Annacone: Kyrgios is the most talented player since Roger Federer arrived

abmk said:
Are you serious ?You think he's more talented than nadal and djoko with his BH,RoS and movement ?

He doesn't have the ballstriking ability of either and obviously nowhere near the movement.

Is worse at the net as well, IMO.

Great serve, very good fh and can come up with some great shots, but not more talented than djoko/nadal.
Click to expand...

I would certainly say he's more interesting than Djokovic/Nadal in terms of his aggressive and creative shotmaking. I really think Kyrgios is talented but obviously has a big problem between his ears.
 
I think Nick should have given up on tennis young and become a baseball pitcher. His use of the throwing motion kinetic chain in his serve is utterly effortless and undeniably world class. And baseball pays a lot better than tennis, and demands a lot less hard work. You can go a lot further on talent alone. Oh well. Live, lose, and learn.
 
SinjinCooper said:
I think Nick should have given up on tennis young and become a baseball pitcher. His use of the throwing motion kinetic chain in his serve is utterly effortless and undeniably world class. And baseball pays a lot better than tennis, and demands a lot less hard work. You can go a lot further on talent alone. Oh well. Live, lose, and learn.
Click to expand...

If Kyrgios finds tennis monotonous, just imagine his mental battle with staying interested in pitching a baseball over and over and over and over again.
 
cc0509 said:
I would certainly say he's more interesting than Djokovic/Nadal in terms of his aggressive and creative shotmaking. I really think Kyrgios is talented but obviously has a big problem between his ears.
Click to expand...

not denying that he's talented, but in the 2000s, fed, nadal, djoker, safin, nalby are IMO clearly above him ...
aggressive/creative shotmaking vs nadal/djokovic, probably ....but that's only a part of talent, not the whole.
 
abmk said:
not denying that he's talented, but in the 2000s, fed, nadal, djoker, safin, nalby are IMO clearly above him ...
aggressive/creative shotmaking vs nadal/djokovic, probably ....but that's only a part of talent, not the whole.
Click to expand...

Let's see what happens with Kyrgios in the future and what he chooses to do with his raw talent. Like Annacone, I'm only talking about the creative shotmaking element to define talent here not the whole package.
 
Honestly don't speak to me about Kyrgios right now. He's a total bogan and until he wins a big one he's just part of the ATP #NextGen hype b-s.
 
I agree with Annacone! Question is though, will he be as successful? IMO he won't, as he does not have the champions' (a la Federer/Nadal/Djokovic/Sampras) mentality. Hopefully, for the sake of tennis, i'll be proven wrong some day.
 
I'm not sure about this, but possible. In any case, if Annacone had said this last year, there would be 1,000 posts from 5555 and other Djokovic extremists raising up a storm. The Nadal extremists seem to be defeated and aren't speaking up.
 
From pure physical aspect, Annacone might be right, but tennis is not just about the physical talent. Players need right attitudes and head to make the most out of their talent in tennis, which Kyrgios seems to lack.
 
cc0509 said:
Let's see what happens with Kyrgios in the future and what he chooses to do with his raw talent. Like Annacone, I'm only talking about the creative shotmaking element to define talent here not the whole package.
Click to expand...

if we're talking creative shotmaking element alone, dolgopolov is far ahead of kyrgios. dude can do ridiculous stuff with the ball, wicked slice, sudden accelerations off both wings etc ...
 
Last edited:
And remember, Nick, the most talented player since Roger Federer also deserves a very talented coach.
 
Returning, athleticism and overall baseline mastery gets the short end of the stick when gauging talent.

What Djokovic and Murray do on the return takes talent. Kyrgios can put in all the hours he wants, he will never return like those two. He will also never be able to move or defend like the big 4 did at their best, no matter how much road work he puts in. How can that not be at least partially attributable to differences in talent (in those facets of the game)?

If Kyrgios gets high marks for his superb shot-making, his deficiencies in other parts of the game (relative to other tennis luminaries) should be taken into consideration as well.
 
Last edited:
tennisaddict said:
Really ? It needs a special kind of player to beat Rafa, Roger and Novak in first attempt.

I think in the mental strength department Kyrgios is ahead of Tsonga.

To me , Kyrgios is almost a Delpo level player.
Click to expand...
BeatlesFan said:
Tsonga?? You must be kidding. Nick is in another stratosphere compared to Tsonga in terms of talent and game.
Click to expand...


I dunno, I think you guys aren't giving Tsonga much credit here. I won't speak of his raw talent but he HAS beaten every member of the big four in a major. Their early career exploits are actually pretty comparable. Both can point to a win over Nadal at a major as their breakthrough (yes, Tsonga was 22, but the early part of his career was plagued by injury, and he played better in his win).

Kyrgios has beaten Djokovic twice in a row, while Tsonga actually had a four match winning streak against Novak from 2008-early 2009.

I think Nick has a better serve, everywhere else they're pretty comparable. I'll give Tsonga the slender edge on the return, from the back of the court and a hearty edge at net. I don't think there's such a big edge talent-wise.

I know Jo was an also-ran but come on, his age 22-27 years took place from 2007-2012. I don't think Kyrgios would be a shoo-in to win a single slam in such a top-heavy time period in tennis.
 
Last edited:
ghostofMecir said:
I'm not sure about this, but possible. In any case, if Annacone had said this last year, there would be 1,000 posts from 5555 and other Djokovic extremists raising up a storm. The Nadal extremists seem to be defeated and aren't speaking up.
Click to expand...

Noting particularly 'extremist' about disputing the notion that Kyrgios is more talented than Nadal or Djokovic.
 
cc0509 said:
I would certainly say he's more interesting than Djokovic/Nadal in terms of his aggressive and creative shotmaking. I really think Kyrgios is talented but obviously has a big problem between his ears.
Click to expand...

More interesting (which is quite subjective) =/ more talented. What is one common denominator among 10+ slam winners? Great movement and footwork, Djok/Nadal are on another plane in that regard for starters. Nadal's shotmaking talent is also quite underrated (often by his own fans even), what do you call those ridiculous passes (heck as a fellow Fed fan you know what I'm talking about) or that monstrous FH when he's confident, comes out of his defensive shell and lets loose off that side? Also keep in mind we're talking about a guy that started winning big titles on every surface as teenager.

Or talking about Novak, you don't consider his precise ballstriking, innate ability to redirect pace probably better than anyone I've seen or his ROS (that gave nightmares to two of the best players to ever pick up a racquet) to be talent? You don't storm a slam tourney at 20 the way Novak did in 2008 AO (some of the best HC tennis I've seen) or utterly dominate the field week-in week-out the way he did in 2011 and 2015 without being uniquely talented.
 
TheGhostOfAgassi said:
"other than serving"- Serving is a big part of tennis.
Nick has beaten top players being younger than Federer was. Nick is soon 22 years old.
Click to expand...
Federer won a slam beating top players before he turned 22 and he beat the 4 time defending champion Sampras at his own backyard at Wimbledon. Kyrgios (as of now) hasn't even managed a SF at a slam.
 
TheGhostOfAgassi said:
"other than serving"- Serving is a big part of tennis.
Nick has beaten top players being younger than Federer was. Nick is soon 22 years old.
Click to expand...

Yeah, and Federer is no slouch there either. What else does Kyrgios do better than Federer when he was the same age? I'm struggling to think of anything.

I'm not sure what you're getting at with your second point. Federer clearly had better results when he was Kyrgios age. Already had a major, a masters, and 500-equivalent titles. Also beat the defending champion at Wimbledon at 19.

Kyrgios is an uber-talented player but the hype is way overblown at this point.
 
TheFifthSet said:
Yeah, and Federer is no slouch there either. What else does Kyrgios do better than Federer when he was the same age? I'm struggling to think of anything.

I'm not sure what you're getting at with your second point. Federer clearly had better results when he was Kyrgios age. Already had a major, a masters, and 500-equivalent titles. Also beat the defending champion at Wimbledon at 19.

Kyrgios is an uber-talented player but the hype is way overblown at this point.
Click to expand...
If it comes to winning slams and masters at young age Rafa is the boss of current players.
 
BeatlesFan said:
I think people's mass hatred of Nick (for good reasons) colors their view. I can't stand Nick, but a blind person can see that Annacone is correct. Just watch Nick for 20 minutes and it's quite apparent he's vastly more talented than either Djoker or Nadal. He will probably never have the results of either player, but talent-wise, he's off the charts. Just watch him play, it's effortless for him.
Click to expand...
Agree fully, except that Kyrgios puts in a lot of effort, especially his footwork is very crafty, the speed with which he changes direction, but the big thing with him is that he makes up shots as he goes along, and makes them look real good, reminiscent to me only of Mac, Rios, and indeed Federer.

Artist as well as athlete. Pity for all esp himself is that he is a headcase, which in a way to me makes me love him more if he sticks around and nicks a couple of majors. I do hope he wins a few more, but not at all sure here. Being Box Office will not at all help him in the long run.
 
TheGhostOfAgassi said:
If it comes to winning slams and masters at young age Rafa is the boss of current players.
Click to expand...

Their contrasting results were merely a supplementary point. My original (and main) point was that young Federer did everything better than Kyrgios outside of serve, and even there it wasn't a blowout. I'm trying to find one transcendent part of Kyrgios game outside the serve. Personally I think 'this generations Krajicek' is a reasonable ceiling for him.

And yes, I would maintain that Nadal is also much more talented than Kyrgios.
 
I can offer some personal view on him, from my subjective perspective at least...

Kyrgios biggest strengths/assets:
1. Mental attitude under pressure - seems he has a natural attitude of 'I wouldn't admit to even God he's better than me in advance', with 0% being impressed of his opponents. This is actually what gave him victories against some biggest tennis names. Seems they were more impressed by his tennis than him with theirs. Many really good tennis players capable of beating biggest names struggle to deliver their best tennis and actually beat themselves in their minds before the match has even begun;
2. Serving - IMO Nick leverages serving to another level. Power, precision, % in, crazy fast second serves, he has it all; besides he's good at converting advantage which serving gives to him by having power from both wings;
3. Big shot making - usually happens only if he had good time ahead to prepare for his big shot;

Kyrgios serious weakness:
- making big shots under pressure; this player seems unable to hit with good power and consistency unless he had enough time to prepare for the shot. He seems to need more time to prepare for shots than ATP's best players. Because of this he plays defensively whenever he hasn't got the initiative, and this is the reason why his return games stats are completely unimpressive. He seems to be able to play some decent defensive tennis though and get many balls back, but he's not likely to regain an initiative within a point in which he has lost it. Skilled player like Novak showed that clearly, as match went on he was taking initiative from Nick by making him run a lot even on Nick's serving games, whenever he was able to make a decent return. However Novak still lost because Nick served perfectly but also because Nick was actually mentally tougher than him at key moments of the match.

Tennis that Roger and Stan showed yesterday, however, Nick can only dream of. They hit hard on the run and at tough positions, prepare to counter the ball in shortest time possible, Nick cannot play like this. His serving and his mental toughness may still win him many big victories but unless he moves his current limits he will hardly become a real champion. So his chances of becomming a champion are only if tennis generally declines after today's top player retire, or if he can pull off some serious improvement. Because making big shots only when you have a lot of time to prepare is simply not enough, even when you have mental toughness and serving quality like he does. Anyway, without just one of 1. + 2., he would be just an average ATP player.

However what makes him interesting as a player and fun to watch is that he's not a bot. He's a unique player who brought something original to tennis, and ATP needs and longs for more players with some authenticity like him. And while he's a ATP's 'bad boy', this bad boy seems to be more human than some polite ATP faces who otherwise, at least on the court, barely show they're human beings and not some biological machines made to play tennis.
 
Last edited:
TheFifthSet said:
Their contrasting results were merely a supplementary point. My original (and main) point was that young Federer did everything better than Kyrgios outside of serve, and even there it wasn't a blowout. I'm trying to find one transcendent part of Kyrgios game outside the serve. Personally I think 'this generations Krajicek' is a reasonable ceiling for him.

And yes, I would maintain that Nadal is also much more talented than Kyrgios.
Click to expand...

But Federer more talented than Rafa? If you think so you have a dilemma in your way of proving your point here :rolleyes:
 
Nick should marry his girlfriend. :D:p:rolleyes:They played doubles together. Do as Federer. Marry your doubles partner. Get in a stable relationship. Move to the top. Seems to be good, look at Rafa, Novak and Federer. All been in a stable relationships before going sky high in results.
 
TheGhostOfAgassi said:
But Federer more talented than Rafa? If you think so you have a dilemma in your way of proving your point here :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

What part of 'supplementary (and not main) point' confuses you, m'lad? :p

I definitely do believe Federer is more talented than Nadal, but not by the exaggerated margins some suggest. They're both generational talents. Not sure if the same can be said of Kyrgios, who not only has accomplished less than either of them at the same age but seems to have much less game.

Hence the question, what are the things you feel Slick Nick does better than a young Federer? Outside of serving (which, again, has always been one of Fed's strong suits) I can't name anything. If you feel he's as prodigiously talented as some of the all-time greats, I'm interested to hear your case. Hell, I hope I'm overlooking something. Tennis desperately needs a successor to the big 4.
 
TheFifthSet said:
What part of 'supplementary (and not main) point' is vexing you, m'lad? :p

I definitely do believe Federer is more talented than Nadal, but not by the exaggerated margins some suggest. They're both generational talents. Not sure if the same can be said of Kyrgios, who not only has accomplished less than either of them at the same age but seems to have much less game.

Hence the question, what are the things you feel Slick Nick does better than a young Federer? Outside of serving (which, again, has always been one of Fed's strong suits) I can't name anything. If you feel he's as prodigiously talented as some of the all-time greats, I'm interested in your case.
Click to expand...

You say that Nick has accomplished nothing to be considered a huge talent. But Nadal accomplished more than Federer at same age? Even beat Fed himself at his own playground. How come Fed more talented?
 
TheGhostOfAgassi said:
You say that Nick has accomplished nothing to be considered a huge talent. But Nadal accomplished more than Federer at same age? Even beat Fed himself at his own playground. How come Fed more talented?
Click to expand...

Wrong. I did not say that 'Nick has accomplished nothing to be considered a huge talent'. I even called him an 'uber-talented player', and hinted that he may be this generations Krajicek, if things pan out. So, you are mistaken. If you can't provide quotes to support your blatantly false assertion, I cordially ask you to retract it. Coz it b false lolz.

Also, I argued that Federer was more talented than Kyrgios primarily because he had much more game and shot-making skill at the same age (check my first post addressed to you) not because he had better results. You mentioned results when you listed some of the things Nick accomplished as a young player, so I in turn responded by giving you Federer's results. Are you not following this back-and-forth?
 
Achievements at age 22:

Rafa - 31 Titles incl:
3 Slams
12 Masters
1 Olympic Gold

2008
1. Beijing Olympics (Outdoor/Hard)
2. ATP Masters Series Canada (Outdoor/Hard)
3. Wimbledon (Outdoor/Grass)
4. London / Queen's Club (Outdoor/Grass)
5. Roland Garros (Outdoor/Clay)
6. ATP Masters Series Hamburg (Outdoor/Clay)
7. Barcelona (Outdoor/Clay)
8. ATP Masters Series Monte Carlo (Outdoor/Clay)

2007- 6
9. Stuttgart (Outdoor/Clay)
10. Roland Garros (Outdoor/Clay)
11. ATP Masters Series Rome (Outdoor/Clay)
12. Barcelona (Outdoor/Clay)
13. ATP Masters Series Monte Carlo (Outdoor/Clay)
14. ATP Masters Series Indian Wells (Outdoor/Hard)

2006 - 5
15. Roland Garros (Outdoor/Clay)
16. ATP World Tour Masters 1000 Rome (Outdoor/Clay)
17. Barcelona (Outdoor/Clay)
18. ATP World Tour Masters 1000 Monte Carlo (Outdoor/Clay)
19. Dubai (Outdoor/Hard)

2005 - 11
20. ATP World Tour Masters 1000 Madrid (Indoor/Hard)
21. Beijing (Outdoor/Hard)
22. ATP World Tour Masters 1000 Canada (Outdoor/Hard)
23. Stuttgart (Outdoor/Clay)
24. Bastad (Outdoor/Clay)
25. Roland Garros (Outdoor/Clay)
26.ATP World Tour Masters 1000 Rome (Outdoor/Clay)
27. Barcelona (Outdoor/Clay)
28. ATP World Tour Masters 1000 Monte Carlo (Outdoor/Clay)
29. Acapulco (Outdoor/Clay)
30. Sao Paulo (Outdoor/Clay)

2004 - 1
31. Sopot (Outdoor/Clay)
 
clayqueen said:
Achievements at age 22:

Rafa - 31 Titles incl:
3 Slams
12 Masters
1 Olympic Gold

2008
1. Beijing Olympics (Outdoor/Hard)
2. ATP Masters Series Canada (Outdoor/Hard)
3. Wimbledon (Outdoor/Grass)
4. London / Queen's Club (Outdoor/Grass)
5. Roland Garros (Outdoor/Clay)
6. ATP Masters Series Hamburg (Outdoor/Clay)
7. Barcelona (Outdoor/Clay)
8. ATP Masters Series Monte Carlo (Outdoor/Clay)

2007- 6
9. Stuttgart (Outdoor/Clay)
10. Roland Garros (Outdoor/Clay)
11. ATP Masters Series Rome (Outdoor/Clay)
12. Barcelona (Outdoor/Clay)
13. ATP Masters Series Monte Carlo (Outdoor/Clay)
14. ATP Masters Series Indian Wells (Outdoor/Hard)

2006 - 5
15. Roland Garros (Outdoor/Clay)
16. ATP World Tour Masters 1000 Rome (Outdoor/Clay)
17. Barcelona (Outdoor/Clay)
18. ATP World Tour Masters 1000 Monte Carlo (Outdoor/Clay)
19. Dubai (Outdoor/Hard)

2005 - 11
20. ATP World Tour Masters 1000 Madrid (Indoor/Hard)
21. Beijing (Outdoor/Hard)
22. ATP World Tour Masters 1000 Canada (Outdoor/Hard)
23. Stuttgart (Outdoor/Clay)
24. Bastad (Outdoor/Clay)
25. Roland Garros (Outdoor/Clay)
26.ATP World Tour Masters 1000 Rome (Outdoor/Clay)
27. Barcelona (Outdoor/Clay)
28. ATP World Tour Masters 1000 Monte Carlo (Outdoor/Clay)
29. Acapulco (Outdoor/Clay)
30. Sao Paulo (Outdoor/Clay)

2004 - 1
31. Sopot (Outdoor/Clay)
Click to expand...
Nobody cares.
 
TheFifthSet said:
Wrong. I did not say that 'Nick has accomplished nothing to be considered a huge talent'. I even called him an 'uber-talented player', and hinted that he may be this generations Krajicek, if things pan out. So, you are mistaken. If you can't provide quotes to support your blatantly false assertion, I cordially ask you to retract it. Coz it b false lolz.

Also, I argued that Federer was more talented than Kyrgios primarily because he had more game at the same age (check my first post addressed to you) not because he had better results. You mentioned results when you listed some of the things Nick accomplished as a young player, so in turn responded by giving you Federer's results. Are you not following this back-and-forth?
Click to expand...

Im being an attorney here, trying to prove the dilemma in your own arguments hence your criteria for how you determent talent. I have not in one single post in this thread said anything about in how I see talent or not. Its not a clear answer in this, but more of a personal choice. Anaconda statement is her opinion.
 
Novak Djokovic - 16 incl:
1 slam
5 Masters
1.TMC

2009 - 5
ATP World Tour Masters 1000 Paris (Indoor/Hard)
Basel (Indoor/Hard)
Beijing (Outdoor/Hard)
Belgrade (Outdoor/Clay)
Dubai (Outdoor/Hard)

2008 - 4

Tennis Masters Cup (Indoor/Hard)
ATP Masters Series Rome (Outdoor/Clay)
ATP Masters Series Indian Wells (Outdoor/Hard)
Australian Open (Outdoor/Hard)

2007- 5
Vienna (Indoor/Hard)
ATP Masters Series Canada (Outdoor/Hard)
Estoril (Outdoor/Clay)
ATP Masters Series Miami (Outdoor/Hard)
Adelaide (Outdoor/Hard)

2006 - 2
Metz (Indoor/Hard)
Amersfoort (Outdoor/Clay)
 
Andy Murray - 14 titles incl:
4 Masters

2009 - 6
Valencia (Indoor/Hard)
ATP World Tour Masters 1000 Canada (Outdoor/Hard)
London / Queen's Club (Outdoor/Grass)
ATP World Tour Masters 1000 Miami (Outdoor/Hard)
Rotterdam (Indoor/Hard)
Doha (Outdoor/Hard)

2008 - 5
St. Petersburg (Indoor/Hard)
ATP Masters Series Madrid (Indoor/Hard)
ATP Masters Series Cincinnati (Outdoor/Hard)
Marseille (Indoor/Hard)
Doha (Outdoor/Hard)

2007 - 2
St. Petersburg (Indoor/Carpet)
San Jose (Indoor/Hard)

2006 - 1
San Jose (Indoor/Hard)
 
TheGhostOfAgassi said:
Im being an attorney here, trying to prove the dilemma in your own arguments hence your criteria for how you determent talent. I have not in one single post in this thread said anything about in how I see talent or not. Its not a clear answer in this, but more of a personal choice. Anaconda statement is her opinion.
Click to expand...

Only, it isn't my main criteria at all. In our exchange your were the first to mention Kyrgios' accomplishments. Presumably to prove some kind of a point, right? Or so I thought. Well, I countered that by showing that Federer accomplished even more at a similar age.
But my main reason for thinking that Federer is more talented than either player is the fact that I found his game to be better and to possess more potential than either of theirs. No 'dilemma' to speak of (I'll state once more that I feel the gap is much smaller between Federer-Nadal than Federer-Kyrgios). You coyly entertained the idea that the premise of the thread may very well be true, so I asked, in earnest, for you to validate your original post. If you're not interested in doing so, fair enough, totally your prerogative. Just plz don't say that I've claimed things which I clearly haven't :p
 
clayqueen, Annacone said Kyrgios was the most talented since Federer, not the most accomplished. I disagree with Annacone's assessment but at least argue against his actual point.
 
I couldn't get all their stats on one post because Rafa's titles alone take up so much space. But at age 22, in order to achievements, the two most talented players according to Annacone are at the bottom of the pile because they achieved the least up to Kyrgios's age now:

Rafa - 31 Titles incl:
3 Slams
12 Masters
1 Olympic Gold

Novak Djokovic - 16 incl:
1 slam
5 Masters
1.TMC

Andy Murray - 14 titles incl:
4 Masters

Roger Federer - 11 Incl:
1 slam
1 Masters
1 TMC

Nick Kyrgios - 3 minor titles

Rafa is the leader by miles.


 
clayqueen said:
How do you measure talent it it's not by accomplishment?
Click to expand...

I'll use another athlete as an example, Barry Sanders. Barry was probably the most talented running back in the history of the NFL and won the rushing title multiple times. His ability to elude defenders and quickness was bar none. But Emmitt Smith has more career yards, more touchdowns, and 3 championships and was a more accomplished player because his career was longer and his circumstances more fortunate.
 
kabob said:
I'll use another athlete as an example, Barry Sanders. Barry was probably the most talented running backs in the history of the NFL and won the rushing title multiple times. But Emmitt Smith has more career yards, more touchdowns, and 3 championships and was a more accomplished player because his career was longer and his circumstances more fortunate.
Click to expand...
You couldn't have picked a worse illustration as far as I'm concerned. First of all, what I know about NFL couldn't compete with what a day old baby knows about it and second, you cannot compare team sport with individual sport. I have no idea who Barry Sanders is, never even heard his name nor Emmitt Smith.
 
So my point is invalid because you don't know American football? Lol. Okay, do you know singers? Adele is clearly crazy talented as a singer but she'll never achieve the album sales or notoriety of a Britney Spears who couldn't sing her way through a song without Autotune.
 
kabob said:
So my point is invalid because you don't know American football? Lol. Okay, do you know singers? Adele is clearly crazy talented as a singer but she'll never achieve the album sales or notoriety of a Britney Spears who couldn't sing her way through a song without Autotune.
Click to expand...
OMG! If you tied me to a tree, I couldn't name a single song by Adele or Britney Spears. Having said that, your analogy is flawed if you are trying to say Nadal achieved more because of some kind of extraneous help not because of his talent.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

atp2015
McEnroe - Kyrgios more talented than Federer and Nadal
2 3
Replies
108
Views
6K
big ted
big ted
JohanLiebert
Comments by Paul Annacone on the greatness criteria (and Paris Masters)
2
Replies
52
Views
3K
UnderratedSlam
UnderratedSlam
weakera
Annacone: 'Roger Federer was extremely pained after that Wimbledon loss'
2
Replies
73
Views
3K
E46luver
E46luver
Nadalgaenger
  • Poll Poll
Is Fed the most TALENTED player ever?
2 3 4
Replies
160
Views
6K
mike danny
mike danny
clout
Is Kyrgios really more talented than players like Nadal and Djokovic?
2
Replies
70
Views
6K
JasonG2019
JasonG2019
Back
Top