Stan Wawrinka’s Grand Slam career is not over yet. And he will play the U.S. Open one more time.
Wawrinka was controversially not awarded a wild card for the season’s final major, but that changed when the final recipient — American Patrick Kypson — pulled out due to injury. Kypson’s wild card now goes to the 41-year-old Swiss, the USTA announced on Wednesday morning.
“Three-time Grand Slam and 2016 U.S. Open men’s singles champion Stan Wawrinka (SUI) will receive a singles main draw wild card into the 2026 U.S. Open,” a press release stated. “Patrick Kypson (USA), previously awarded a main draw wild card, withdrew with an injury.”
“I’m incredibly excited to accept the wild card for the 2026 U.S. Open and look forward to competing in front of the fans in New York once again,” Wawrinka said.
The former world No. 3 has played in all three slams so far this season. He reached the third round of the Australian Open (lost to Taylor Fritz in four sets), fell to Jesper de Jong in round one at Roland Garros in four sets, and came up short in a 6-7(7), 7-6(16), 7-6(7), 7-6(5) thriller against Matter Berrettini in the Wimbledon first round.
Wawrinka beat Novak Djokovic in the 2016 U.S. Open final.
should have gotten one in the first place
Precisely.
There’s now people on the Internet hoping for a Djokovic — Wawrinka final! Ah nostalgia. Maybe it’ll be an R1 match.
Probably one of the greatest matches I’ve ever witnessed was during that run. Wawrinka vs. Evans, down two sets to love. He had an uncanny ability to find a way when nothing was working, and then once he was On, it would snowball.
i was there
Very lucky
It’s really unbelievable they didn’t grant Stan an outright wildcard in his retirement year. Unlike the Williams sisters, he’s still playing great and winning some matches too. Was on fire in the United Cup and at the Australian Open earlier this year. But the previously already retired Williams sisters are getting wildcards for anything anywhere no matter how many times they lose first round. They’ve just been given another wildcard for Grand Slam doubles but were out in R1 in Cincinnati.
Surely there are young players more worthy of a shot, plus more in need of the experience, and the money for a R1 loss. Of course, it’s partly the public causing it because they queue up around the block to watch the Williams sisters lose and won’t support new “no names”…
I think out of all players, Monfils was the most deserving. He’s been the most competitive. I am one of the biggest Stan fans, but I saw the writing on the wall back when I pick Bautista Agut to easily roll him, which had to have been like 3-4 years ago. His peak after knee surgery was when he almost beat Medvedev, which had to have been 3-4 years ago too. He definitely draws a crowd in the practice areas, but he shows up to every tournament. He’s like the old uncle that’s always hanging around, and it’s time he just showed up with a beer, and not a racket. I call it the Baghdatis tour. Good that Roger, Rafa, and Murray stepped away gracefully.
vs. Berrettini in R1
winner faces Djokovic
Love leppy’s comment, above, about Stan being “the old Uncle who always shows up…”!!!!
I take all your points there, from all of you. Personally I couldn’t tell you if I prefer Wawrinka or Monfils, they have both been favourite players of our household for decades. Monfils for his joy and athleticism, Wawrinka for his never-lay-down attitude. I’m glad they both ended up with wildcards and when they retire at the end of the year I expect they will stay retired (at least for singles), rather than make “comebacks” five years from now…
So, a Wawrinka — Djokovic rematch is possible here, a decade later. But not probable I should think, unless Stan can pull a rabbit out of a hat versus Berrettini!
So, when is Djokovic getting old-Uncle-showing-up-status? Or does he have it already? Although Stan has been the more reliable showing-up uncle lately.😜
By the way, was this really the result of a random draw? I don’t know how tennis draws are done, are they totally watertight against some official quietly deciding, “Hmmm, let’s make this scenario more probable by just quietly putting this person in this spot…”
That’s a good question. They always say it is random, although I believe there is influence from previous results and previous H2H. But then again, I am a conspiracy theorist, I always believe there is someone pulling the strings.
It was my experience from a family in horse racing that if you ran the statistics on “random” draws you found they were prejudiced towards certain trainers and drivers in the in-group. Out-group trainers could “randomly” draw barriers 9-12 three or more times in a row and this never happened to in-group trainers. That went on for years and that was a statistical impossibility for “random” draws. It’s just that corruption is often quite open in sport and if overseeing people are appointed, those can quickly be corrupted as well.
Is tennis drawn “by computer” or “out of a barrel” — by members of the public?