Skip to main content

Stan The (forgotten) Man

If there is one guy I hate writing about its Stan Wawrinka!! But probably not for the reasons you are thinking…

Actually, as a player and as a personality I really love Stan. In fact, it’s a shame the tennis world doesn’t talk about him as often as we probably should. He is, after all, a 3 time grand slam champion at 3 different slams and holds an impressive 75% success rate when he reaches a major final.   However, the thing is….he is an impossibly annoying subject to write about!! Why?

1)      He’s unpredictable: I like to make predictions, especially before grand slam events, which sometimes hit the mark and other times (more often than not) don’t. Trying to guess where Wawrinka is at, however, is a sure fire route to public humiliation…
2)      He’s unpredictable: Not only does Stan’s form go up and down like an elevator from tournament to tournament, but he can also find a world beating level from seemingly nowhere at a moment’s notice without any warning. Hence, making judging his chances pre event even less possible, and…
3)      He’s unpredictable: Did I mention already? But really, it’s not just his game that’s perplexing but emotionally Stan is an enigma. When he wins he points to his head to highlight his mental strength. It’s a resource he has in stacks as he isn’t one to crack under pressure. You could even say he rises to big occasions when the opportunity presents itself by producing a level well above his yearly average. A ‘Super Stan’ version of himself that hibernates during masters events but awakens when the big 4 really wish it wouldn’t. Yet, for long enough his mind was also his greatest weakness. Wawrinka was a late developer where slam success was concerned winning his first at the age of 28. He left his wife and daughter in 2015 to focus fully on tennis which doesn’t suggest the image of someone mentally strong and capable of multitasking the demands of the tour with the stresses of family life. He has also been very open about the empty feeling some of his greatest victories have brought him.
So surely anyone standing in the locker-room/ corridor with Stan before his 2016 US Open final, when he admitted to having a near panic attack experience and had to fight to stop crying, wouldn’t have really expected him to have a chance in that match? …yet….

So that’s my excuse for not writing about Wawrinka more but what about everyone else’s? Because I don’t believe it’s an exaggeration to say Stan is in danger of becoming the forgotten man.

Maybe it’s just that some commentators and journalists feel there isn’t the demand. Federer and Nadal have massive worldwide and long established fan bases and (as two of the greatest of all time) it is hard to resist the urge to bring them into any tennis conversation. Djokovic has been the dominant force for the last few years and has given everyone lots to talk about technique and personality wise. With his flatter groundstrokes, impressive speed, knack for turning defence into offence and pioneering popularisation of sliding on a hard court he is hard to ignore. Not to mention those old videos of the player impressions. Rounding off the big 4 is Andy Murray. In addition to being the treasure of Britain he has built impressive following in China?!? So does Stan just not have as many fans and so we overlook him because we think people don’t care about his achievements or struggles?

Well, it is true he doesn’t have quite the following of the other active multiple slam winners: you only need to look at social media following figures to see that. Even in his home country of Switzerland he is the second in command because of a guy called Federer. But he has built up in this respect more with every triumph. I think a lot of people who do support Stan have taken to him because of his ‘ordinary guy’ brand. He’s not an impossibly graceful tennis player/ballet dancer hybrid and slick media man who gets dressed in sequin snake design jackets by Gucci for functions. Nor is he a fantastic gymnastic health food enthusiast with a rawist restaurant who meditates at Buddhist temples and does ariel yoga. At least not that I know of…He’s actually quite relatable.

So is it that he just is not good enough in terms of skill?? Yes, he is perhaps unlucky to be in the era of the big 4: unless he can accelerate now he will forever be fifth man (whatever the rankings say) and he is fast running out of time. But it’s not like there’s nothing technical to talk about regarding Wawrinka. I mean that singlehanded backhand is just!!!! For me that one shot is so stunningly beautiful to watch that when it’s firing it eclipses the backhand of every member of the big 4 - yes even the peak Djokovic two hander! It is crazy to suggest Wawrinka doesn’t possess enough skill to mention. When Stan is on top form he can beat anyone. The problem is, he is not on his top form consistently enough.

Even excellence is easily forgotten when it is interspersed by vast periods of… averageness.

Still, Wawrinka’s average is better than yours. I guarantee it. It’s certainly better than mine. The bottom line is we need to credit this man for the way he has infiltrated the top of the game. He was always there but since 2013 he has really carved out a right to seriously join the conversation. In my opinion, it’s time we accept the big 5.

True, the big 4 have all held the number 1 singles ranking: something Stan hasn’t and quite possibly won’t ever do. If we take Andy Murray, the weakest of the big 4, then he is better than Stan in terms of consistency. No doubt. But…when Stan and Murray are both at their absolute peaks then, I would argue, Wawrinka’s best is slightly better than Andy’s. Even if you disagree with this opinion I’m sure you can acknowledge that the gulf between Djokovic and Murray is far greater than that between Murray and Wawrinka. So either there is a big 3 or there is a big 5, up to you!


Stan Wawrinka is 32 years old and so who knows for how much longer he will play. In fact, he has just announced he will not play for the remainder of the 2017 season while he recovers from knee surgery and will most likely have a fight on his hands when he does return to get back to his current ranking. But I for one am going to try remember to talk a lot more about him for whatever is left of his career, because for ‘Stan The Man’ to be forgotten would be the biggest injustice of all. 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

#Tennis Kids of Instagram

There is only one way that a sport like tennis can grow. We need young people to continue to watch, participate in and improve our sport: so it’s nice to see on Instagram that there are no shortage of kids and young adults who love our sport! For anyone who isn’t familiar with the ‘Rich kids of Instagram’ it is a verified Insta account that gives an insight into the world of 20 somethings with way too much money (which is often, but not always, from their parents) and their lavish lifestyles. If you want to check it out then please do but please, READ THIS FIRST!  Anyway, it got me thinking I should do some real journalism for once and that we need to celebrate the stories behind the hard working, enthusiastic, ambitious and inspiring ‘Tennis Kids of Instagram’. The future of our sport! Here are the stories of 4 very different but equally amazing 5-17 year olds who all share one thing: they love tennis. This article is written in order of age category so please read right to the e

Mid-Season Roundup: Injury Issues

There was a running theme throughout this year’s Wimbledon and unfortunately it was not a positive one. We have become accustomed to talking about the impact of the weather at Wimbledon over the years and the impact it can have as a third player, but this year the spotlight was on a different issue: injury! Indeed, it was the talk of the first round as the centre court crowd saw two consecutive mid-match retirements when both Klizan and Dolgopolov succumbed to injuries they had carried into the tournament. Under current rules a player may not take a medical time out in circumstances where the issue already existed before the match. Hence, they had no option but to concede defeat….. Or did they? I only ask because the decision sparked a lot of controversy! For those that didn’t hear the discussions, a first round Wimbledon loser gets around £30,000 (maybe as much as £35,000- I honestly don’t remember) for participating in the tournament: regardless of the score-line. This, o

5 things we learned from the French Open 2017: Lesson 5

Lesson #5 The game is in flux! Okay, so, a little contradictory? I know: I’m just after implying that the matches at this year’s French Open were more predictable than normal and I stand by it! In terms of outcome that is. As I said, it appeared that identifying which player was physically stronger often answered the question of who would win. So if we could guess the result then what do I mean by ‘the game is in flux’? Well firstly let us think back on some of the score lines from the tournament. While it is true that the winner was often predictable the manner in which they got there was so often not. The Halep vs Svitolina encounter was always going to be a tight one. Hence, the fact Svitolina stretched her to 3 sets was pretty regular. But if anyone foresaw the demolition that would follow in the decider then I would like to congratulate you and maybe even employ you to write these for me! The momentum was so obviously with Svitolina….so how come Halep took it 6-0?? She