Roger Federer took the easy way. Stan Wawrinka chose the scenic route.
Whatever the case, the two Swiss veterans will be facing each other for the 26th time in their careers when they renew their friendly–and lopsided–rivalry in the French Open quarterfinals on Tuesday. Federer is completely dominating the head-to-head series 22-3, a record that includes a current six-match winning streak and a 20-2 mark in their last 22. Perhaps the only good news for Wawrinka is that one of his victories has come at Roland Garros, where he prevailed 6-4, 6-3, 7-6(4) in the quarterfinals on his way to the title. All three of them have come on clay.
Of course, Federer can also harp on his two French Open defeats of his countryman, both in straight sets (in 2009 and 2011). They most recently collided earlier this season in Indian Wells, where the 37-year-old cruised 6-3, 6-4.
Federer is a considerable favorite once again, and not just because he registers 25 spots ahead of Wawrinka at No. 3 in the rankings. Moreover, the underdog is coming off a five-hour and eight-minute battle with Stefanos Tsitsipas on Sunday afternoon, taking it 7-6(6), 5-7, 6-4, 3-6, 8-6.
“To play Roger in [the quarterfinals], it’s something amazing for me,” Wawrinka assured. “I’m really happy…. He’s still playing so well. He’s the best player to ever play this sport. So it’s going to be a big challenge. I [haven’t beaten] him many times in all my career, but I did once here so I still do remember that time and was a special day for me.
“It’s gonna be a big challenge; will need to recover from today’s match. It was still a long match. I’m getting old, and older and older, so it is not going to be help to be ready for Tuesday. But again, I love that kind of challenge and I’m going to try to do my best to play my best tennis.”
When it was pointed out to him that Federer is even older, Wawrinka quipped, “But he’s quite better than me, also.”
Federer has certainly been more efficient this fortnight. While Wawrinka has spent 12 hours and 27 minutes on court (also a four-setter with Jozef Kovalik and three consecutive tiebreakers against Grigor Dimitrov), the 20-time major champion required only seven hours and 10 minutes through four rounds. He did so by erasing Lorenzo Sonego, Oscar Otte, Casper Ruud, and Leonardo Mayer.
That does not mean Federer will be taking anything for granted in this one.
“On clay, this is when it’s been most tough for me against him,” the third seed said of Wawrinka. “If I think back at [the 2014 Monte-Carlo final], French Open here in ’15, and then also he beat me in [Monte-Carlo in 2009]. So on clay it’s been definitely more dangerous than on any other surface for me against him.
“Look, it always starts by saying I’m just happy for the guy that he’s back after his knee problems. They were severe, and that’s why I think he’s really happy he got sort of a second life on tour, because I think for a while there he wasn’t sure if he was ever going to come back again. It’s nice to see him pain-free and playing well. I hope he’s not at the level of ’15…. Because then he was crushing the ball. It was unbelievable.”
Wawrinka, of course, is not all the way back to his level that carried him to three Grand Slam triumphs. And even if he was, Federer’s current form combined with the five-set marathon against Tsitsipas would make this a brutally tough task.
Pick: Federer in 4
[polldaddy poll=10333920]
WWW?
I agree that Fed in 4 makes most sense, but I think there is a decent chance that this will be more lopsided in Fed’s favor because Stan will be out of gas, and a small chance that Stan will come out in world-beating form and overwhelm Roger like he did in 2015.
I think it’s worth noting that each time Wawrinka raised his game to break or win a set, he relaxed and let his opponent back into the match. He can ill afford to do that against Federer that has a stronger service game than Tsitsipas and much more experience.
When Wawrinka won the title, sure his performance escalated to lights-out tennis but it all started by playing consistently within himself. He needs to find that steadiness if he is to have any chance at winning this match.
Federer hasn’t dropped a set so far and has only been broken twice in 4 matches so the chances of Wawrinka winning in 3 or 4 are slim and if it goes to 5 he will need nothing short of a miracle due to the physicality of his previous match.
Federer in 4
Agree w/Jim above…but could even be 3 sets for GOAT!
Wawa in 3 sets
Plus Fed has bene breaking early in each set in all his matches. Wawrinka will most likely be playing catchup. Odds of Fed winning the first set are like 90%.
Jim Courier, Federer has played nobodies so far you can’t compare that to Stan having to get past Dimitrov and Tsitsipas.
I’m going Stan in 4 or 5. His physical stamina and fitness has always been extremely underrated. Since he became Stan, as we know him, he has been just a bad matchup for Fed on clay. I just can’t get the straight-set complete demolition of Fed in the 2015 QF out of my head. Stan will never be fully back to the player he was at that time, but he’s pretty darn close right now.
Of course there’s a possibility that Stan really just can’t recover enough from the Tsitsipas match, as he is older, himself. And Fed could definitely win this match. But I personally think he will be fine, and will be dying to avenge that 5-set SF loss to Fed at 2017 AO.
So, yeah, I’ll go Stan in 4, or 5 if Fed really plays well. (Personally, I don’t think it matters who wins this match because whoever wins is just going to be obliterated by Rafa in the SF. 🤷♂️)
Let me put this to you. Can Stan withstand another battle like he just had with Tsitsipas? If not, he wont win because Fed will give him a similar kind of test and will be less forgiving when Stan takes his foot off the peddle like he has been doing.
You’re right, Jim. It could be difficult for Stan to grind for another long match, given what he went through in the last match. I guess I just believe that Stan will have recovered just fine. There is no question that Fed will have to come flying out of the gates like he has been if he wants to have the best chance of beating Stan. I really think that Fed has to win the first set, especially, if he will realistically win the match. Stan just overpowers Fed so much on clay.
Even though I’m picking Stan right now, the truth is that I really don’t feel totally comfortable picking either of them until I see the first set, and see how Stan looks physically. If Stan is totally fine physically, then I’m giving him the edge. But I’m also not too naive to think that Fed doesn’t have a chance to win the match- of course he does. And a good chance at that. I just can’t get it out of my head how helpless Fed was against Stan the last time they played at RG… Stan KILLED Fed. It was like he just completely took the racquet out of Fed’s hands. And I haven’t yet seen enough evidence to think that Stan won’t do that again. Only at RG! After the first set, we will know.
Have you been watching Fed’s matches, Kevin? He’s hitting the ball extremely hard, harder than I’ve seen him do for awhile. He will be able to almost match Stan from the ground in terms of power, but will have more variety. He is definitely the favorite in this match.
True, if Stan plays like he did in 2015, he will probably win, since Fed played very good in that QF. But that Stan has never returned, and if he does, I have no doubt he will beat Nadal and (probably) Novak to win the title.
Seriously!! Always the digs at Rafa. Why would 2015 Stan definitely beat Rafa and maybe, note the maybe, Nole. Stan is more of a problem for Nole than he is for Rafa so that makes zero sense. But don’t let logic stand in the way of your desire to get your verbal boot into Rafa.
The ‘probably’ was only to signal that I’m not sure Novak will make the final (whereas I’m very confident Nadal will make the SF). I don’t see how I’m putting the boot into Rafa especially: I’m saying the 2015 version of Stan would beat all of the big three at this tournament -none of whom, I should add, has been at his all-time best.
Now, if the 2015 Stan had shown up in the 2017 final, that would have been a match. I’m not sure anyone could have beaten that version of Nadal, but 2015 Stan would have had a chance. It would have been very close.
He he Amy, its the same old same old from Joe!
Stan has never been a problem for Rafa on clay, don’t even need to talk about the FO.
His SHBH, no matter how great that is/was, its not enough to trouble Rafa’s topspin FH all along. Rafa had already proven that time and again, against Stan at the FO.
This year, Rafa’s topspin FH isn’t having the same lethal effect it used to have all these years, but he’s still beating his opponents, including Djoko, quite comfortably at Rome and at Paris.
Rafa has more weapons now then when he was 10 years younger, so that may make up for the loss of power or speed due to age.
Stan was winning more of the shorter points vs Tsitsipas, against Fed, I feel most of the points would be short, so I doubt Stan would feel the physical strain that much.
It won’t be easy for Fed or Stan beating each other, Stan has the power to hit through Fed, unlike most of Fed’s other opponents. They’re familiar foes, so Stan knows what to expect out of Fed, again unlike most of Fed’s other opponents.
2015 Stan would overpower current Nadal just like he did to Novak in 2015. Only reason 2017 Nadal would beat 2015 Stan is because in 2017 Nadal was aggressive and accurate, especially with the FH.
This year Rafa has tried to be aggressive, but not with nearly as much success, which is why he often reverts to being more of a counter-puncher/ retriever. Same with his serve: he’s trying to hit it harder, but he can’t do so consistently enough so he goes back to the old serve.
To be clear, I don’t think 2015 Stan is going to return, and if Stan meets Nadal in the SF in a couple days, I’ll pick Nadal to win.
I heard a former top player today say the same thing , no-one would have beaten Stan in 2015.And plenty of other people, he was just amazing, it happens.
Like Murray at Wimby 2013,or Djoko at the AO this year.And of course,Rafa at rg 2008.
Why did Amy say Joe was putting the boot in? She was, imo.
amy,
Thanks for picking up on that. Bias is a terrible thing. It happens all the time and by the same person.
Same old, same old. There is a reason. why Rafa has only lost twice in his entire career at RG. Enough said!
How on earth did this match get scheduled on lenglen..strange decision
I reckon they are on first while Rafa and Kei are on second on Chatrier is to give Fed the advantage. Otherwise with the rain the second match may not get on court. Which would be great for Stan! Also Rafa may have to play on Wednesday. So even better!😬
No Amy..fed Stan at 2 pm first match on lenglen .Rafa is second match on chartier around 330 pm..
330 pm still gives window of 5 hrs to play .I think match will be played..
However Stan is more aware of lenglen..he played his fourth round on lenglen..fed played his third n complained about the court ..hence I’m surprised they scheduled this match here as both are Swiss .both speak French n on paper it’s a better match than Rafa Nishi.
So bcos Fed complained so he should be given the court of his liking? Since when does he get to decide?! He plays on the court that they schedule!!! And Y should he get to play on Chatrier, he’s not #1 and neither is he the defending champ!! Susan Lenglen it is!!!
I’m not complaining .I’m happy as Rafa loves chartier..I just said I am surprised that better match on paper got lenglen..we all know all tourneys allegedly favour fed regarding courts n schedule..
I hope it does not sound like im shouting at you either Sanju! I guess im just tired of Fed and his sense of entitlement which is very much pandered to!!! Sigh!
Monalisa, Sanju just said that Fed complained about Lenglen. How would putting him on a court he apparently doesn’t like me pandering to him? If they pandered to him, he and Stan would be on Chatrier, especially since that match has great potential while Rafa-Nishikori is guaranteed to be a quick, one-sided drubbing. They are clearly giving preference to the 11-time champion, as they should. So what’s your beef here?
*BE pandering to him
Maybe not this time around but Fed is very much pandered to?!! He always seems to get the best scheduling! And Im not the only who thinks so, and it’s quite obvious actually!!
If its true and he complained about a court, how dare he?!!! Fed is not mad to think that he will get any preference after having not played at RG in the last 100 years!! Really, who does he think he is?!!! Choops!!!
Susan Lenglen it is!!!! Or perhaps Court 1!!!
Careful with the logic, Kevin. It’s a powerful weapon, to be used sparingly in select contexts!
Sanju,
Rafa is the defending champion
Rafa is the 11 times RG champion
Rafa is higher ranked than Federer
Three good reasons why Rafa should be on PC above Federer.
No Good decision, bcos i get to watch Fed play! Stop being a wet blanket Sanju, lol!!
Roger gets what Roger wants. That’s just the way it is. Except at Wimbly last year Rafa/Delpo got center court and Fed/Kando got relegated to the second court.
If Roger always gets what he wants, then why is he on Lenglen when he apparently complained about it?
Exactly, there’s no bias here, he’s not getting the court he would actually want (PC).
And by the way, this is easily a more interesting match-up for audiences than Nishikori/Nadal anyway, which is quite likely to be one-sided.
Kevin .fed will come out fast from the gates n will win in max 4
That could definitely happen, Sanju. But Stan has the ability to not let him come out fast like that. Of course it can happen, but I’m not sure why people are so certain that it WILL happen.
And I’m not so certain why, for a supposed Fed fan, you’re always so quick with a lengthy analysis of why he’s sure to lose these days. I sense a bit of ageism, Kevin!
Kevin is a Fedal fan, but a Fed fan first, also a tennis fan first. He likes to see good matches. He didn’t say Fed was sure to lose, just put forth a possibility for a good match. I’m hoping for a good match too, but I think Stan may be a little fried. If we can’t have a good match I hope Fed gets it over with quickly so I can see Rafa play for once.
I think Kevin is a Nadal fan first. Either that, or he tries to overcompensate for this being a heavily Nadal-friendly site by giving insincerely rosy predictions for Rafa and the opposite for Fed.
He thinks that Whoever wins between Fed and Stan will be “obliterated” by Nadal in the SF? (The same Nadal who has lost on clay this year to Fognini, Thiem, and Tsitsipas, and lost a set here to Goffin?)
That’s not objective tennis analysis; that’s just crazy talk, imo either fan-obsessed or insincere.
They could schedule Federer/Wawa on PC after Rafa/Kei because the ladies’ match might only last an hour.
Fed in four, energy advantage
Roger has always had Wawrinka’s number and Stan will not be as fresh as Rogere in the QF. Advantage Roger … http://www.138mph.com/wawrinka-will-play-federer-after-5-hours-against-tsitsipas-2019-roland-garros-quaterfinal/
Fed will play like Tsitsi but do a much more efficient job and win in four.
It would be interesting to know if Fed has ever lost to someone coming off a 5-setter let alone a lengthy 5-setter.
I’m pretty sure Fed would be a master at exploiting this type of advantage.
Yes he has..delpo in USO 17 qf
5 sets at the US open is nothing caompared to RG though. Half the match is serving aces or unreturnables.
And AO2009 final.
Wawrinka at 32 isnt Rafa in his prime. Rafa played Verdasco from memory and that match was 90% flat out winners. Hardly comparable to a 5 hour marathon at RG against a highly tenacious opponent in a last man standing wins battle.
Nice find though.
Jim, you forget Fed wasn’t 37 in 2009 either but 27! Not forgetting, Fed back then had an extra day rest before the final! The AO2009 SF between Rafa and Verdasco was equally if not more physical than the Stan/Tsitsipas match; that match was played with many long points on slow HCs, the Tsitispas match if I’m not wrong, there were more 5 shots and below points (which Stan won most of them) than longer rallies where Tsitsipas won most.
Stan at 34 is as fit as ever, if not he couldn’t outlast a 20 yo Tsitispas! I don’t think Stan’s fitness will be an issue as the QF will probably be played with many short points too so it’s not physically as strenuous.
Flat out winners? Well those winners were after some incredible long rally exchanges? You talked as if they’re from some big booming serves! Lol!
Wimby 2008 in a lengthy five-setter
That was in the actual match (the final) that was a 5-setter, not the match before. An all-time classic though.
My conclusion from all of this; all things considered, Federer has never lost to someone coming off a match as physical as the one Wawrinka has just played.
Federer wins in 4 or possibly in 3.
Yes he did, don’t deny that! AO2009 final was a typical example, when Fed even had an extra day rest!
And Fed finished off his SF opponent, Roddick, back then in straight sets, to add salt to the wound.
I’d agree with this.
It was a pretty physical match b/w Nadal & Verdasco, I remember watching the whole thing at the time.
The ‘big four’ + Stan have overcome tough 5 set matches & then won the next match multiple times, particularly prime Djokovic and Nadal.
People often say ‘oh well player x has just had a tough five setter, they probably won’t have enough in the tank for the next match’. And sometimes fatigue does turn out to be a factor. But other times it just doesn’t, especially for the best of the men’s tour. You have to look at the match itself and see if there are signs of physical fatigue, rather than just diagnose it because a tough match came before, for example.
That being said, I won’t be surprised if Stan’s five setter has some impact on him given: (1) His age, (2) he may not be at peak physical fitness due to the injury comeback; (3) There were a lot of long rallies/tough games against Tsitsipas and it was a grueling five setter (rather than a 3hr match with 6-3, 3-6, 6-2, 4-6, 6-3 scoreline, for example).
Even then, it may only come into play once a few sets have gone by, and by that point Fed himself might even be a bit worn down, so it all depends. I definitely give Stan a fair chance of winning this, on clay he is a noticeably more difficult opponent for Fed.
“Prime Nadal” had one hell of a time recovering from that 2009 AO semi v Verdasco. It was one of the most brutal matches ever played due to high heat/humidity – even though it was at night they were using the ice towels. It’s well detailed in Nadal’s book. At the time it was the longest match ever played at the AO (Nadal/Djokovic final in 2012 is now the longest). It’s still spoken of with awe by the commies that were there. Right up to match time Nadal believed there was no way he could put on a competitive match v Roger. When he tried to train for the final he had to give up – he simply could not move. But Toni fired him up with a pre-match speech on what people can do when they need to – and the endorphins kicked in – and his trainer gave him some advice on playing efficiently. And in the end, well, according to Navratilova ir was “Roger lost his legs.” early in the 5th set. At that point Rafa was 22 and Roger was 27 – getting older everyone said, no longer in his prime! 11 years ago!
Stan and Roger are both much older now but they’re also both much smarter. Roger’s learned to play very efficiently. Stan, too, in a way. He was going for winners v Tsitsipas.
Two years ago in his AO semi Stan won a long 5 setter v Murray. He lost the final rather easily to Rafa but he never claimed, nor did it appear, that fatigue was a factor.
All that said, I think it’s Fed in 3 or 4 today. Fed isn’t Tsitsi, he won’t be intimidated by the occasion.
We’ll see.
Federer into Nadal 3-zip. I’ll take the free 2s on offer thank you very much.,
Fed’s a bit tentative so far. He wouldve broken by now
How does Stan look? Does he seem fatigued?
Fed’s had about 4 break point opportunities already and just hasnt been ruthless enough. They are still playing like best of mates.
I think Stan is showing subtle signs but nothing obvious yet
So many missed opportunities which is very uncanny for Fed.