Becker and Kygrios beefing on twitter

L

leodevlin

Professional
www.sportskeeda.com

"Last I checked you were the one hiding assets" - Nick Kyrgios hits back at Boris Becker after criticism, questions his and Alexander Zverev's credibility

Nick Kyrgios has called Boris Becker and Alexander Zverev's credibility into question in a heated exchange triggered by Becker's criticism of his remarks.
www.sportskeeda.com www.sportskeeda.com

I feel Kygrios has good points about the game and the fact that you don't need to be a slam winner to have credibility.

A bit douchy though to bring up Boris' criminal conviction , wasn't necessary.
 
L

leodevlin

Professional
_donk_ said:
No you need slams to have credibility. Becker also has got serious coaching credentials.
Click to expand...
Really? So in order to assess if the game has become faster or not a slam final is not enough , you must have won it ?

What about all other commentators in other sports and tennis who were never pros , are they not allowed to comment ?
 
R

reaper

Legend
leodevlin said:
www.sportskeeda.com

"Last I checked you were the one hiding assets" - Nick Kyrgios hits back at Boris Becker after criticism, questions his and Alexander Zverev's credibility

Nick Kyrgios has called Boris Becker and Alexander Zverev's credibility into question in a heated exchange triggered by Becker's criticism of his remarks.
www.sportskeeda.com www.sportskeeda.com

I feel Kygrios has good points about the game and the fact that you don't need to be a slam winner to have credibility.

A bit douchy though to bring up Boris' criminal conviction , wasn't necessary.
Click to expand...
In bringing up Becker's conviction Kyrgios is showing just how important winning is to him. Becker's conviction has nothing to do with the subject of debate, but Kyrgios raises it for no reason other than to demean him. He's essentially saying that irrespective of the substance of what they're discussing Becker's view will always be worthless because of a criminal conviction. So Kyrgios in his own mind wins the argument. In demeaning Becker whose own flaws are well known through his criminal case Kyrgios demonstrates what a nasty, petty and vindictive individual he really is.
 
InsuranceMan

InsuranceMan

Hall of Fame
_donk_ said:
I wouldn't need anyone's analysis on whether or not the game has got faster as I'm not a complete pleb
Click to expand...
Look at this guy. Right, obviously there’s nothing you might possibly take away from commentary what an ATG and a Wimbledon finalist might have to say
 
Aabye5

Aabye5

G.O.A.T.
This has to be the last straw for someone...Nick...Boris...or Elon? No one cares that it's dubbed 'X' now, dude.

If you were to pick players who were most likely to have a beef from any name that has been mentioned in tennis circles in the last 5 years, these two ranked pretty high on the list. Maybe the three of them should sit down and do something productive, like come up with a different name.
 
Aabye5

Aabye5

G.O.A.T.
_donk_ said:
Kyrgios and ATG don't belong in the same sentence unless you're saying it doesn't belong in the same sentence.
Click to expand...

Should we say the fact that Nick K has reached a major final now makes him an ATG or just scrap the tennis hall of fame annual ceremony?

At this point, Nick is ahead of Monfils due to final appearance but behind Marcos Baghdatis in terms of surface variability. Or vice versa? :unsure:
 
Razer

Razer

G.O.A.T.
leodevlin said:
Really? So in order to assess if the game has become faster or not a slam final is not enough , you must have won it ?

What about all other commentators in other sports and tennis who were never pros , are they not allowed to comment ?
Click to expand...

A loser hiding behind the veil of evolution can never be allowed to run his mouth over a winner

Today's Physics Nobel prize winners have more knowledge in physics than Einstein did 100 years ago because science in general is more advanced today, but that doesn't mean a normal PHD student in physics today can be allowed to run his mouth rubbishing Einstein's feats.....

Same way, a loser like Kyrgios has no ground to talk of advancements in sports..... he remains a failure in any era.... so he needs to be put in his place.
 
Mustard

Mustard

Bionic Poster
accidental said:
Becker isn’t even arguing that he would beat Alcaraz.

Becker is questioning why a guy who always says he hates tennis seems to be spending all his free time talking about tennis, giving his opinions about tennis, and seemingly trying to secure work in tennis for after his retirement.
Click to expand...
I doubt Kyrgios hates tennis at all. That was a public image as an excuse not to try much harder.

At least say, Safin, actually did party like a maniac, which did his long term consistent focus not much good, but he was nearly always entertaining and achieved a lot for an underachiever. Tortured geniuses are popular, but Kyrgios just doesn't have anywhere near enough career highs in my opinion to be in that group. If he had won a major or two in the big 3 era, and some masters, he'd be more justified. Safin has the big wins over Sampras and Federer/Hewitt to win his majors, has Davis Cup wins, has Super 9 Masters wins (some of them all-time great matches, like the 2000 Paris Indoor final against Philippoussis), has phenomenally entertaining Australian Open runs in 2002, 2004, 2005 and 2007, winning the 2005 event. Kyrgios lacks this on almost every level.

Even Safin was criticizing guys like Gulbis a few years back for not focusing more on their tennis careers.
 
B

Bambooman

Legend
reaper said:
In bringing up Becker's conviction Kyrgios is showing just how important winning is to him. Becker's conviction has nothing to do with the subject of debate, but Kyrgios raises it for no reason other than to demean him. He's essentially saying that irrespective of the substance of what they're discussing Becker's view will always be worthless because of a criminal conviction. So Kyrgios in his own mind wins the argument. In demeaning Becker whose own flaws are well known through his criminal case Kyrgios demonstrates what a nasty, petty and vindictive individual he really is.
Click to expand...
This is the very definition of a strawman argument from Kyrgios.
 
Aabye5

Aabye5

G.O.A.T.
_donk_ said:
Well, All time great status means you are elite. Elite sports means winning. What has kyrgios won?

No finalists and finalists only do not belong in an ATG discussion and only those with loser mentalities would think otherwise. Monfils and Baghdathis? Come on man what are we doing here? They aren't the standard; They are decent era fillers.

In terms of ability Monfils is clear of bagh and wifebeater kyrgios.
Click to expand...

My point is that tennis fans shouldn't care about Becker v Kyrgios on Twitter, because it's what they have both drawn a lot of negative publicity to the sport recently.

As far as potential, none of those three (La Monf, Kyrgios, Baghy) had ANY consistency. Consistency is crucial in tennis, talent can be a footnote.
 
J

jdx2112

Hall of Fame
Kyrgios doesn't begin to mention racquet and string technology changes since Sampras and Becker. It's a sloppy argument from, frankly, a sloppy person. Krygios just isn't a professional at anything.
 
L

leodevlin

Professional
reaper said:
In bringing up Becker's conviction Kyrgios is showing just how important winning is to him. Becker's conviction has nothing to do with the subject of debate, but Kyrgios raises it for no reason other than to demean him. He's essentially saying that irrespective of the substance of what they're discussing Becker's view will always be worthless because of a criminal conviction. So Kyrgios in his own mind wins the argument. In demeaning Becker whose own flaws are well known through his criminal case Kyrgios demonstrates what a nasty, petty and vindictive individual he really is.
Click to expand...
I am no Kygrios fan but it was Becker who demeaned him by not allowing him to comment on the men's game because he didn't win a slam.
That position is highly irrational and Becker took it because Nick mentioned him to make a point. I doubt he would have reacted the same way, if he had mentioned McEnroe for example.

With that said , bringing up Becker's conviction was a petty low blow .
 
L

leodevlin

Professional
Aabye5 said:
This has to be the last straw for someone...Nick...Boris...or Elon? No one cares that it's dubbed 'X' now, dude.

If you were to pick players who were most likely to have a beef from any name that has been mentioned in tennis circles in the last 5 years, these two ranked pretty high on the list. Maybe the three of them should sit down and do something productive, like come up with a different name.
Click to expand...
**** X.
 
L

leodevlin

Professional
Razer said:
A loser hiding behind the veil of evolution can never be allowed to run his mouth over a winner

Today's Physics Nobel prize winners have more knowledge in physics than Einstein did 100 years ago because science in general is more advanced today, but that doesn't mean a normal PHD student in physics today can be allowed to run his mouth rubbishing Einstein's feats.....

Same way, a loser like Kyrgios has no ground to talk of advancements in sports..... he remains a failure in any era.... so he needs to be put in his place.
Click to expand...
That's a fantastically ignorant view to take.

Nick didn't live up to his potential but a slam finalist who has wins over the big 3 is not a loser and even if he were as a tennis pro he certainly is qualified to make statements about the evolution of the men's game.
 
Razer

Razer

G.O.A.T.
leodevlin said:
That's a fantastically ignorant view to take.

Nick didn't live up to his potential but a slam finalist who has wins over the big 3 is not a loser and even if he were as a tennis pro he certainly is qualified to make statements about the evolution of the men's game.
Click to expand...

A slam finalist who never won a slam is definitely a loser for most of the public out there when we only speak of ATGs at a GOAT conversation level, only slam winners across history are remembered. The finalists, semi finalists are no different from guys who reached 4th round or QF and collected their paychecks... won smaller tourneys .... so that is the league. Majority of the public worldwide only judge people on slams. If you have won even 1 slam in your only attempt you are ahead of a guy who never won a slam but reached 10 slam finals..... Only the people who scaled mount Everest are remembered, not the ones who climbed 90% and failed.

Regarding evolution, don't you get it ? Modern day scientists today have more knowledge in Physics than Einstein did 100 years but this doesn't mean their IQ is even close to his. Sameway, being more evolved in sports 30 yrs later has no relevance at all when you have not won something comparable to the guys you are being compared with.

Time travel tennis is done by arm chair critics, not by real men ... Kyrgios is a pathetic thug and thats why he is even uttering such stuffs.... if he had won even 1 grand slam then he would have developed some self respect nd a sense of achievement... and he would never talk of time travel tennis because he would be too proud of his own achievement to do that....
 
D

Deleted member 295013

Guest
Kygrios bags out Sampras and Becker, and states that they hit harder now. But he forgets that all courts where slowed BECAUSE OF Sampras, Ivanisavic and co. And the courts they play on now are essentially no faster than clay courts. Hence why Rafa won so many titles on different surfaces.
Players today may hit harder, but thats because of the technology, not the man. Kygrios claims that Sampras only served at 220kph, and he hits 240+. But he forgets to mention that he simply only has one flat serve and and an overused underarm serve in his bag. Sampras, Becker, Ivanisavic, and even Pat Rafter could put a ball on a dime, and serve to any part of the service box with spin, slice and kick. Kygrios only dreams of being that talented. The guy needs to go away. How long before he starts saying he is greater than Rod Laver? :rolleyes:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
R

reaper

Legend
leodevlin said:
I am no Kygrios fan but it was Becker who demeaned him by not allowing him to comment on the men's game because he didn't win a slam.
That position is highly irrational and Becker took it because Nick mentioned him to make a point. I doubt he would have reacted the same way, if he had mentioned McEnroe for example.

With that said , bringing up Becker's conviction was a petty low blow .
Click to expand...
I think the inference of Becker's statement isn't that you can't comment if you haven't won a slam, it's more that if you should have won slams but due to your attitude to the sport you did not, then your opinions don't count for much. Kyrgios hit Nadal off the court at Wimbledon in 2014. By the USO of that same year he was faking injury and tanking matches. I watched him lose to Robredo at that USO and he spent the entire match clutching at different parts of his body to feign injury, apparently unable to decide where on his body the actual injury was located. That match pretty much sums up the 9 years that followed, apart from a brief interlude in 2021 where he was visibly lighter and in good physical condition.
 
A

ALCARAZWON

Guest
Sampras took away Agassi's biggest asset = the deadly return.
Djokovic is therefore a LOSER in this match-up.
And Kyrgios is yet to say ONE intelligent thing about tennis.
I would say he should stick to basketball, but he always sucked at basketball, and that is why he had to play tennis.
 
L

leodevlin

Professional
ALCARAZWON said:
Sampras took away Agassi's biggest asset = the deadly return.
Djokovic is therefore a LOSER in this match-up.
And Kyrgios is yet to say ONE intelligent thing about tennis.
I would say he should stick to basketball, but he always sucked at basketball, and that is why he had to play tennis.
Click to expand...
Nick does a lot of stupid things he needs to be criticized for but I am not sure what he has said about Tennis that is been so off.

The statement that the men's game has changed is accurate. Due to improvements of racket , nutrition and training science, you need to be a way better athlete than you had to be in the 80s.

What is so controversial about that or anything else he has said about Tennis?
 
R

reaper

Legend
leodevlin said:
Nick does a lot of stupid things he needs to be criticized for but I am not sure what he has said about Tennis that is been so off.

The statement that the men's game has changed is accurate. Due to improvements of racket , nutrition and training science, you need to be a way better athlete than you had to be in the 80s.

What is so controversial about that or anything else he has said about Tennis?
Click to expand...

Wouldn't the improvements to racquet, nutrition and training science make the athlete better, such that the individual doesn't have to do anything to attain the higher level. Rendering the ordinary incremental improvement worthless...
 
L

leodevlin

Professional
reaper said:
Wouldn't the improvements to racquet, nutrition and training science make the athlete better, such that the individual doesn't have to do anything to attain the higher level. Rendering the ordinary incremental improvement worthless...
Click to expand...
Well racket technology aside, you still have to eat well and train harder to be at the higher level. I doubt anyone actually worked out in the 80s , now strengh training , flexibility training etc is part of the regiment. Eating clean ain't easy either.

I feel in the 80s you could just get by more so based on your tennnis talent, today that is definitely not the case and incidentally Nick is a great example of that.
 
Fighting phoenix

Fighting phoenix

Professional
As a commentator, Nick has a right to share his perspective, but he did go too far with low-brow social media bashing to create buzz and clicks. However, I agree with Mr. Intuitive Tennis in that he's just wrong in his analysis - those guys played a big game, and it would be even bigger today with better racquet technology and training/nutrition.
 
nolefam_2024

nolefam_2024

Bionic Poster
reaper said:
I think the inference of Becker's statement isn't that you can't comment if you haven't won a slam, it's more that if you should have won slams but due to your attitude to the sport you did not, then your opinions don't count for much. Kyrgios hit Nadal off the court at Wimbledon in 2014. By the USO of that same year he was faking injury and tanking matches. I watched him lose to Robredo at that USO and he spent the entire match clutching at different parts of his body to feign injury, apparently unable to decide where on his body the actual injury was located. That match pretty much sums up the 9 years that followed, apart from a brief interlude in 2021 where he was visibly lighter and in good physical condition.
Click to expand...
Wow true.

Ivanisevic and Pete combined changed entire tennis landscape. They were that good.

Kyrgios serve is good but he is so unfit that he needed the serve to be that good to even get to good place.

Comparing Kyrgios vs Isner
Both have slam semis , Kyrgios got a bye to the final while Isner didn't.
Kyrgios has 3 more QF and Isner has 2 more.
Kyrgios has 0 masters and Isner has 1
Kyrgios has highest ranking 13 while Isner has 8
Kyrgios has 7 titles and Isner has 16

While Kyrgios has 1 more QF, he has so less respect for tennis and himself. I hope he gets forgotten by tennis community after doing something unforgivable. He even joined tennis channel which is very bad.
 
L

leodevlin

Professional
Fighting phoenix said:
As a commentator, Nick has a right to share his perspective, but he did go too far with low-brow social media bashing to create buzz and clicks. However, I agree with Mr. Intuitive Tennis in that he's just wrong in his analysis - those guys played a big game, and it would be even bigger today with better racquet technology and training/nutrition.
Click to expand...
I don't think Nick meant that , I think he meant that you cannot compre the Becker from the 80s to a current top player.
 
H

helterskelter

G.O.A.T.
_donk_ said:
No you need slams to have credibility. Becker also has got serious coaching credentials.
Click to expand...

You are WAY too generous. Plenty of MUGs have won slams, especially in this weakest era of all possible worlds. To have credibility, you must be an ATG, which means: a) you must have won at least six slams, b) you must have done so in a strong era, and c) to have more than very basic credibility, you must have beaten other ATGs repeatedly, and d) for full credibility, you need to have repeatedly beaten YOUNGER ATGs, and ideally ones who are at least five-six years younger.

Becker meets criteria a, b, and c, so he has a good degree of credibility. However, his poor record against Agassi and Sampras does limit his credibility a little.
 
Last edited:
Apun94

Apun94

Hall of Fame
I have always found Kyrgios funny and authentic and a breath of fresh air, but this is too far. Dude has done NOTHING in tennis, yet he's leading the charge of "we are sooo superior to every previous generation and they would have never reached my level" crap. Clown behavior from a part time clown
 
Apun94

Apun94

Hall of Fame
helterskelter said:
You are WAY too generous. Plenty of MUGs have won slams, especially in this weakest era of all possible worlds. To have credibility, you must be an ATG, which means: a) you must have won at least six slams, b) you must have done so in a strong era, and c) to have more than very basic credibility, you must have beaten other ATGs repeatedly, and d) for full credibility, you need to have repeatedly beaten YOUNGER ATGs, and ideally ones who are at least five-six years younger.

Becker meets criteria a, b, and c, so he has a good degree of credibility. However, his poor record against Agassi and Sampras does limit his credibility a little.
Click to expand...
So anyone who hasnt beaten agassi and sampras a lot but won multiple slams during their era, has reduced credibility? WHAT???
 
H

helterskelter

G.O.A.T.
Apun94 said:
So anyone who hasnt beaten agassi and sampras a lot but won multiple slams during their era, has reduced credibility? WHAT???
Click to expand...

This isn’t your first rodeo on TTW. How can it surprise you to learn that the only career worthy of being called a tennis professional is an ATG one?
 
Jack the Hack

Jack the Hack

Hall of Fame
Several years ago, I had the opportunity to spend about 90 minutes talking with Nick. He was extroverted, charming, and funny to converse with. However, it was clear that he knew very little about previous generations of tennis players because he didn't know who many of them were, let alone ever watched them play. I just summed it up to the vanity of youth. Besides, Nick didn't even want to talk about tennis... he was mostly enthused about basketball instead. (And predictably, he thought Lebron is the GOAT over Jordan, which is typical for younger people who never saw how ferocious MJ was.)

Anyway, Kyrgios is entitled to his opinion. However, that doesn't mean it's a fact. I'm not a fan of Becker, but he's an ATG and has much more authority and credibility on the subject than Nick does, especially since Boris has stayed in the game long enough to coach Djokovic and Rune. In their prime, Sampras and Becker were beasts and would be champs today if they were in their 20s right now.
 
D

Deleted member 295013

Guest
leodevlin said:
Nick does a lot of stupid things he needs to be criticized for but I am not sure what he has said about Tennis that is been so off.

The statement that the men's game has changed is accurate. Due to improvements of racket , nutrition and training science, you need to be a way better athlete than you had to be in the 80s.

What is so controversial about that or anything else he has said about Tennis?
Click to expand...
Yes technology and science have improved. But the courts have been slowed. To say that the players of the 80`s are not of a similar standard is just disrespectful and unhelpful. Their skill was of the level of the technology of that time. And played on faster courts. Todays bashfests are simply uninteresting, and lack any showmanship.
 
DSH

DSH

Talk Tennis Guru
Wombat_Samurai said:
Yes technology and science have improved. But the courts have been slowed. To say that the players of the 80`s are not of a similar standard is just disrespectful and unhelpful. Their skill was of the level of the technology of that time. And played on faster courts. Todays bashfests are simply uninteresting, and lack any showmanship.
Click to expand...
And to say that Nadal couldn't have won in the 80s on surfaces other than clay when a player like Wilander did, is too bold, don't you think?
:cautious:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

L
Kygrios slams Becker over Alcaraz commemt
2 3
Replies
109
Views
4K
NedStark
N
L
Becker not coaching Rune at AO?
Replies
32
Views
1K
BeatlesFan
BeatlesFan
nolefam_2024
Boris Becker setting the records straight for youngest evers
2
Replies
90
Views
2K
mike danny
mike danny
King_olaf_the_hairy
Boris Becker no longer bankrupt, court says
Replies
16
Views
478
Galvermegs
Galvermegs
esvc
Becker: Nole is not just the best tennis player, he's the best Sportsman
Replies
30
Views
1K
Aestheticsaboveallelse
Aestheticsaboveallelse
Top