At Kyrgios' age...

Inspired by @King No1e's age thread a month or so ago about Thiem being a now-gen rather than a next-gen - same applies to Kyrgios. He's turning 25 this year and has barely done squat despite many claiming him to be "elite" or "as talented as Federer" or "he's still young." Here are what all the OE ATG players already achieved by the time they were Kyrgios' age (i.e. January of their age 25 season):

- Federer: 7x grand slam champion, spent 2 years as the world number one and was kick-starting the best year of his career (January 2006)
- Nadal: 9x grand slam champion, spent 2 years as the world number one, and already completed the career grand slam (January 2011)
- Djokovic: 5x grand slam champion, spent 1 year as the world number one, and completed one of the most dominant 12 month stretches ever (January 2012)
- Sampras: 7x grand slam champion, spent 3 years as the world number one, and 3 straight multi-slam years (January 1996)
- Borg: 10x grand slam champion, spent 2 years as the world number one, won 3 consecutive channel slams, reigning champ at the last 4 RGs and 5 WIs, and was entering his last full season on tour (January 1981)
- McEnroe: 5x grand slam champion, spent 3 years as the world number one, and was entering arguably the greatest season of all time (January 1984)
- Connors: 4x grand slam champion, spent 3 years as the world number one, and completed the best year of his career in '74 (January 1977)
- Agassi: 3x grand slam champion, held the last 2 majors, and was entering the best year of his career level-wise (January 1995)
- Becker: 5x grand slam champion, already won his last Wimbledon and USO titles, and was on the decline (January 1992)
- Edberg: 4x grand slam champion, reigning world number one, and already won his last AO and WI titles (January 1991)
- Wilander: 7x grand slam champion, just completed his best year in '88 and never won a major again (January 1989)
- Lendl: 1x grand slam champion (okay Lendl achieved the least among OE ATGs heading into year 25 of his life, but still, he'd already been ranked number one, won a slam, a ton of titles and lost in 4 GS finals against ATG comp.) (January 1985)

Even if we look at non-ATG players (prominent players who won 1-4 slams):
- Murray: Yes I know he didn't win any majors or make it to number one at Nick's current age, but he was number four for 4 years in a row, won a ton of other titles, and always made it to the semis/finals only to lose to the GOAT three in their primes/peaks (January 2012)
- Courier: 4x GS champion, 1 year as number one, already won his last slam, and never made it to another GS or Masters final again (January 1995)
- Kuerten: 2x GS champion, reigning number one, and was entering the last year of his prime (January 2001)
- Hewitt: 2x GS champion, 2 years as number one, and had not only won his last slam, but by the time Hewitt was NK's current age, he never made another slam SF again (January 2006)
- Safin: 2x GS champion, and would only make it past the R16 at a major one more time for the rest of his career (January 2005)
- Del Potro: 1x GS champion, won to this date his only GS title and beat prime Fedal b2b to win it (January 2013)
- Chang: 1x GS champion, already won his last and only GS title, won his last Masters title, and was entering his last year as a top 10 player (January 1997)
- Kafelnikov: 2x GS champion, reached number one and won all his slams (January 1999)

The vast majority of slam winners in recent decades had already achieved a lot by the time they were Kyrgios' current age and given how one-dimensional his game is to go along with his unstable mental state, he'll never reach the level of any of these players. He is NOT a young player nor is he an up-and-coming player - if he really was that good, he'd be in the middle of his prime/peak right now regularly competing for big titles.

Also, I know someone will bring up Wawrinka, but we gotta realize, Stan is a massive outlier and not a trend/regular pattern

I myself am not a fan of Nick Kyrgios. I posted a thread saying what he could become if he focused and concentrated on his game, but I don’t think it’s possible where he’s at. He has very little respect for the game, and what he does have is the ability to make fun of other players. Not a fun of Nick’s overall tennis game, bad self control will ultimately equal a bad player. Just gotta wait to see where he goes.

Kyrgios is just a made in China off brand version of Roddick. He's not going to be an elite player, let alone win Slams.

He's in his prime right now. Anything more than what he's doing now would be an unexpected late career surge.

Kyrgios is just a less entertaining taller Santoro.

Jonesy said:

Kyrgios is just a less entertaining taller Santoro.

Click to expand...

The real #SantoroWithAServe

Or conversely, Santoro is #KyrgiosWithASenseOfDecency

(don't wanna knock Kyrgios too much now because his contributions to the Australian fire recovery efforts are nothing short of heroic)

clout said:

Also, I know someone will bring up Wawrinka, but we gotta realize, Stan is a massive outlier and not a trend/regular pattern

Click to expand...

And how do you know Nick isn't a "massive outlier" and won't break established tennis patterns? He may win 3 slams after he turns 28 like Stan or win 10 after he's 30.

BeatlesFan said:

And how do you know Nick isn't a "massive outlier" and won't break established tennis patterns? He may win 3 slams after he turns 28 like Stan or win 10 after he's 30.

Click to expand...

The same way we know whether Diego Schwartzman or Fabio Fognini will be a massive outlier and win Slams after 30. We don't, but the odds are not in their favor.

King No1e said:

The same way we know whether Diego Schwartzman or Fabio Fognini will be a massive outlier and win Slams after 30. We don't, but the odds are not in their favor.

Click to expand...

OP, are you OK?

Doubt Kyrgios is ever winning a slam, but given the way the tour is evolving and so many players are peaking after or near 30 I'd also say most of the Young Gen or those in the future are more likely to have Wawrinka esque careers and win later on than what was previously normal.

All bets are off once the big 3 are gone. It's nothing but mugs all the way down and someone has to win slams.

If we're being honest, tennis as a sport is already in a massive decline.

Your list re-arranged in order of achievements. Fedr is 4th not 1st.

At Kyrgios' age...
- Borg: 10x grand slam champion, spent 2 years as the world number one, won 3 consecutive channel slams, reigning champ at the last 4 RGs and 5 WIs, and was entering his last full season on tour (January 1981)
- Nadal: 9x grand slam champion, spent 2 years as the world number one, and already completed the career grand slam (January 2011)
- Sampras: 7x grand slam champion, spent 3 years as the world number one, and 3 straight multi-slam years (January 1996)
- Federer: 7x grand slam champion, spent 2 years as the world number one and was kick-starting the best year of his career (January 2006)
- Wilander: 7x grand slam champion, just completed his best year in '88 and never won a major again (January 1989)
- McEnroe: 5x grand slam champion, spent 3 years as the world number one, and was entering arguably the greatest season of all time (January 1984
- Djokovic: 5x grand slam champion, spent 1 year as the world number one, and completed one of the most dominant 12 month stretches ever (January 2012)
- Becker: 5x grand slam champion, already won his last Wimbledon title and was on the decline (January 1992)
- Connors: 4x grand slam champion, spent 3 years as the world number one, and completed the best year of his career in '74 (January 1977)
- Edberg: 4x grand slam champion, reigning world number one, and already won his last AO and WI titles (January 1991)
- Agassi: 3x grand slam champion, held the last 2 majors, and was entering the best year of his career level-wise (January 1995)
- Lendl: 1x grand slam champion (okay Lendl achieved the least among OE ATGs heading into year 25 of his life, but still, he'd already been ranked number one, won a slam, a ton of titles and lost in 4 GS finals against ATG comp.) (January 1985)

clout said:

Inspired by @King No1e's age thread a month or so ago about Thiem being a now-gen rather than a next-gen - same applies to Kyrgios. He's turning 25 this year and has barely done squat despite many claiming him to be "elite" or "he's still young" or "just wait and see in the future." Here are what all the OE ATG players already achieved by the time they were Kyrgios' age (i.e. January of their age 25 season):

- Federer: 7x grand slam champion, spent 2 years as the world number one and was kick-starting the best year of his career (January 2006)
- Nadal: 9x grand slam champion, spent 2 years as the world number one, and already completed the career grand slam (January 2011)
- Djokovic: 5x grand slam champion, spent 1 year as the world number one, and completed one of the most dominant 12 month stretches ever (January 2012)
- Sampras: 7x grand slam champion, spent 3 years as the world number one, and 3 straight multi-slam years (January 1996)
- Borg: 10x grand slam champion, spent 2 years as the world number one, won 3 consecutive channel slams, reigning champ at the last 4 RGs and 5 WIs, and was entering his last full season on tour (January 1981)
- McEnroe: 5x grand slam champion, spent 3 years as the world number one, and was entering arguably the greatest season of all time (January 1984)
- Connors: 4x grand slam champion, spent 3 years as the world number one, and completed the best year of his career in '74 (January 1977)
- Agassi: 3x grand slam champion, held the last 2 majors, and was entering the best year of his career level-wise (January 1995)
- Becker: 5x grand slam champion, already won his last Wimbledon title and was on the decline (January 1992)
- Edberg: 4x grand slam champion, reigning world number one, and already won his last AO and WI titles (January 1991)
- Wilander: 7x grand slam champion, just completed his best year in '88 and never won a major again (January 1989)
- Lendl: 1x grand slam champion (okay Lendl achieved the least among OE ATGs heading into year 25 of his life, but still, he'd already been ranked number one, won a slam, a ton of titles and lost in 4 GS finals against ATG comp.) (January 1985)

Even if we look at non-ATG players (prominent players who won 1-4 slams):
- Murray: Yes I know he didn't win any majors or make it to number one at Nick's current age, but he was number four for 4 years in a row, won a ton of other titles, and always made it to the semis/finals only to lose to the GOAT three in their primes/peaks (January 2012)
- Courier: 4x GS champion, 1 year as number one, already won his last slam, and never made it to another GS or Masters final again (January 1995)
- Kuerten: 2x GS champion, reigning number one, and was entering the last year of his prime (January 2001)
- Hewitt: 2x GS champion, 2 years as number one, and had not only won his last slam, but by the time Hewitt as NK's current age, he never made another slam SF again (January 2006)
- Safin: 2x GS champion, and would only make it past the R16 at a major one more time for the rest of his career (January 2005)
- Del Potro: 1x GS champion, won to this date his only GS title and beat prime Fedal b2b to win it (January 2013)
- Chang: 1x GS champion, already won his last and only GS title, won his last Masters title, and was entering his last year as a top 10 player (January 1997)
- Kafelnikov: 2x GS champion, reached number one and won all his slams (January 1999)

The vast majority of slam winners in recent decades had already achieved a lot by the time they were Kyrgios' current age and given how one-dimensional and unstable his mental state is, he'll never reach the level of any of these players. He's NOT a young player nor is he an up-and-coming player, if he really was that good, he'd be in the middle of his prime/peak right now.

Also, I know someone will bring up Wawrinka, but we gotta realize, Stan is a massive outlier and not a trend/regular pattern

Click to expand...

Great post. He's not Next Gen anymore. He's in his prime and slowly but surely closing the door on his own Grand Slam hopes.

There's two concepts...NextGen the actual generation, and NextGen the current crop of players eligible for that tournament. Of course he isn't a member of the second, but he was what I'd consider the leading edge of the first.

And yeah, it's highly doubtful he'll win a Slam at this point, I agree. I'd honestly just like a decent effort from him to see what his peak really is. Certainly he's capable of top 10 level play.

clayqueen said:

Your list re-arranged in order of achievements. Fedr is 4th not 1st.

At Kyrgios' age...
- Borg: 10x grand slam champion, spent 2 years as the world number one, won 3 consecutive channel slams, reigning champ at the last 4 RGs and 5 WIs, and was entering his last full season on tour (January 1981)
- Nadal: 9x grand slam champion, spent 2 years as the world number one, and already completed the career grand slam (January 2011)
- Sampras: 7x grand slam champion, spent 3 years as the world number one, and 3 straight multi-slam years (January 1996)
- Federer: 7x grand slam champion, spent 2 years as the world number one and was kick-starting the best year of his career (January 2006)
- Wilander: 7x grand slam champion, just completed his best year in '88 and never won a major again (January 1989)
- McEnroe: 5x grand slam champion, spent 3 years as the world number one, and was entering arguably the greatest season of all time (January 1984
- Djokovic: 5x grand slam champion, spent 1 year as the world number one, and completed one of the most dominant 12 month stretches ever (January 2012)
- Becker: 5x grand slam champion, already won his last Wimbledon title and was on the decline (January 1992)
- Connors: 4x grand slam champion, spent 3 years as the world number one, and completed the best year of his career in '74 (January 1977)
- Edberg: 4x grand slam champion, reigning world number one, and already won his last AO and WI titles (January 1991)
- Agassi: 3x grand slam champion, held the last 2 majors, and was entering the best year of his career level-wise (January 1995)
- Lendl: 1x grand slam champion (okay Lendl achieved the least among OE ATGs heading into year 25 of his life, but still, he'd already been ranked number one, won a slam, a ton of titles and lost in 4 GS finals against ATG comp.) (January 1985)

Click to expand...

Didn’t intend to put it in order, but hopefully you got my point of this post regardless

clout said:

Didn’t intend to put it in order, but hopefully you got my point of this post regardless

Click to expand...

I do get your point but it's easier to read when in order. Thanks for your effort in compiling it. Only yesterday, I made the same point to my husband that Kyrgios is approaching 27 in April by which age many players had achieved an awful lot even if they retired at that age.

BeatlesFan said:

And how do you know Nick isn't a "massive outlier" and won't break established tennis patterns? He may win 3 slams after he turns 28 like Stan or win 10 after he's 30.

Click to expand...

I'll bet my paycheck that he doesn't pull a Stan. Stan is a better player than Kyrgios and is way more mentally stable

clayqueen said:

I do get your point but it's easier to read when in order. Thanks for your effort in compiling it. Only yesterday, I made the same point to my husband that Kyrgios is approaching 27 in April by which age many players had achieved an awful lot even if they retired at that age.

Click to expand...

Well he's approaching 25 not 27, but still, he's hardly done anything of note despite many people saying he's "as talented as Federer," and "a future winner." A lot of proven winners were already very accomplished players by age 25, or were in the thick of their primes/peak, with some even on the decline. I highly doubt Kyrgios will ever win anything big at this point

clout said:

Well he's approaching 25 not 27, but still, he's hardly done anything of note despite many people saying he's "as talented as Federer," and "a future winner." A lot of proven winners were already very accomplished players by age 25, or were in the thick of their primes/peak, with some even on the decline. I highly doubt Kyrgios will ever win anything big at this point

Click to expand...

Maybe he is only as talented as Federer that's why he hasn't achieved much. If he was as talented as Nadal, then we are talking. Fedr couldn't have been that talented as a late starter.

Kyrgios has done nothing so far. If his body was in good condition, odds are he’s do nothing in the rest of his career. But his body is already massively breaking down. Which means he’ll do nothing in the few relatively good years he has left

Odds are, he’s effectively out of tennis in 3 years or so

May be this is the best he can be? Tennis afterall is both mental and physical.

BeatlesFan said:

And how do you know Nick isn't a "massive outlier" and won't break established tennis patterns? He may win 3 slams after he turns 28 like Stan or win 10 after he's 30.

Click to expand...

Dude this was not one of your 3 pre-approved Kyrgios responses! What the heck?

<3

r2473 said:

Kyrgios has done nothing so far. If his body was in good condition, odds are he’s do nothing in the rest of his career. But his body is already massively breaking down. Which means he’ll do nothing in the few relatively good years he has left

Odds are, he’s effectively out of tennis in 3 years or so

Click to expand...

I think people underestimate this.

Kyrgios is not the type to take care of his body like the elite players do. He will absolutely break down much earlier and fail to recover like a top player.

BeatlesFan said:

And how do you know Nick isn't a "massive outlier" and won't break established tennis patterns? He may win 3 slams after he turns 28 like Stan or win 10 after he's 30.

Click to expand...

He is aging really fast! Looks like he is way over 30 there.

clayqueen said:

Maybe he is only as talented as Federer that's why he hasn't achieved much. If he was as talented as Nadal, then we are talking. Fedr couldn't have been that talented as a late starter.

Click to expand...

BeatlesFan said:

And how do you know Nick isn't a "massive outlier" and won't break established tennis patterns? He may win 3 slams after he turns 28 like Stan or win 10 after he's 30.

Click to expand...

Stan didn’t go 5 straight years without a slam QF.

The only thing that has held him back is himself. He potentially has the game, he just doesn't have the mentality or commitment to go out and win big and I doubt that will ever change.

As mentioned elsewhere, he tends to play better in a team environment which he seems to enjoy more as his efforts at Laver Cup and ATP Cup have shown.

Tennis_Hands said:

OP, are you OK?

Click to expand...

I can never understand why you are such a huge Kyrgios fan.

Phoenix1983 said:

I can never understand why you are such a huge Kyrgios fan.

Click to expand...

Because:

A) his brand of tennis is entertaining. Win or lose when the guy plays he is a highlight reel machine
B) whatever the reason for his direct approach, he confronts players and problems that no one else on the tour does (out of PC or fear that they might be targeted and their livelihood change for the worse). The tour has severe problems and someone has to point at them. Even if nothing comes out of it, at least he spoke it like it is, and there is a lot of dignity in that
C) on the face of it, whatever Kyrgios does it mostly hurts him, not the others. The fact that people get wind up from his shenanigans tells more about them than about him and I like to see their "principles" tested
D) he knows pretty well who and what he is, with all his baggage. He is real, which is something that many other players cannot say about themselves

Tennis_Hands said:

Because:

A) his brand of tennis is entertaining. Win or lose when the guy plays he is a highlight reel machine
B) whatever the reason for his direct approach, he confronts players and problems that no one else on the tour does (out of PC or fear that they might be targeted and their livelihood change for the worse). The tour has severe problems and someone has to point at them. Even if nothing comes out of it, at least he spoke it like it is, and there is a lot of dignity in that
C) on the face of it, whatever Kyrgios does it mostly hurts him, not the others. The fact that people get wind up from his shenanigans tells more about them than about him and I like to see their "principles" tested
D) he knows pretty well who and what he is, with all his baggage. He is real, which is something that many other players cannot say about themselves

Click to expand...

I don't agree with all of the above. A) and D), yes.

Regarding C), I think it does hurt the tour to have someone act like a massive moron rather than display sportsmanlike values - which Kyrgios has done for many years. Perhaps he is finding more maturity with his response to the Australian bush fires, and will stop playing the fool. You must concede that there is a reason why people generally respect those who are perceived to show good sportsmanship, rather than act like jerks.

On B), the tour's main issue is the lack of decent young players. Not sure how Kyrgios is doing anything to address that. I know you also have issues with a certain high-ranked player, so you probably like Kyrgios because he also despises that man.

Phoenix1983 said:

I don't agree with all of the above. A) and D), yes.

Regarding C), I think it does hurt the tour to have someone act like a massive moron rather than display sportsmanlike values - which Kyrgios has done for many years. Perhaps he is finding more maturity with his response to the Australian bush fires, and will stop playing the fool. You must concede that there is a reason why people generally respect those who are perceived to show good sportsmanship, rather than act like jerks.

On B), the tour's main issue is the lack of decent young players. Not sure how Kyrgios is doing anything to address that. I know you also have issues with a certain high-ranked player, so you probably like Kyrgios because he also despises that man.

Click to expand...

Re C: The truth is that the general public (not to be confused with the tennis nuts) has no principles to go by when it comes to entertainment, so "good" or "bad" are just labels to distinguish the player from someone else. It is all "show". Athletes are not held in high regard so that we can put a premium on their behaviour. Nadal is one of the worst examples of gamesmanship ever, yet if he gets to the coveted Major record no one will remember him for that (hell, he won't be remembered for that even on the back of his current results). To me "massive moron" is someone who hurts others and even more so if it is intentional. Like I said, he isn't doing it, so his shenanigans are more a bad taste than anything else. He hurts himself and that is enough of a punishment in itself. No need to further judge him that harsh. I don't approve of his behaviour when he goes off the rails, of course, but I understand where he is coming from, and let me tell you that he has a lot more justification to be like that than say Mac or Nadal (who are some of the worst in that regard).

Re B: the tour has many many issues. The one you mention is one that addresses the competitive side of the things. There are huge problems with the way the sprit of the sport is upheld, the way the top players are privileged to a point that it distorts the fair competition, the money issues, the issues with the upholding of the rules, and probably also issues with doping. Kyrgios helps address some of them. Whether it "helps" depends on the point of view, but I tend to think that any action that exposes problems helps.

Tennis_Hands said:

Re C: The truth is that the general public (not to be confused with the tennis nuts) has no principles to go by when it comes to entertainment, so "good" or "bad" are just labels to distinguish the player from someone else. It is all "show". Athletes are not held in high regard so that we can put a premium on their behaviour. Nadal is one of the worst examples of gamesmanship ever, yet if he gets to the coveted Major record no one will remember him for that (hell, he won't be remembered for that even on the back of his current results). To me "massive moron" is someone who hurts others and even more so if it is intentional. Like I said, he isn't doing it, so his shenanigans are more a bad taste than anything else. He hurts himself and that is enough of a punishment in itself. No need to further judge him that harsh. I don't approve of his behaviour when he goes off the rails, of course, but I understand where he is coming from, and let me tell you that he has a lot more justification to be like that than say Mac or Nadal (who are some of the worst in that regard).

Re B: the tour has many many issues. The one you mention is one that addresses the competitive side of the things. There are huge problems with the way the sprit of the sport is upheld, the way the top players are privileged to a point that it distorts the fair competition, the money issues, the issues with the upholding of the rules, and probably also issues with doping. Kyrgios helps address some of them. Whether it "helps" depends on the point of view, but I tend to think that any action that exposes problems helps.

Click to expand...

Suffice to say, I don't agree with you about Nadal (as in, your low opinion of him). Kyrgios does more to bring the game into disrepute, by his offensive comments and behaviour (remember "he banged your girlfriend, mate?" - even if rather silly, that was a disgusting comment and indeed intended to hurt someone else), than do any of the top players. Athletes are held up as role models by society, actually - whether they should be or not is a moot point. Kyrgios, with his half-hearted attitude and disrespect towards the sport, is IMHO a much worse role model than most of the other top pros. I can see you disagree with me on this, however - but I believe he doesn't have any justification to act like this.

The tour probably does have most of the issues you detail, but how has Kyrgios ensured that the top players are less privileged, or exposed doping, etc? I think you're giving him too much credit.

King No1e said:

Kyrgios is just a made in China off brand version of Roddick. He's not going to be an elite player, let alone win Slams.

He's in his prime right now. Anything more than what he's doing now would be an unexpected late career surge.

Click to expand...

lol this is ridiculous.

Kyrgios is the most talented ball striker in the game outside of Federer, the things he does are just outrageous. The touch, the trick shots, the easy power...it’s breathtaking.

I realize he is a huge underachiever but his athleticism is just mind-boggling and is a real treat to watch.

Plus he is one of the only players who can challenge Nadal, that in and of itself is a massive achievement.

Holding him up against players from other eras is stupid. No other active player outside the Big Handful is impressive either.

I think Nick will be an Ivanesevic type, win a Slam or two much later when his peak is long gone and he has matured a bit.

Rosstour said:

lol this is ridiculous.

Kyrgios is the most talented ball striker in the game outside of Federer, the things he does are just outrageous. The touch, the trick shots, the easy power...it’s breathtaking.

I realize he is a huge underachiever but his athleticism is just mind-boggling and is a real treat to watch.

Plus he is one of the only players who can challenge Nadal, that in and of itself is a massive achievement.

Holding him up against players from other eras is stupid. No other active player outside the Big Handful is impressive either.

I think Nick will be an Ivanesevic type, win a Slam or two much later when his peak is long gone and he has matured a bit.

Click to expand...

He's got talent, no denying that. But I can name at least a handful of other players with just as much, if not more talent. Dimitrov, Tsitsipas, Nishikori, Monfils, Tsonga.

Maybe he will have a red-hot fortnight and win a Slam at some point. But I don't see it as a likely occurrence.

Rosstour said:

lol this is ridiculous.

Kyrgios is the most talented ball striker in the game outside of Federer, the things he does are just outrageous. The touch, the trick shots, the easy power...it’s breathtaking.

I realize he is a huge underachiever but his athleticism is just mind-boggling and is a real treat to watch.

Plus he is one of the only players who can challenge Nadal, that in and of itself is a massive achievement.

Holding him up against players from other eras is stupid. No other active player outside the Big Handful is impressive either.

I think Nick will be an Ivanesevic type, win a Slam or two much later when his peak is long gone and he has matured a bit.

Click to expand...

The most talented ballstriker in the game who can't make a QF in a Slam in over 5 years? What game are you watching? His athleticism is mind-boggling? His posture is like the hunchback of Notre Dame and he lumbers around the court. He is definitely not one of the best athletes in the game today.

Phoenix1983 said:

Suffice to say, I don't agree with you about Nadal (as in, your low opinion of him). Kyrgios does more to bring the game into disrepute, by his offensive comments and behaviour (remember "he banged your girlfriend, mate?" - even if rather silly, that was a disgusting comment and indeed intended to hurt someone else), than do any of the top players. Athletes are held up as role models by society, actually - whether they should be or not is a moot point. Kyrgios, with his half-hearted attitude and disrespect towards the sport, is IMHO a much worse role model than most of the other top pros. I can see you disagree with me on this, however - but I believe he doesn't have any justification to act like this.

The tour probably does have most of the issues you detail, but how has Kyrgios ensured that the top players are less privileged, or exposed doping, etc? I think you're giving him too much credit.

Click to expand...

It was not his shining moment and for that he is justly criticised, but that is not why people go ga ga over his actions. He is not significant enough to bring the game into disrepute, unlike Nadal, who is a massive factor in the way people perceive tennis. I have spent considerable amount of time thinking about Nadal's actions and my opinion of him is very well grounded in the reality. He is a fierce competitor, who doesn't stop in front of anything to achieve success and that includes practices that I never ever will accept from an ATG. My opinion of him will remain unchanged probably forever, regardless what he achieves until his career is over. Athletes that achieve big success are perceived as role models and by the time they achieve big success all bad is forgotten. Massive cheaters are held in high regard, despite of disgracing themselves. It goes to show how much their integrity is influencing the perception of the general public: not much.

Kyrgios confronts privileged top players by pointing at their privileges (Nadal being allowed to break the rules at will is a privilege granted to him by the tennis authorities). Kyrgios cannot ensure anything, he can point at the ongoing hypocrisy of not dealing with that.

StANDAA said:

Stan didn’t go 5 straight years without a slam QF.

Click to expand...

I beg to differ. Stan went without a slam QF from 1985 until 2013. That's 27 straight years without a slam QF. You are WAY off with "5 years."

NoleFam said:

The most talented ballstriker in the game who can't make a QF in a Slam in over 5 years? What game are you watching? His athleticism is mind-boggling? His posture is like the hunchback of Notre Dame and he lumbers around the court. He is definitely not one of the best athletes in the game today.

Click to expand...

He’s 6’4” and moves better than any of the other tall players. Yeah, he hunches and walks like his idea of an NBA player. But his movement is really good.

He combines the movement of a smaller player with the unbreakable serve of the bigger servebots. And he has so much variety on his FH, which doesn’t have an elaborate windup so it takes time away from the opponent. His BH is just a little slap but again, it takes time away and isn’t a weak shot.

He has terrific touch and can hit short or trick shots off either wing. Like or hate his body language and stupid strut, OK. But he is one of the best athletes on tour and he shows it every time he plays.

King No1e said:

He's got talent, no denying that. But I can name at least a handful of other players with just as much, if not more talent. Dimitrov, Tsitsipas, Nishikori, Monfils, Tsonga.

Maybe he will have a red-hot fortnight and win a Slam at some point. But I don't see it as a likely occurrence.

Click to expand...

What Nick has that those guys don’t, is the ability to improvise. As I said in my other post, he can whack a monster forehand or an off-speed Medvedev-style backhand from anywhere on the court, on the run, off either foot.

The only other guys who can compete with his shotmaking ability are Federer and Monfils.

Rosstour said:

lol this is ridiculous.

Kyrgios is the most talented ball striker in the game outside of Federer, the things he does are just outrageous. The touch, the trick shots, the easy power...it’s breathtaking.

I realize he is a huge underachiever but his athleticism is just mind-boggling and is a real treat to watch.

Plus he is one of the only players who can challenge Nadal, that in and of itself is a massive achievement.

Holding him up against players from other eras is stupid. No other active player outside the Big Handful is impressive either.

I think Nick will be an Ivanesevic type, win a Slam or two much later when his peak is long gone and he has matured a bit.

Click to expand...

Lol. He's not even close to being more talented than Nadal and Djokovic.

Rosstour said:

He’s 6’4” and moves better than any of the other tall players. Yeah, he hunches and walks like his idea of an NBA player. But his movement is really good.

He combines the movement of a smaller player with the unbreakable serve of the bigger servebots. And he has so much variety on his FH, which doesn’t have an elaborate windup so it takes time away from the opponent. His BH is just a little slap but again, it takes time away and isn’t a weak shot.

He has terrific touch and can hit short or trick shots off either wing. Like or hate his body language and stupid strut, OK. But he is one of the best athletes on tour and he shows it every time he plays.

Click to expand...

He doesn't move better than Tsitsipas or Medvedev who are 6'4 and 6'6.

He has a good serve and good forehand but he certainly doesn't move like a smaller player.

I disagree about him being one of the best athletes on tour. I don't even think he's in the top 20.

Rosstour said:

He has terrific touch and can hit short or trick shots off either wing. Like or hate his body language and stupid strut, OK. But he is one of the best athletes on tour and he shows it every time he plays.

Click to expand...

Like his serve and playing style. His drop shots are fun to watch although he tends to overuse it...
It is high time for him to either put up or shut up at a Slam with a good outing against Rafa. But most likely he will choke like he always does.
Nick is a solid top 20 player but Rafa is a GOAT and should dispense of him quite easily. Nick just does not have the all-around game to hang with Rafa.

As for his so-called "personality", don't see how anyone with half a brain can be drawn to his personality.

Is he trying to pull off some "tough bad boy" act? His tantrums just comes across as total cringe and low-class. Particularly when he does not have the game like Macenroe or Nastase to back it up.

Let's hope Rafa embarrasses him so badly it drives this clown off into retirement or suspension.

vanioMan said:

Lol. He's not even close to being more talented than Nadal and Djokovic.

Click to expand...

I specified ball striking, they are much better movers and obviously they work a thousand times harder.

BeatlesFan said:

I beg to differ. Stan went without a slam QF from 1985 until 2013. That's 27 straight years without a slam QF. You are WAY off with "5 years."

Click to expand...

He made slam QFs in 2010 and 2011

Raul_SJ said:

Like his serve and playing style. His drop shots are fun to watch although he tends to overuse it...
It is high time for him to either put up or shut up at a Slam with a good outing against Rafa. But most likely he will choke like he always does.
Nick is a solid top 20 player but Rafa is a GOAT and should dispense of him quite easily. Nick just does not have the all-around game to hang with Rafa.

As for his so-called "personality", don't see how anyone with half a brain can be drawn to his personality.

Is he trying to pull off some "tough bad boy" act? His tantrums just comes across as total cringe and low-class. Particularly when he does not have the game like Macenroe or Nastase to back it up.

Let's hope Rafa embarrasses him so badly it drives this clown off into retirement or suspension.

Click to expand...

Nick reminds me of Justin Bieber from a few years ago when he was egging houses and starting fights on streets to prove his “toughness”

Only difference is Bieber actually got his act together (which I gotta give him credit for and I can’t stand that dude). Nick meanwhile, is only a year younger than Bieber and still acts like a 13-year old girl

Good effort from Nick but still not enough. Again though, a 24-year old who is deemed as "a star" should be beating a 33, soon to be, 34-year old in a BO5

Rosstour said:

Kyrgios is the most talented ball striker in the game outside of Federer, the things he does are just outrageous. The touch, the trick shots, the easy power...it’s breathtaking.

Click to expand...

lul
Decent touch and that's it. Mostly spinbotting from the baseline, nothing like consistent easy power you see from Berdych or Delpo or zoning Wawrinka.

I realize he is a huge underachiever but his athleticism is just mind-boggling and is a real treat to watch.

Click to expand...

lel
Not any boggler than a dozen other playas at least.

I think Nick will be an Ivanesevic type, win a Slam or two much later when his peak is long gone and he has matured a bit.

Click to expand...

lawl
Ivanisevic was a known force by 21, Nick could never.

His development stalled years ago. His backhand is such a potential weapon, he has let the development lag and its too bad. I think for Nick, training is directed to endurance, footwork and consistency, but not development of his shots.

Rosstour said:

lol this is ridiculous.

Kyrgios is the most talented ball striker in the game outside of Federer, the things he does are just outrageous. The touch, the trick shots, the easy power...it’s breathtaking.

I realize he is a huge underachiever but his athleticism is just mind-boggling and is a real treat to watch.

Plus he is one of the only players who can challenge Nadal, that in and of itself is a massive achievement.

Holding him up against players from other eras is stupid. No other active player outside the Big Handful is impressive either.

I think Nick will be an Ivanesevic type, win a Slam or two much later when his peak is long gone and he has matured a bit.

Click to expand...

He is just a bigger version of Santoro as far as hitting goes. Hitting uncoconventional & unexpected shots does not always equal winning.

undecided said:

He is just a bigger version of Santoro as far as hitting goes. Hitting uncoconventional & unexpected shots does not always equal winning.

Click to expand...

Santoro hit a 2HFH, please. He was a weakling compared to Kyrgios.

Of course this hasn't translated to Slam titles but the pure talent and athleticism is there. Not sure how that's even arguable. I never said "He's a winner", did I?