits Wawrinka's well because it's based on shot consistency first, great defensive movement second, and aggression third. It means that they will play a lot of long, quite neutral rallies, that Wawrinka can use to calibrate his shots and increase his power and aim shots after shots. He doesn't have to pull the trigger straight away, with a high risk of errors. Also for some reason Djokovic struggles against powerful serve. Djokovic can still flay other powerful servers because they can't move well enough and have a backhand liability. Stan serves bigger than his size suggest, but moves as well as his size suggests, and his backhand is certainly not a liability.

In comparison, Wawrinka doesn't have as much success against Federer and Nadal because they have different qualities. Federer can force him to play too agressive and can mix his shot enough than Stan can't calibrate his shots as he can against Djokovic. Nadal can always pummels his backhand with huge forehand, which remains a huge handicap for Stan.

Federer's aggressivity is often not enough to go through Djokovic, he lacks the power. Nadal can't dismantle Djokovic's backhand.

 

[Deleted member 762343]

it only matters if the opponent steps on the court.
most if not all pros have injuries and pain.
and you can only defeat whoever is on the other side of the net. or lose to whoever is on the other side of the net.
all these excuses about healthy / unhealthy are hilarious.
the man made it to R4, he decided to step on the court. end of the story.

Yes, sure. Injuries don’t count when the player steps onto the court, even if he’s far from his best level. And you can totally compare the likes of Londero and Kudla to Wawrinka.

Injuries make a difference against this kind of players, that’s a reality. I don’t care if he decided to play, it was obvious the injury affected him and that’s all we need to know. The fact he made a bad decision doesn’t make the problem vanish.

 

[blablavla]

Yes, sure. Injuries don’t count when the player steps onto the court

that's correct.
edit. simply because he doesn't talk about matches he won in spite of pain and injuries, doesn't mean they don't exist.
so, once decided to play a tournament and a match, everything else is an excuse.

Injuries make a difference against this kind of players, that’s a reality. I don’t care if he decided to play, it was obvious the injury affected him and that’s all we need to know. The fact he made a bad decision doesn’t make the problem vanish.

would you have bet your house on Wawrinka before the match?
if not, this is a poor and hilarious attempt to diminish Wawrinka achievement.

Djokovic dominated the tour for approx. 18 months with the elbow injury.
He certainly knows better than you if he is fit to step on the court or not.
Or do you perhaps think that nothing bothers Wawrinka, no fatigue, no past injuries, no pain? top form letting him crush every opponent?

 

[AGreatOne]

To answer the Thread Title question: Match-up + Belief

 

[RF6777]

U people are talking as if fed is clueless against djoker...djoker won 5 sets in last 2 matches against fed...All in TB...couple of points here n there...& Fed would have won last 2 matches in straights...

 

[Wander]

You might as well ask, what is it that Rafa and Roger have that Djokovic doesn't have over Stan

 

[Deleted member 762343]

that's correct.
edit. simply because he doesn't talk about matches he won in spite of pain and injuries, doesn't mean they don't exist.
so, once decided to play a tournament and a match, everything else is an excuse.



would you have bet your house on Wawrinka before the match?
if not, this is a poor and hilarious attempt to diminish Wawrinka achievement.

Djokovic dominated the tour for approx. 18 months with the elbow injury.
He certainly knows better than you if he is fit to step on the court or not.
Or do you perhaps think that nothing bothers Wawrinka, no fatigue, no past injuries, no pain? top form letting him crush every opponent?

I actually bet on Wawrinka before the match because I knew Djokovic's injury would prevent him from winning.

It’s not about me knowing better than him if he’s fit, it’s about what happened : he couldn’t finish the match because of it. He almost quit during his match against Londero because of the pain, so even he wasn’t sure what to do. He kept playing in the hope pain would eventually vanish, that’s all. He made it clear he wasn’t sure if he’d be able to finish the tournament.

Past injuries ? Either you’re injured or you’re not. Wawrinka didn’t mention any injury so he’s not injured until proven otherwise.

Listen, you obviously don’t know me. If you did, you’d know I’m not trying to find excuses just because I like him. I’d have no problem admitting Wawrinka was just better if I really thought it was the case, just like it was at 2014 AO or 2015 RG. But I simply think that’s not true this time. Wawrinka was solid but not that good, he exposed Djokovic’s bad form due to his injury. That’s what I think.

 

[AceSalvo]

Because of the SHBH bomb. Djoko helps set it up for Stan.

It’s all about matchups.

 

[blablavla]

Past injuries ? Either you’re injured or you’re not.

this + this

I’d have no problem admitting Wawrinka was just better

Djokovic stepped on the court, so give the due credit to Wawrinka and let's close it here.

I guess you don't think that Djokovic was faking in the AO final vs Murray.
That is probably a legit win in your opinion?
So give credit to Wawrinka. He didn't put a gun to Nole's had and forced him to step on the court and later to retire.
You can only defeat the person on the other side of the net, or lose to the person on the other side of the net.

 

[heninfan99]

1. Novak has a harder time reading Stan's 1st serve when it's on
2. Stan can burtalize Novak from the baseline. They hit with a similar rhythm but Stan hits a bigger ball

 

[roysid]

It's all mental and matchups I believe.
If Roger had converted match point in those 3 slam matches against Novak, the h2h would have been 9-7 instead of 6-10.
Novak gets fired up while facing Roger while the opposite happens against Stan

 

[Start da Game]

belief......and vekic of course.....

 

[Mike Sams]

If you want to know why Novak has problems with Stan, here's why at the 1:08 mark.
It's the weight of shot from both wings, especially the BH. Neither Federer nor Nadal hit it with that much force consistently.

 

[Eren]

What wawrinka has that fedal dont: a lower seeding which allows him to reach slumping Djokovic in early rounds before he crashes out.

Yes beating him half of the time in Slam finals is really indicative of whay you're proposing.

 

[73west]

Right. Djokovic OWNS Nadal (28-26) and Federer (26-22) but gets OWNED by Stan. That DOMINANT 6-19 H2H speaks for itself.

Well, i'd say this

Fed and Nadal are obviously better overall than Wawrinka. Not only do they have dominant H2Hs, they also have far better records against Novak than Wawrinka does. However, Wawrinka *outperforms* a priori expectations against Novak in a way that Nadal and Federer do not. Why is that? And is that something that Nadal and Federer could learn from?

Why is it that a guy who you'd expect would win 25% (made up number) of his majors matches against Nole wins 50% instead? And can a guy you'd expect to win 40% use that to get to 60%?

My gut says no, it's not something Nadal or Fed can learn. Sometimes, players have natural matchup edges on certain other players. For years, Nadal outperformed expectation against Fed. Wawrinka against Djokovic. There are some of these out there. They are fascinating to analyze, but they don't lay out a blueprint that someone else can follow.

 

[BHud]

Stan pretends to be his friend, Quitovic is so anxious to be loved, that he can't possibly destroy his only friend...Stan wins/kicks back over a beer and laughs...tells Roger you need to play this smarter pal...

 

[Sysyphus]

"balls"

 

[Blitzball]

1. Stan's got more cahones in the bigger moments.

2. You've got a great backhand, huh? So do I. The best one-handed backhand around, actually.

3. Power game. Unpredictability off both wings. Bull-headedness.

 

[Ray Mercer]

Djokovic has no variety and gives Stan a ton of rhythm. Stan is happy to trade backhands all day and can overpower Djokovic. Djokovic has no slice and plays a one dimensional game.

 

[hipolymer]

Luck;
his AO 2014 win should have been Novak's in that 5th set
his RG 2015 win Novak was puking on court from stomach flu
his USO 2016 win Novak was not match-ready
his USO 2019 win Novak was injured

 

[lud]

Stan is in Novak’s head. At this level, 99% is mental.
Fed owns Murray
Novak owns Fed
Rafa owns Fed
Stan owns Novak

Nope.

 

[lud]

It's 4-4 at GS ONLY and ONLY becuase Stan wasn't good enough to face Djokovic more often.
Where was Wawrinka before 2013? Where was Waw at Wimb 2015? Where was Waw in last 24 months?

 

[kevaninho]

From the time Stanimal has come out, he has won 3 different majors. Nadal just his usual FO and the one USO

Yeh let's bend stats to suit agenda lol
Nadal has won more slams the past few years in his twilight, than stan has his whole life lol
A career doesn't begin once a certain player wins his first slam.
Whole career is what matters. Stan didn't just come good in 2014 lol

 

[tennisaddict]

Yeh let's bend stats to suit agenda lol
Nadal has won more slams the past few years in his twilight, than stan has his whole life lol
A career doesn't begin once a certain player wins his first slam.
Whole career is what matters. Stan didn't just come good in 2014 lol

Then Fed has more slams than Nadal in terms of whole career

 

[chjtennis]

Stan hits so big FH and BH, which seems to be the situation Djoko hates most. Basically, Stan accepts he is the underdog and goes for his shots, and that nothing to lose attitude seems to lift his level. Federer should accept he is the underdog and put the pressure off his shoulders, play aggressively and freely to beat Djokovic.

 

[kevaninho]

Then Fed has more slams than Nadal in terms of whole career

At least you can count .

 

[Raiden]

Sheer flat power.

Wawa hits Djoker in a manner that is too often too fast and too direct for the Serbian.

Djoker is a very precisely constructed machine, with the fewest weaknesses/holes in his game... however like all machines, it has programmed capacity limits beyond which it simply can't perform.

 

[TearTheRoofOff]

Luck;
his AO 2014 win should have been Novak's in that 5th set
his RG 2015 win Novak was puking on court from stomach flu
his USO 2016 win Novak was not match-ready
his USO 2019 win Novak was injured

Meh, I felt Waw should have won their 2013 encounter. Certainly not wasting my time with the rest.

 

[duaneeo]

Djokovic beat Stan 14 consecutive times from 2007 - 2013. That he's lost to him 4 times (all slams) since 2014 makes little sense. It would if Stan were younger/taking advantage of the older/declining player, but that's not the case.

 

[Raiden]

Djokovic beat Stan 14 consecutive times from 2007 - 2013. That he's lost to him 4 times (all slams) since 2014 makes little sense.

It makes perfect sense actually.

Clearly Stan improved. He became a better tennis pro.

This is not rocket science.

 

[BringBackSV]

Easy answer: Peak Stan is just better than peak Nadal or Peak Federer.

He would be at 10+ slams if he could maintain that level.

That is in the running for dumbest posts of the month.

 

[BringBackSV]

Djokovic beat Stan 14 consecutive times from 2007 - 2013. That he's lost to him 4 times (all slams) since 2014 makes little sense. It would if Stan were younger/taking advantage of the older/declining player, but that's not the case.

Did you watch the matches? It shouldn't be that confusing.

 

[tennisaddict]

At least you can count .

How does it feel knowing he is behind all his tennis career ?

 

[Fedr and three others]

Yes beating him half of the time in Slam finals is really indicative of whay you're proposing.

My comment is referring to the fact that fedal would have both beaten this Djokovic. Anyway, Stan's USO final win over Djokovic is extremely overrated, Djokovic should not have even been in that final.

 

[USO19]

Flat hitting.

 

[kevaninho]

How does it feel knowing he is behind all his tennis career ?

Maybe not for long