This performance was against prime wawrinka lol..amazing US open performance..he just feserfed the US open and he had so many chances to break against djokovic but just couldnt and losing the first set didn't help
Stan matches up well with Djokovic because longer points allows him to get into a rhythm. Fed did not allow any rhythm for Stan in this match. Stretching the court side to side and front to back from the first strike all match long. Also Fed hit fine targets with his serve. I noticed his serve did not have this control in the last couple years of his career.
I don’t know what kind of match the creator of this video watched 😂😂😂😂 Wawrinka even had more winners than Federer: it was just a matter of crucial points that Federer prevailed on
Exactly because Federer didn't let him get into a rhythm...wawrinka wins many more matches after losing the first set than fed does. For Fed winning the first set is pivotal
It seems the consensus among the majority of tennis fans is that Joke is the "stat" vulture/ weak era GOAT (thanks to too many Berritini/ Ruud/ Tsitsipas/ Norrie Opens) while Federer is seen as the true GOAT. I'm happy most people know the truth!
because he is. Federer won slams from world no.1 level players like Hewitt Safin and Roddick. Djokovic harvest slams from weak minded Tsitsipases and low tennis IQ Ruuds in these years.
Djokovic beat the Big 3 for his whole career, and now at 36 beats Alcaraz and Sinner, who are better than anyone other than Roger and Nadal in 2005/2006. Novak is breaking all the records because he's the best player in the history of tennis, Nadal admitted it and Roger said he will soon do too, he's just waiting for Rafa to retire.
I think Stan has a better backhand than Roger. Roger hits his slice with different spins better than any one hander but when it comes to the backhand top spin or flat one, Stan probably has the best technique.
@shubhjoshi6205 He played also pretty good in the final. First set he started bad, lost. Second and almost whole third had the edge, and has had many BP, in some of them Novak a bit lucky, most of them he played unbelievable, yes but still Roger should've broken at least once and it would be a different match. After he lost the third, he also lost believe, really shame he didn't win.
Stan has not even 50% of the potential of federer doesnt matter which time period. Stan had 2 outstanding years for his standards thats why he got that attention. But honestly his win/loss record over 23 years or more now are really bad. 569/349. Only 16 titles in that period. Most of them small tournaments, won only 1 1000 masters (outcluded the 3 majors he has)..otherwise it would be a very bad career to be honest. Many young players has won already more than 10 titles and more 1000 in a young age. The 3 majors rescued him in a lot. But you have to see the whole thing. Many players trolled stan.
