Will Stan Wawrinka be remembered as the Y. E. Yang of tennis?

Silent

Professional
Time will tell but I did think of exactly this.

If Nadal starts to lose finals, starts to drop sets left and right, especially on clay, then I think so. It's still a big stretch to think that will happen.

But golf IS different. Tiger used to always win with the lead. That loss gave confidence to the field. Now nobody is afraid anymore. It's very hard to make the same parallel with tennis because the score is reset for every match.

I definitely think some players are seeing an opportunity here. Whether they can execute is a different matter.
 

Kalin

Legend
Y. E. Yang was the first player to beat Tiger Woods in a major (the equivalent of tennis' Grand Slam tournament) when Tiger had entered the last round with the lead. It had never happened before.

Since then, Tiger has never won another major...
 
F

FedererWinsWimbledon2014

Guest
Could well be. Now all we need is a fire hydrant...
 
F

FedererWinsWimbledon2014

Guest
images


captphoto_1250474695736-1-0.jpg
 
No. Random winners are typical in golf. In tennis they are not. Winning a slam in tennis in this era totally dominated by only 3 or 4 men will forever hold him in high esteem, just like Del Potro.
 
F

FedererWinsWimbledon2014

Guest
Nadal currently struggling mentally, just like Tiger.

Yang/Wawrinka broke the aura of invincibility. Players now believe they can win. Without belief you are beat before it starts.

We have to wait till the French to see.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

West Coast Ace

G.O.A.T.
Nadal currently struggling mentally, just like Tiger.

Yang/Wawrinka broke the aura of invincibility. Players now believe they can win. Without belief you are beat before it starts.
a) Eldrick wasn't struggling when YEY beat him; b) 1 AO winner Nadal was hardly ever considered invincible there. Except for his fanboys who always write off his losses to injury.
 

egn

Hall of Fame
Stan was a much better player than Y.E Yang prior to his major. Stan was a top 10 player for a while, Y.E never was close. We will have to see how Stan follows it up. However someone like Johansson is a closer comparison to Y.E Yang.
 

bluetrain4

G.O.A.T.
No, because few people will understand the comparison. Other than a handful of hardcore golf fans, no one will recall who Y.E. Yang is.
 

chjtennis

G.O.A.T.
While Yang doesn't seem like he will repeat his success at a major, Wawrinka is a legit contender in slams now. Whether Stan will win another is not certain, but he may. The best chance could be next year's AO, but he is a contender in FO and USO this year, I think.
 

bluetrain4

G.O.A.T.
Golf is not a sport. So the comparison is void.

I always think people get this wrong.

Golf is an enormous sport. A very popular sport. Nearly anything can be done "for sport", engaged in through serious competitions. Bass fishing is a sport, competitive eating is a sport. Poker can be a sport. Bowling is a sport.

I think what people want to say is that golfers are not "real" or "elite" athletes. I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with this, but it would make much more sense. "Track and field" in the Olympics is (or at least was) officially called "Athletics" and that makes sense since the skills on display in track and field match what most of us think of when we think of elite athletes - freakish speed, strength and/or endurance. Further, those traits are absolutely essential to success. Sure, there are buff golfers who played other sports and are indeed good athletes, but, it is not absolutely necessary in golf to be a great athlete to be successful.

But, many of us generally associate "sports" with "athletes" instead of more accurately "sports" with "sportsmen" (which would include athletes and non athletes depending on the sport).
 

mental midget

Hall of Fame
I always think people get this wrong.

Golf is an enormous sport. A very popular sport. Nearly anything can be done "for sport", engaged in through serious competitions. Bass fishing is a sport, competitive eating is a sport. Poker can be a sport. Bowling is a sport.

I think what people want to say is that golfers are not "real" or "elite" athletes. I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with this, but it would make much more sense. "Track and field" in the Olympics is (or at least was) officially called "Athletics" and that makes sense since the skills on display in track and field match what most of us think of when we think of elite athletes - freakish speed, strength and/or endurance. Further, those traits are absolutely essential to success. Sure, there are buff golfers who played other sports and are indeed good athletes, but, it is not absolutely necessary in golf to be a great athlete to be successful.

But, many of us generally associate "sports" with "athletes" instead of more accurately "sports" with "sportsmen" (which would include athletes and non athletes depending on the sport).

you don't need to run fast or jump high to play golf, but if your definition of an athlete includes exceptional hand-eye coordination i think it's fair to say pro golfers are great athletes in that regard. most of the guys i know who are excellent golfers happen to be exceptional athletes all-around, and i'm sure it's even more so at the professional level. to get to that level you need to have something special, beyond just thousands of reps.
 

Fiji

Legend
Does Nadal have tons of mistresses? He seems to swing the other way if you know what I mean.
 

Fiji

Legend
Though I agree with the op.

Tiger needed four more majors to tie the golf Goat Nicklaus.

Nadal needed four more majors to tie the tennis Goat Federer.
 
Top