Stan Wawrinka’s 2014 World Tour Finals campaign was nothing short of memorable, both on and off the court. One year later, his tournament should get off to a similarly entertaining start. On the other side of the net come Monday night will be Rafael Nadal.
Stan Wawrinka and Rafael Nadal will be squaring off for the 17th time in their careers and for the third time this fall when they kick off their weeks at the World Tour Finals with a round-robin showdown on Monday night.
They split their two most recent meetings, with Nadal dominating 6-2, 6-1 in the Shanghai quarterfinals before Wawrinka exacted revenge with a 7-6(8), 7-6(7) victory at the same stage of the Paris Masters. Their only previous encounter at the year-end championship came in 2013 and it also went to a pair of tiebreakers before Nadal survived 7-6(5), 7-6(6). Overall, the Spaniard owns a 13-3 lead in the head-to-head series–including 8-2 on hard courts and 2-1 indoors.
This season will go down as a disappointment for Nadal regardless of what transpires at the O2 because he failed to win a Grand Slam title or even a Masters 1000 tournament. That being said, the world No. 5 is in relatively resurgent form at the moment. In addition to his Paris performance, Nadal’s fall swing includes a semifinal showing in Shanghai and runner-up finishes in Beijing (to Novak Djokovic) and Basel (to Roger Federer).
Wawrinka’s year, of course, is highlighted by his second-ever major title at the French Open. The fourth-ranked Swiss also reached semifinals at the Australian Open and U.S. Open to go along with a trip to the Wimbledon quarters. He has plenty of momentum heading into London with a 17-4 record dating back to the start of the season’s final Grand Slam.
Neither man has ever triumphed at the World Tour Finals. Nadal, who missed the event in 2014 due to injury, is 13-11 lifetime with runner-up efforts in 2010 and 2013. Wawrinks is 4-4 in two appearances and reached the semis in both 2013 and 2014. He had four match points last year against Federer only to fall 4-6, 7-5, 7-6(6) in a semifinal thriller that featured as much drama in the post-match locker room as between the lines.
A relatively slow hard court that is reportedly identical to the Paris surface should be conducive to each player’s game and will likely result in another high-quality, competitive contest. Nadal will be well-rested this time around and may be particularly motivated for his first London appearance since 2013.
Pick: Nadal in 3
[polldaddy poll=9177751]
Oh goodness! Stan had 35 UE’s in a straight set match! Yikes!
That translates into an error every 2.4 minutes ?
Vaamoos Rafa!
http://www.sherv.net/cm/emo/happy/cheering-clapping-smiley-emoticon.gif
How did the match play out?
Rafa smoked Stan, 63 62.
I mean like how did they play? Was it lots of errors from Stan or did Rafa just dictate with forehand? I already know Rafa the boss prevailed lol.
Bring on Murray!
Vamos Rafa!
Benny,
I will give you my thoughts on the match. Stan was definitely not at his best, but that takes nothing away from Rafa. The first set was close until Rafa got the break and served out the set. Stan played a terrible game at 4-3 to give Rafa the chance to serve it out. His serve wasn’t working and he was spraying errors everywhere.
Rafa was able to take advantage of Stan’s mistakes. He also played very aggressive tennis. Rafa was determined to stand on or inside the baseline and control the points. The tennis channel commies said that Stan is not a great defender and Rafa kept putting him in a position where he had to defend.
Rafa outplayed him for sure, but this was not Stan at his best.
Benny,
Did you see the match stats that augusta posted on the previous page? Stan had 35 UE’s in a two set match! That lets you know how he played!
Here we go again. NNY, the eternal apologist for Rafa’s victims. NNY, one day, maybe, you will see some talent in Rafa. We can only hope.
Benny G, Rafa played great from well inside the court. He played attacking tennis and Stan was like a rabbit caught in headlights. The only thing Rafa didn’t hit so well was his 1st serve. He really needs to work on that. His ROS improved as the match went on but he missed some easy returns.
The match between Rafa & Andy is scheduled to start at 2:00 pm (local time):
OOP for Wednesday
http://www.protennislive.com/posting/2015/605/op.pdf
The round matches may not be too exciting so far – Tues. & Wed. matches can’t be worse can they?
Regrets about my picks:
1) 3 sets seems 1 set too many for all the matches in Group Nastase.
2) Wawrinka defeating Murray unlikely!.
3) Murray, not Wawrinka, makes it 2-1
—————-
Nadal makes through round matches 3-0. He’s back for 2016 ;P
Wawrinka will be happy on vacation after 0-3.
(The link I provided @10:32 pm, now leads to Tuesday’s schedule in PDF format).
OOP for Wednesday in another format:
http://www.atpworldtour.com/en/scores/current/barclays-atp-world-tour-finals/605/daily-schedule
Rafa analyzes his match:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d2SR7-OYmK0
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CT96biJUYAAN9BE.png
Rafa: “You don’t get tired of hitting winner shots. You get tired of missing shots.”
🙂
Rafa must be exhausted this year!
yup, i knew the court positioning stats would be much more positive. It was obvious to me. Rafa’s ROS kept so much pressure on stan. He has started to get more comfortable returning serve from closer to the baseline. He must keep doing it more and more so that it can hold up pressure moments…allows him to stay close to the baseline which is so damn important for his game.
AWESOME EXPERIENCE! IT WAS A MASSIVE MASSIVE TREAT TO WATCH RAFA DESTROY STAN !!
really impressed with rafa’s ROS and his ability to play inside the court. He had decided to stay close to the baseline no matter what! Even when he was not able to pack a full punch on his forehand DTL, he was able to spread the court and being the aggressor, he was able to take initiative.
Watching live if quite fun. Rafa hit some vicious slices as well and he was driving his backhand pretty flat on many occasions. He had a nice mix. Towards the end he also started moving quite ‘aggressively’ to his backhand.
Rafa will finish his group 3-0…
He had to wait for me to watch him play in order to play one of his best matches of the year 😉 ;P
vr, get tickets for all Rafa’s matches, pleeeeeaaaaaassssssseeeeeeeeeeeee!!
The fan boy on me may have gotten tooo excited watching rafa live, lol…but it was definitely a very positive performance ! bravoooo
vamosrafa,
You seem to be on quite a high after seeing Rafa in person! I think it’s great that you had this chance. 🙂
yesssss! My seat right next to the entrance area for players… awesome to see rafa from that close 🙂
Pics?
I think vr maybe credited with giving Rafa lots of positive vibes!!!
Eleanor Crooks @EleanorcrooksPA 3h3 hours ago
Stan Wawrinka was not impressed with himself: “It’s a really bad match. Bad behaviour in the second set.”
Chris Fowler @cbfowler 5h5 hours ago
Strong work @RafaelNadal but Stan’s performance a downer. Tight? Tired? Cranky? Indifferent? Who knows? @ATPWorldTour needs guys to step up
Steve Tignor @SteveTignor 5h5 hours ago
“A very curious parachute out of a competitive environment for Stan”: Appropriate summation from Jim Courier. Nadal wins 63 62
Tiggy says:
Rafael Nadal leaped in the air as if he had just won Wimbledon. Stan Wawrinka stalked off court as if he had just been double-bageled by the 1,000th-ranked player in the world. Had this really been, for many of us, the most enticing match-up of the first two days at the ATP World Tour Finals? In the end, the 6-3, 6-2 victory that meant so much to Rafa had been, by all appearances, handed over on a silver platter by Wawrinka.
Something about the O2 Arena brings out Stan’s sulky side. Two years ago he complained that Toni Nadal was coaching his nephew from the stands. Last year he was called a “crybaby” by Roger Federer’s wife, Mirka. This year, seemingly angered by Nadal’s pace of play and his own erratic form, Wawrinka, in the understated but wholly appropriate words of Tennis Channel commentator Jim Courier, engaged in, “A very curious parachute out of a competitive environment.” By the start of the second set, Wawrinka had stopped moving his feet; by the middle of it, he had stopped pausing between points or putting balls in the court.
“Something went wrong,” Stan said afterward, “and then everything went wrong today.”
http://www.tennis.com/pro-game/2015/11/pros-end/56830/#.VkqRt4RqrZZ
November 17, 2015 at 2:54 am,
—Last year he was called a “crybaby” by Roger Federer’s wife, Mirka.—
===
.
Oh, Mr. Tiggy continues to make attempts to justify behavior of Fed & his team – no matter what!
Mrs. Fed couldn’t keep her mouth shut during the Fed-Wawrinka match at the WTF and called Wawrinka ‘crybaby’ after he complained about that:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B9kowCICQAAT1jw.png:medium
(“Pleure bébé” = “crybaby” in French )
Fed should have been fined for that (Rulebook, page 177 & 178).
In the off chance that Stan hasn’t time to check here, maybe you should contact Benito and he can contact Stan’s people to warn him of what Tignor is doing. You have his contact info, yes?
November 17, 2015 at 2:10 pm,
.
Tiggy’s contact info is available on the Internet.
Issues between Fed’s team and Waw have nothing to do with “maybe you should contact Benito.”
You seem very preoccupied with that particular event and seem genuinely concerned for how Stan is being portrayed but not much we can do about it.
It was just a suggestion. Just trying to help.
November 17, 2015 at 2:55 pm
—You seem very preoccupied with that particular event…—
===
.
What??? YOU quoted Mr. Tiggy! You should try to help yourself! 😆
BTW, I have no idea who are these mysterious “we”.
I quoted Tignor on his opinion that Wawrinka has this chronic tendency to sulk, not about that one particular event.
However you keep bringing up that one particular episode repeatedly. There is nothing new with that and to gain some closure, I thought perhaps you might want to contact the people involved directly.
@ 3:09 pm,
I commented on the “episode” what Tiggy & YOU brought up!
Speaking of “bringing up…repeatedly” – that’s what YOU were doing this spring. Evidences are available in The Grandstand archives.
He brought up several examples.
I’ve mover on long ago on or before site rules were defined.
You choose to focus on one repeatedly.
I am just trying to help you find some closure on this seemingly traumatic episode.
From Rafa’s reaction, we can deduce that Stan’s bad play was because of Rafa not letting Stan play his game. Of course Rafa may also be like Djoko taking credit for opponent’s poor game.
Video by ATP.
Rafa’s post-match interview:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UBmwJy2qA80
Rafa’s post-match press conference (English & Spanish):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pnLP_U38wvQ
augusta,
do you know anything about Rafa’s racquet? It may only be me imagining stuff but it seemed to me that Rafa’s racquet last night was slightly bigger than his regular one? Could it be that he has switched to a new racquet?
natashao (at 1:32 pm),
Rafa is playing with his old racquet:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CUBItZSWIAA_4Ay.png
Stan: “Something went wrong,” Stan said afterward, “and then everything went wrong today.”
***************
No Stan, nothing went wrong, you just played the real Rafa who owns you when playing at 100%.
Vamos Rafa!
Glad to see an ardent Rafa fan being brought down to Fed fan’s standard.
Rafa only loses when he is not at his 100% ( Just like Fed, no)
Frankly abhirf, some here have taken it to a new level turning it into a caricature-like art form.
(Not necessarily good art though.)
I guess we are to assume that when Rafa lost in two TB’s in Paris to Stan, that he wasn’t at his best.
I can understand why abhirf would feel the way he does. Yes, it appears that some think Rafa only loses when he is not at 100%! Even though Rafa has made a career out of winning when he is not at his best! 🙂
LIVE STREAMING from Practice court 1,
Tuesday 17th November Schedule* (all local times):
11:30 Nishikori & Sparring
12:30 Ferrer & Coach
13:30 Nadal & Gasquet
*This schedule is subject to change without notice.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VxZN_Cb8Z_c
Stan suffers from a sense of entitlement to beat Rafa because he is believing the propaganda so when he comes up against the real Rafa he can’t take it then he starts to sulk.
Like mirka says.
Exactly, like a baby.
LOL (literally)
I watched the replay of the match last night when I got back home…I think some comments here are just not fair to Rafa…it was not Stan who played lousy tennis, it was Rafa not letting him play his A game…Rafa was very good last night…I wouldn’t even go that far and say that he was 100% because he obviously wasn’t…if he was 100% he would have destroyed Wawa and would have used those 15 break points in a better way…this way Rafa gifted Wawa with those 5 games and Wawa should if anything be grateful for it….
Rafa played aggressively…he was up to the task…he made some amazing points that will most likely be replayed over and over again as the shots of the year…Rafa’s body language showed some serious change in his mindset…I am enjoying Rafa’s progress…and I think his anxiety is being dealt with as there are clear steps forward in that regard…Rafa simply trusts his game more thus feeling more determined and more confident…Rafa is on the right track…
I wish Rafa beats Andy and Ferrer to secure the first place in the group…
and these commies complaining about the bad match…the Serbian commentator announced a “very close match” a “thriller”, a “long lasting grueling match””…etc…poor souls…they were all disappointed by Rafa’s dominance…I hope they get more and more of these disappointments…
Vamos Rafa!
Thank you, nats. You’ve said it all. It’s just as well tennis is not like other contests that award points by a panel of judges, if that were the case, Rafa would stand no chance with these biased people.
You are right that a 100% Rafa would not have wasted so many break points and I don’t think Rafa served that well. He needs to fix that. When I say a 100% Rafa, I mean a Rafa who is not doubting himself. Clearly no one can play a faultless match against another top pro.
Rafa neutralised Stan and the commies are disappointed because they were all bigging Stan up predicting that Stan would win. Stan was berating his team because their strategy wasn’t working.
I admit it is completely different to watch replay of the match. I knew the result so I could focus on each point played without any fear or anticipation. I think Rafa served well in the Set 2 (71%) unlike Set 1 where his first serve was at 52%. It clearly indicates that once he gets the pressure off his back he plays more freely and his shots work better.
And I so much agree that Rafa neutralized Stan whose strategy was clearly wrong…Stanimal expected to face a doubtful Rafa hitting short and making errors whereas Rafa played some agressive tennis combining well defense and offense…Stan was not able to defend last night and could not position himself to hit those trademark BHs…that’s how good Rafa was…
He has made significant progress.
He’s now beating the guys that were beating him and that’s a crucial step.
His last step is to start beating the rest of the Big 4 again and I don’t see that level from him just yet. He was close in Basel.
The reasoning that Rafa plays badly because he doubts himself is flawed in many respects. The explanation of physical causes is more believable as Rafa has missed big chunks of seasons because of physical injuries. So physical factors hindering his career is an established fact. Mental illness hindering him is speculation. If true it might well be that all those years Rafa was claiming knee, shoulder, back injury or whatever he was actually in a mental asylum.
Posters get involved in convoluted explanations when they get confused between cause and effect.
Rafa has stated mental injury impacting his game is a fact.
You choose to use the term mental illness. That is your choice.
In other words, your argument is an informal fallacy based on giving the impression of refuting an opponent’s argument, while actually refuting an argument which was not advanced by that opponent.
Obviously hawkeye your reasoning model is flawed. While physical factors maybe the cause, players can be troubled by the effects. If a man loses a leg, it is normal for him to go into depression or be anxious when trying out physical routines and he may talk of his anxiety or depression but you cannot say anxiety is the cause of his losing his leg.
Then your reasoning is also flawed because it is essentially the same as mine.
Please read more carefully.
I always read carefully. You have diagnosed Rafa’s problem as “anxiety disorder” .
I have diagnosed Rafa’s problems as physical injuries. To save his career and prevent repetitive injuries he has to implement new ways of playing but his new game so far is not effective. The newness plus the lack of power and speed caused by physical factors are causing him anxiety. According to you, he has forgotten how to play and lost his speed and power because of anxiety disorder.
Not carefully enough obviously.
Well I just hope that you not comparing “suspect” with “diagnose”.
Don’t you? or do you.
In other words, your argument is an informal fallacy based on giving the impression of refuting an opponent’s argument, while actually refuting an argument which was not advanced by that opponent.
^^ ––“very close match” a “thriller”, a “long lasting grueling match––
They can’t have been watching the same match. There were a few longish rallies that’s it.
Goodall asked Koenig what he thought of WaWa’s performance to which he replied ‘if I were his coach I would have left the court a long time ago.”
I was watching his team and wondering whatever must they be thinking. From Stan’s comments later on I would say he was told he had to give some explanation for his behaviour. I guess that was the best he could come up with.
Koenig and Goodall were very candid openly criticizing Wawrinka’s lack of professionalism and lack of respect for the paying fans.
Similar criticisms from Tignor.
ed,
the commentators anticipated and hoped for the grueling match…at the start of the match the Serbian commentator was all excited about a “thriller” that he expected to see…obviously, Rafa beating Wawa easily is not what they hoped for…
why is it that people must drag about Wawa not being himself in this match rather than admitting Rafa played well and beat Wawa fair and square…before 2015 Rafa was never troubled by Wawa’s game (with H2H 14:3) except for that unfortunate back injury in 2014…
ed,
Yes! I absolutely agree with you. The match was not competitive at all, because Stan just didn’t show up. As I posted while live blogging yesterday, both Courier and Annacone were highly critical of Stan’s effort, or the lack thereof. If anyone thinks that Stan only played poorly because of Rafa, then they must have blinders on.
Rafa did play aggressive in that match. He stayed on or inside the baseline and was moving into the court. Rafa took advantage of a very poor game from Stan to get a break late in the first set and serve it out. Stan’s serving was not good at all. There were break chances that Rafa could not convert. He is still struggling with his serve. But I thought overall that Rafa kept up his aggressive play. However, I can’t say that Stan playing so poorly was all because of Rafa. Rafa didn’t make him serve like crap.
The tennis channel commies all but called out Stan for tanking late in the first set and in the second set. He just didn’t seem to really be there.
For heaven’s sake, no one is taking credit away from Rafa! Why some people have to go on and on about this endlessly, I have no idea. So much defensiveness! I don’t see anyone here saying that Rafa didn’t play well! He absolutely did play well. But to pretend that Stan was really in this and was making a real effort, is to just be in denial. He was out of it.
Bravo NNY.
Also mental illness is your diagnosis. You compared it with Fish’s problem which was a mental illness.
Well I just hope that you not comparing “compare” with “equate”. Don’t you? Or do you.
Besides it is improtant to distinguish between disorders and illnesses.
You choose to use the terms mental illness and assylums. That is your choice.
In other words, your argument is an informal fallacy based on giving the impression of refuting an opponent’s argument, while actually refuting an argument which was not advanced by that opponent.
hawkeye has obtained his double PhD from straw man Univ. Congrats! Rise Dr hawkeye!
You are the Dean.
Sky says Ferrer was on the practice court before Rafa and it was very quiet but as soon as Rafa took over the crowd trebbled and all the sponsors came out of their tents to watch him
BREAKING
Sky specialises in breaking news, as it happens.
Vamos Rafa!