Wawrinka v Murray : RG Semi-Final 2016

I think this deserves its own thread. It's a match up we haven't seen before in a slam semi-final and their first meeting at RG. In my view, it's very hard to call: 

Overall H2H : Murray 8-7 Wawrinka
Clay H2H : Murray 0-3 Wawrinka
Slam H2H : Murray 2-2 Wawrinka

Stan has won the last three matches, all in straight sets. These include a 61 62 demolition in Monte Carlo 13. I think it's fair to say there are questions over Andy's back both for that loss and the US loss later that year. However, they were still very comprehensive.

I think Stan goes into this as favourite. He's the reigning champion and he's looked more consistent in this event. Couple that with the recent and clay H2H and he rightfully holds the edge. However, it's definitely not a lock. If Stan is anywhere sort of his peak level then Andy will have a shot. Andy needs to serve well and make sure he's aggressive throughout. If he can get control, then Stan's defence obviously isn't his best feature. If Andy tries to grind it out the probability is that he will lose. Stan can power through him and (since Norman at least) he's both physically and mentally rock solid. He won't lose the match - Andy will need to win it.

Fun fact - neither player has ever lost a SF to anyone other than the big 3. Something has to give!

Stan in 4, unless Murray finally wakes up a little. Would maybe set up a RG final rematch

Agree with first comment - if Stan is at the top of his game, he can blow Murray off the court. However, Murray - if he can serve very well, and BE AGRESSIVE, then could see it being Murray in 4. As pointed out above - it's a great semi in a Major, so good to see them reaching this round, against each other.

Stan in 3, possibly 4.

Murray has been laboured throughout against players with far lesser weapons than Wawrinka.

I agree with what quite a few others seem to be saying - if Stan plays well I think he wins, but I also think he is more likely to play well below his best than Andy is, so overall I would make Andy a slight favorite.

That said, I voted for Stan in 4 - I think that would be the most likely outcome if they both played well.

A lot will depend on the first set. If Wawrinka wins it I can't seeurray having the energy teserves to haul his way back into a match against Stan pinging his backhand all over the court. If Murray wins the first set then that changes things. I will opt for Stan in four as he has looked more bullet-proof than Andy so far and has came through more smoothly and in less time than Andy.

It's a worthy semi-final and Murray can win but I don't think Murray can win in straights sets. Wawrinka however I believe is capable of winning in straight sets. Murray had a good tournament last year getting to the semi-final and took Djokovic to five sets. Wawrinka is the defending champion. Both started this tournament with five set victories, but since then Wawrinka has been fairly convincing while Murray less so. Wawrinka has the weapons to beat Murray even if Murray is playing well. Have to go for a Wawrinka win in four as the most likely outcome. This is the first match of the tournament where Murray doesn't start out as favourite IMO.

I think the Berdych v Djokovic quarter final is also going to be interesting. Is Berdych a Wawrinka - Lite?

I think Stan can edge Andy but Andy wont make it easy for him so I say Stan in 5
A lot will depend on how well Murray can keep his head and stay focussed.
Hard one to call

Agree with most of the comments, but I don't think Andy is quite as much of an underdog as some. If he serves very well and wins a lot of quicker points on his serve through coming to the net or 1-2 punches, and he can do that as Stan blocks back virtually all returns, then he'll put a lot of pressure on Stan.

If Stan plays like he did in last years final then he wins, end of. Doesn't matter who he's playing. His very best can't be matched in today's game. But he doesn't always produce that. In fact it's quite rare.

I'm really looking forward to it. I'll say Stan in 4 but I really think it could be anything. I think if Andy wins the first set he'll win the match.

For the sake of making a prediction I will say Murray in 4. However it could be just as easily Wawrinka in 3.

I think that Andy will be fully focussed for this. Which is when he plays his best tennis. He has negate Stan's power game though to win. He has to be wary of getting into too many baseline rallies where Stan does not have to move around a lot. As these give Stan the opportunity to unleash a huge shot as soon as Andy drops a bit short.

Yes, agree that Stan is slight favourite but he can have his off days and this could be one of them.
Doubt whether heavy balls and dull weather are going to bother a hitter like Stan and if he's in the mood then Murray can forget it.
If Stan wins, it will probably be fairly quickly. If Murray is to triumph it could be a four or even a five-setter.

Wawrinka's very best on clay is better than Murray's very best, but Murray generally plays more consistently at a higher level as is shown by the fact that their slam win tally is the same, but Murray has been to many more finals and semi's and has won more Masters Tournaments both on and off clay.

Murray came into this tournament in better form on clay, but Stan has shown better form from R2-QF, in particular Murray has gone walkabout too often, which he can get away with vs. lesser opponents but against Stan you have to wonder.

It's v. difficult to call, if Stan hits one of his (rare) purple patches it will be over quickly, but if not (which is more likely) I think it will go to five sets and that Murray will just edge it.  I expect a match with some passages of great play and some maddeningly scrappy passages.

Stan in 3 or 4

This match will be determined by which Stan turns up. If it's The Man then Murray has no chance. Anything less and it's very close.

I'm a bit perplexed by some of the descriptions of Murray. He isn't even getting damned with faint praise. It's almost as though the last 14 months didn't happen, i.e. 3 clay court titles in 5 events. Heading the Nole/Nadal/Stan table for this season (at the three Masters)

Despite the surface here, to put Isner and Karlovic away as easy as has done, is no mean feat

And let's not forget that whilst he'd no business finding himself a set and 3-1 down to Gasquet in the tie-break, he did then win 11 of the next 12 games.

I think there's a quiet confidence about Murray and so I've put him down to do it in four

Hm many had Murray as second favourite before the tournament began and Stan not even consider much of a contender - remember when we argued the % chance to win the tournament for the top three favourites. Stan hardly got a mention.

Now he's playing himself into a bit of form, and Murray has had a few wobbles, I suppose it's a bit understandable the change of heart to an extent.

I'm still stuck on the fence myself at this point.

People that have a great run to a title or final often do repeat a year later - Soderling getting to RG 09 and then 10 finals even though he couldn't make other slam finals, Cilic putting up a credible US Open defence even after a poor year - for my other one I think I'll take Joe Johnnson getting to the 1987 snooker final I think it was having won in 1986 and been considered a one-hit wonder (OK, I was running low on good tennis examples).

@HB - quite right, I had Murray ranked v. highly, and Stan well below, and I have changed because of their respective more recent form (Stan's includes Geneva, which I had not noticed at the time).

That's the thing about Stan, he's not as consistent as Murray, but when you look at what he can do on clay and that he's played himself into decentish form, the match is more on his racquet than it on Murray's.

I think in that thread or another pre-tournament thread I did say opinions change on who is the favourite based on the form of the players as they go through the tournament. My views on that haven't changed.

Now I think it is very fair to say that coming into the tournament comparing Andy and Stan's form it was a no contest really. Andy reached a semi, a final and won Rome in the main clay court events where Stan bombed out early in all of those tournament. Stan found form in Geneva granted by winning it but they were crumbs compared to what Andy feasted on.

However, at RG, whilst Stan has had a scare V Rosol in the First Round he has been largely untroubled whereas Andy has had his back to the wall in three matches though did come through in the end. That says Stan is the form man at RG which is all that matters. Plus lets not forget he is the reigning champion so I'd say Stan has every right to be seen as favourite though I wouldn't say he is a strong favourite or anything.

A lot will depend on Andy's approach tomorrow and on how Stan deals with Andy's tactics. A passive Murray tomorrow loses - he must be aggressive. One thing that puts Andy in good stead is he has shown his mettle when needed here and came through so isn't under-cooked. Stan has not been tested since the First Round though he will be all the fresher for it.

Very tough one to call.

Let's face it; every neutral will be hoping for Stan to make the final


Nothing more boring in tennis than watching Murray try to out grind Djokovic only to run out of steam after two hours.

Stan is great to watch when he's on and he genuinely has pedigree against Screech at slam level.

emancipator wrote:Nothing more boring in tennis than watching Murray try to out grind Djokovic only to run out of steam after two hours.

Unquestionably the single most boring thing in the sport at the moment. Ok, maybe Granollers v Ferrer could be up there but it lacks the inevitability.

Pre-tournament I had
Djokovic favourite
Nadal second favourite
Wawrinka third favourite (defending champion)
Murray fourth favourite

The only thing that has changed is that Nadal has withdrawn due to injury and Wawrinka following the first round has shown a good level of tennis consistent with a defending champion.

I've thought about it some more and it's too hard to call for me. I bet if I have a guess it will go the other way. I'm just going to stay on the fence and enjoy it.

For what it's worth, Murray is the bookies favourite, but very close to 50/50.

Henman Bill wrote:I've thought about it some more and it's too hard to call for me. I bet if I have a guess it will go the other way. I'm just going to stay on the fence and enjoy it.

For what it's worth, Murray is the bookies favourite, but very close to 50/50.

It's not hard to call - past results, technique, and a defending champion - make Wawrinka the likely winner based on data. People that have an emotional investment in one or the other player will be swayed by their heart. But likely doesn't mean definitely - Murray may win but the data indicate this is a less likely event assuming both are fit and well.

Stan laying it on thick saying he is not in the same class as Murray. Pressure transferring?

Nore Staat wrote:

Henman Bill wrote:I've thought about it some more and it's too hard to call for me. I bet if I have a guess it will go the other way. I'm just going to stay on the fence and enjoy it.

For what it's worth, Murray is the bookies favourite, but very close to 50/50.

It's not hard to call - past results, technique, and a defending champion - make Wawrinka the likely winner based on data.  People that have an emotional investment in one or the other player will be swayed by their heart.  But likely doesn't mean definitely - Murray may win but the data indicate this is a less likely event assuming both are fit and well.

Not certain that the data indicates this at all, considering Murray's improvement on clay since they last met. I'd agree if it was Stan achieving the results  Andy has this clay court season, but it wasn't

I don't see why past results, when the last meeting was nearly three years, is a better indicator than current data

Close and I can't really call it, but I think if Andy stays with Stan he wins. And he has the capability of doing this

CaledonianCraig wrote:Stan laying it on thick saying he is not in the same class as Murray. Pressure transferring?

I don't think he plays those games. I think he's as genuine as Gasquet was when he was full of compliments about him. It was a statement based on facts

banbrotam wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:Stan laying it on thick saying he is not in the same class as Murray. Pressure transferring?

I don't think he plays those games. I think he's as genuine as Gasquet was when he was full of compliments about him. It was a statement based on facts

I'd agree with what he said though many here wouldn't. On the match itself people here talking of a Stan win I would say is more down to that Stan is a bad match up for Andy. A hard and flat power hitter. If we are talking about overall player I will court controversy here and say as Stan does that Andy is the better player. Hence the more titles, slam consistency, ranking consistency and such-like.

CaledonianCraig wrote:

banbrotam wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:Stan laying it on thick saying he is not in the same class as Murray. Pressure transferring?

I don't think he plays those games. I think he's as genuine as Gasquet was when he was full of compliments about him. It was a statement based on facts

I'd agree with what he said though many here wouldn't. On the match itself people here talking of a Stan win I would say is more down to that Stan is a bad match up for Andy. A hard and flat power hitter. If we are talking about overall player I will court controversy here and say as Stan does that Andy is the better player. Hence the more titles, slam consistency, ranking consistency and such-like.

I see what you and others mean, but I think Andy now goes toe to toe with these players. In fairness, he's never had a big problem with hard hitters as his record against Cilic, Del Potro and even Berdych shows. He was always far more vulnerable to good all rounders, particularly those with a good back hand, even more so the single handers, i.e. that's why Stan, Roger and Gasquet often give him problems

But Stan does have this wonderful ability to play with power and disguise, which previously had got to Andy.

Ironically, he wasn't beating Stan much under Lendl - my theory is that his game wasn't as varied under Ivan and that played into Stan's hands. In other words Andy is not going to beat him by trying to out-power him, he's going to have try dragging him all over the court and disrupting his rhythm

Stan is basically a far more powerful version of Gasquet, so the key is to still do the drop shots and still vary the play. The slight improvement in Murray's serve is also important as Stan, relative to Rafa, Novak and Andy is a poor returner (ranked 37th for the last year)

It's a great match up as Andy is now fully fit, arguably at his peak and the same can be said about Stan

For sure Andy is the better player, just look at the results, he is way ahead, Masters alone Stan has only won  one Masters and he is now thirty one years old.

As for some of the comments on this thread if you don't fancy an Andy v Novak final - SIMPLE- don't watch it. There are loads of fans who are looking forward to it If Both Andy & Novak win!

Hey. A murrokovic final would be great. They always have decent, but predictable matches

In all fairness though a rematch from last year would have a great story to it as well

It all depends on how you define best. If you looked at their peak levels I'd say peak Stan beats peak Andy, it's just that Stan's game falls away in standard from peak fast simply because it's a more aggressive, risk taking game.

Therefore Murray will inevitably win more tournaments than Stan, but Stan will be more able to beat the very best players even if they play at a high standard.

I feel that Wawrinka is the slight favourite here -

sadly he is playing well and a tough match up for Andy, who I do not think is playing that well

bogbrush wrote:It all depends on how you define best. If you looked at their peak levels I'd say peak Stan beats peak Andy, it's just that Stan's game falls away in standard from peak fast simply because it's a more aggressive, risk taking game.

Therefore Murray will inevitably win more tournaments than Stan, but Stan will be more able to beat the very best players even if they play at a high standard.

I agree with this.

Murray is more consistent but I'm pretty sure the big three would rather face a Murray on form than a Stan on form in a slam final.

I actually think Murray should utilise plenty low slices & drop shots this afternoon - you don't want to let Stan become overly comfortable at the baseline because when he gets that rhythm and timing, his power hitting will take over.

I think Stan does win this though in 3 or 4 - his form is peaking perfectly. (And here's hoping it'll be Thiem that joins him in an unlikely final matchup!)

Interesting how the poll has shifted from being overwhelmingly in favour of a Wawrinka win as the most likely outcome - to something more approaching a 50 - 50 split in the outcome.

It is as if - as the match drew closer we had a late run on the market for a Murray win.  
I wonder if there is a simple explanation for this observation?

Hi everyone, long term lurker - first time poster here.    Really looking forward to the match today. I agree  with the consensus here, a bit too close to call - however with Stan as the slightest of favourites. Murray needs to move him around the court/drop shot to expose Stan's movement (although not as many as against Gasquet please).
I'd also like to see Murray play the BHDL a bit more, historically I always remember this as being one of his better shots but he tends to play cross court more frequently these days (which could be slightly dangerous considering the strength of Stan's backhand).

Lord Christobal wrote:Hi everyone, long term lurker - first time poster here.    Really looking forward to the match today. I agree  with the consensus here, a bit too close to call - however with Stan as the slightest of favourites. Murray needs to move him around the court/drop shot to expose Stan's movement (although not as many as against Gasquet please).
I'd also like to see Murray play the BHDL a bit more, historically I always remember this as being one of his better shots but he tends to play cross court more frequently these days (which could be slightly dangerous considering the strength of Stan's backhand).

I'd agree with that. Andy has to play the match on his terms and not allow Stan to dictate the play. If he allows Stan to get his backhand ripping on a regular basis then Andy will be in trouble. Variety and aggression is what Andy will need.

Perhaps the only certainty about this match is that Murray's corner are going to cop a lot of flack from their charge.  I have drawn the conclusion that Murray has to do this to get the best out of himself except when he has one of his idols in the box - where rather than discharging his frustrations by shouting at his corner etc he rather converts his frustrations into determined energy within the match to please his idol.  Psychology 101?

Nore Staat wrote:It is as if - as the match drew closer we had a late run on the market for a Murray win.  
I wonder if there is a simple explanation for this observation?

Yeah. Murray's impressive finishing off of Gasquet, shows how good he is when he's on. And I think some people still remember his Rome win against Novak

I repeat. A bit like when Murray met Del Boy after a three year gap and Novak after an 22 month one, their past performances are largely irrelevant.

In both those occasions Murray who'd had the recent upper hand with each player, lost, i.e. Stan's recent wins are so long ago, to be meaningless

I'm 51/49 in Murray's favour, but only just!!

Nore Staat wrote:Perhaps the only certainty about this match is that Murray's corner are going to cop a lot of flack from their charge.  I have drawn the conclusion that Murray has to do this to get the best out of himself except when he has one of his idols in the box - where rather than discharging his frustrations by shouting at his corner etc he rather converts his frustrations into determined energy within the match to please his idol.  Psychology 101?

It's yet another wrong myth about Murray, to suggest that he totally cleaned up his act when Lendl was his coach. In the US Open 2012, Lopez match he was so agitated with everything and everyone, you wondered if he'd had a fall out with Kim!!

Yes, there was a slight change, but there was in the first few months, of the Mez - after she'd been officially appointed

It's like the Mourinho doesn't like youngsters myth. Blown away by the facts, i.e. he actually managed the youngest ever Premiership winning team

I wonder whether being the defending champion brings both a certain level of confidence plus a certain level of determination to live up to the defending champion label.

On Murrays part he shouldn't be overawed by Wawrinka and should have some belief he can beat him. Murray should also be determined that this will be fourth time lucky in converting a French open semi-final into a final. He can gain a lot of confidence from last years semi-final performance where he stretched Djokovic to five sets.

So it should be a fair match and both giving it their best.

Nore Staat wrote:Interesting how the poll has shifted from being overwhelmingly in favour of a Wawrinka win as the most likely outcome - to something more approaching a 50 - 50 split in the outcome.

It is as if - as the match drew closer we had a late run on the market for a Murray win.  
I wonder if there is a simple explanation for this observation?

The numbers are probably not statistically significant. Too few votes to draw conclusions. May be random chance.

Lord Christobal wrote:Hi everyone, long term lurker - first time poster here.    Really looking forward to the match today. I agree  with the consensus here, a bit too close to call - however with Stan as the slightest of favourites. Murray needs to move him around the court/drop shot to expose Stan's movement (although not as many as against Gasquet please).
I'd also like to see Murray play the BHDL a bit more, historically I always remember this as being one of his better shots but he tends to play cross court more frequently these days (which could be slightly dangerous considering the strength of Stan's backhand).

Welcome to the forum. Good analysis here. Also looking forward to this one. It's nice a match without a clear favourite. You just know as soon as the favourite goes a set and a break up some of the excitement is going from the match. However if one player goes a set and a break up, perhaps even 2 sets up in this one, it could still be everything to play for.

So shall we use this thread for the live commentary on Murray-Stan?

Works for me

Surely use the main thread for both matches?

It's no real bother either way. I mean it's easier to have both on the match thread

Well just see which one gets favoured. I expect well all migrate to the day thread when it starts

Henman Bill wrote:

Lord Christobal wrote:Hi everyone, long term lurker - first time poster here.    Really looking forward to the match today. I agree  with the consensus here, a bit too close to call - however with Stan as the slightest of favourites. Murray needs to move him around the court/drop shot to expose Stan's movement (although not as many as against Gasquet please).
I'd also like to see Murray play the BHDL a bit more, historically I always remember this as being one of his better shots but he tends to play cross court more frequently these days (which could be slightly dangerous considering the strength of Stan's backhand).

Welcome to the forum. Good analysis here. Also looking forward to this one. It's nice a match without a clear favourite. You just know as soon as the favourite goes a set and a break up some of the excitement is going from the match. However if one player goes a set and a break up, perhaps even 2 sets up in this one, it could still be everything to play for.

Thanks
Stan is really remarkable, the amount of power he can utilize from a SHB is unbelievable. Must have an iron core!

Also, I'm recording the match but would appreciate frequent updates as working
I tend to find however if Murray loses (and I know the result) that I don't end up watching the recording, so the point may be moot.

My view is that Wawrinka wins this by overpowering Murray and Murray wins this by outlasting Wawrinka. I still think Murray has greater endurance and stamina to bring to this match than Wawrinka.

Well did not expect this to be so one sided