Is Kyrgios really more talented than players like Nadal and Djokovic?

clout

Hall of Fame
#1
I’ve seen many posts/threads on this forum, YouTube and social media in general regarding the “immense talent” of Aussie Nick Kyrgios. Some ppl consider NK as the second most talented player of all time only behind Federer, despite achieving very little in his career so far. I’ve even heard some say that a focused Kyrgios can make Nadal, Nole and pretty much everyone on tour look like pushers. He’s definitely a fun player to watch when he’s on but is he really THAT talented i don’t know
 
#2
We should learn to separate things like natural talent adn the skills, that improve as player earns experience and gets better due to hard work and dedication (Thats what both Nadal and Djokovic were doing and were successful at all this time!) and mind you this is coming from Djokovic fan...so as far as shotmaking, natural talent, anticipation goes, Kyrgios is two leagues ahead of both of them! Now psychology and overall mentality (the will to improve and put hard work into that!) its whole different beast...Kyrgios is obviously one of the most gifted players o nthe tour (has great feeling and shot anticipation, finds the sweet spot to hit the ball at the right place and at the right time, so has good judgement, but also kinda lazy and dumb...), but also one of the tour's midgets as far as mentality goes and i can't help but feel like he just...doesn't care anymoire, but maybe thats just me...i remember him saying once somewhere, that he didn't even initally wanted to become a tennis player, but was kinda forced into it or something?...so much for that will of improvement in the tour...
 

N01E

Semi-Pro
#3
We should learn to separate things like natural talent adn the skills, that improve as player earns experience and gets better due to hard work and dedication (Thats what both Nadal and Djokovic were doing and were successful at all this time!) and mind you this is coming from Djokovic fan...so as far as shotmaking, natural talent, anticipation goes, Kyrgios is two leagues ahead of both of them! Now psychology and overall mentality (the will to improve and put hard work into that!) its whole different beast...Kyrgios is obviously one of the most gifted players o nthe tour (has great feeling and shot anticipation, finds the sweet spot to hit the ball at the right place and at the right time, so has good judgement, but also kinda lazy and dumb...), but also one of the tour's midgets as far as mentality goes and i can't help but feel like he just...doesn't care anymoire, but maybe thats just me...i remember him saying once somewhere, that he didn't even initally wanted to become a tennis player, but was kinda forced into it or something?...so much for that will of improvement in the tour...
What's his return games winning percentage? 10%?
 
#4
What's his return games winning percentage? 10%?
shot anticipation isn't tied exclusively to one's ability to read serves! LOL Its an overall attribute to measure one's overall all-around ability to read an opponent and see several steps ahead, not only at serve return games...so while his returns might not be so great (definitely not even in the same ballpark as Rafa's, let alone Novak's!) his overall shotmaking is nevertheless very impressive...
 

N01E

Semi-Pro
#6
shot anticipation isn't tied exclusively to one's ability to read serves! LOL Its an overall attribute to measure one's overall all-around ability to read an opponent and see several steps ahead, not only at serve return games...
The serve is the first first shot you have to anticipate for and he fails in that departament (You could argue that you also have to think about your opponent while serving, but that's before the ball's technically in play so I won't put it in the "anticipation" category. Returning is when the mid-point "reading" starts. Even when your opponent has perfect disguise (Fedr as an obvious example) and seemingly random pattern there is always something you can look for. The greats are able to find it. Then comes the ball in play (after the the ros) part. What exactly has Nick done that makes you think he's good at reading his opponents then. Watch his AO19 match against Raonic and then compare to let's say Paris Bercy 2014 final (not just the highlights though). And I'm not talking about the serves, but also the baseline play. LOL. (as you would have said it) He can make some obvious choices that most pros would make, but his not the guy that's figuring out the patterns. He's zoning more than depending on that when it comes to his best performances. Djokovic, Nadal and Murray are way more talented when it comes to reading their opponents.
 
#8
The serve is the first first shot you have to anticipate for and he fails in that departament (You could argue that you also have to think about your opponent while serving, but that's before the ball's technically in play so I won't put it in the "anticipation" category. Returning is when the mid-point "reading" starts. Even when your opponent has perfect disguise (Fedr as an obvious example) and seemingly random pattern there is always something you can look for. The greats are able to find it. Then comes the ball in play (after the the ros) part. What exactly has Nick done that makes you think he's good at reading his opponents then. Watch his AO19 match against Raonic and then compare to let's say Paris Bercy 2014 final (not just the highlights though). And I'm not talking about the serves, but also the baseline play. LOL. (as you would have said it) He can make some obvious choices that most pros would make, but his not the guy that's figuring out the patterns. He's zoning more than depending on that when it comes to his best performances. Djokovic, Nadal and Murray are way more talented when it comes to reading their opponents.
Reading opponents though isn't a natural talent...it is gained by getting experienced and getting to know more about your opponent, natural talent is something you are born with, that you have it in you, regardless of improvements of your skills...i just dunno...to me it seems like Kyrgios has this natural talent more than Djokodarray...but to each his/her own...
 

Raindogs

Hall of Fame
#9
When you play a loosey goosey devil may care style of play you're bound to hit the occassional wacky circus shot highlight.
Many here have been fooled into calling that a once in a lifetime talent seemingly handed down from the heavens.
He's Mansour Bahrami with a world class serve.
 
#10
Kyrgios has no natural talent for footwork. Sorry, but he is too tall and lacks agility and velocity to be as good as some are suggesting. (Nick didn't tank against Murray at the US Open 2015 or Wimbledon 2016, Murray just killed him).

In addition, it is unclear whether mental strength can be considered a natural talent or a product of teaching. Would Nick be mentally tough had he had Tío Toni coaching him since he was a kid? Or was Kyrgios born with a natural inclination to be mentally weak?
 
#13
More talented yes, but in a long rally with Nadal or Djokovic Nick (and other 'talented' players all the way up to Roger) will crack first, and in tennis that's what matters, especially in 5 sets.
 

jga111

Hall of Fame
#17
I’ve seen many posts/threads on this forum, YouTube and social media in general regarding the “immense talent” of Aussie Nick Kyrgios. Some ppl consider NK as the second most talented player of all time only behind Federer, despite achieving very little in his career so far. I’ve even heard some say that a focused Kyrgios can make Nadal, Nole and pretty much everyone on tour look like pushers. He’s definitely a fun player to watch when he’s on but is he really THAT talented i don’t know
Fun? Yes.

Talented? Yes.

Most talented ever? No.
 
#20
"talent" on these forums tends to be viewed in a narrow minded way, as in their ability as a shotmaker and not much else.

Kyrgios is a better shotmaker than Nadal/Djokovic. However compared to those guys he has no return of serve, no mental strength, no consistency and sloppy footwork.

All of those attributes are important as far as defining talent goes. However the narrow minded emphasis on "shotmaking" means players like Kyrgios, Dimitrov, Gasquet and Rios end up being over-rated, even though they lack many of those other qualities.
 

aman92

Hall of Fame
#22
Yeah even I have more talent than those 2 pretenders... Only my lack of mental strength prevented me from winning slams.
 

DSH

Professional
#29
feargios is so talented that even if he does not like what he does, he earns millions of dollars a year.
Who would not envy the damn *******?
 
#30
"talent" on these forums tends to be viewed in a narrow minded way, as in their ability as a shotmaker and not much else.

Kyrgios is a better shotmaker than Nadal/Djokovic. However compared to those guys he has no return of serve, no mental strength, no consistency and sloppy footwork.

All of those attributes are important as far as defining talent goes. However the narrow minded emphasis on "shotmaking" means players like Kyrgios, Dimitrov, Gasquet and Rios end up being over-rated, even though they lack many of those other qualities.
Agree on all of that but I dont think it is even clear Kygrios is a better shotmaker than Nadal or Djokovic. Those guys show off some utterly insane shotmaking at times, unbelievable angles and abilities to find impossible shots on the court from certain positions, they dont show it as consistently since they have measured games and play the percentages smartly. Federer as well doesnt even show off his full arsenal of shotmaking, which if he did would put even Kygrios utterly to shame I am sure.
 
#32
I do think he is extremely talented and should be achieving much more than he is. I do think he has the talent to be a multi slam winner if he somehow got all his sh1t together (unlikely to happen). However more talented than Djokovic or Nadal is a major stretch, and massively underrates the talent level of those two guys, something I see happen regularly.
 
#34
"talent" on these forums tends to be viewed in a narrow minded way, as in their ability as a shotmaker and not much else.

Kyrgios is a better shotmaker than Nadal/Djokovic. However compared to those guys he has no return of serve, no mental strength, no consistency and sloppy footwork.

All of those attributes are important as far as defining talent goes. However the narrow minded emphasis on "shotmaking" means players like Kyrgios, Dimitrov, Gasquet and Rios end up being over-rated, even though they lack many of those other qualities.
Excellently summarized, although I disagree with the assertion that Kyrgios is a better shotmaker. I think he has more top-end groundie speed and is the more aggressive player, but not quite the better natural shotmaker.
 
#35
All these guys that make it on the pro tour are extremely talented, but there is always more to success than just talent including mental skills, staying physically healthy and what goes on in the lives of these guys. Family I think is a big factor. Both Nick and Rafa were very good as juniors. Rafa was taking sets off Moya when he was 14 and Nick was number one junior but things happen. I recall back in the day Australia had a world number one junior called Mark Kratsmann, great left handed player. At the same time Boris Becker would struggle to make the quarters in the juniors. A year later Boris wins Wimbledon and course of life changes.
 

topspn

Hall of Fame
#37
It is really really hard to simply distinguish between so called raw talent vs a more complete player who works fervently. After all, it is hard work and mental strength that enables you to be even more talented. Impossible to tell really what a motivated Kyrgios could do.
 
#38
I’ve seen many posts/threads on this forum, YouTube and social media in general regarding the “immense talent” of Aussie Nick Kyrgios. Some ppl consider NK as the second most talented player of all time only behind Federer, despite achieving very little in his career so far. I’ve even heard some say that a focused Kyrgios can make Nadal, Nole and pretty much everyone on tour look like pushers. He’s definitely a fun player to watch when he’s on but is he really THAT talented i don’t know
The people who say only Federer is more talented than him must not have heard of Xavier Malisse.
 
#42
I’ve seen many posts/threads on this forum, YouTube and social media in general regarding the “immense talent” of Aussie Nick Kyrgios. Some ppl consider NK as the second most talented player of all time only behind Federer, despite achieving very little in his career so far. I’ve even heard some say that a focused Kyrgios can make Nadal, Nole and pretty much everyone on tour look like pushers. He’s definitely a fun player to watch when he’s on but is he really THAT talented i don’t know
Well the peanuts on this forum don't see the ridiculous returns that Novak possesses or the crazy gets which both Rafa and Novak routinely make and turn into attacking shots as talent. Swinging for the outright winner at all times is considered next level
 
#43
No, I think too many people only look at offense when assessing an athlete's talent in any sport. Nadal was beating top pros at 16 and won a slam at 19, while Djokovic was top 3 and won a slam at age 20. You don't achieve that kind of success early without being immensely talented. You can't just grind your way to those kinds of results.
 
#45
No lol. I think people look at Nadal and Djokovic's relatively error free game and think they have no shot making ability. I beg to differ. I've seen djokovic and Nadal have several matches with crazy shot making ability. The thing is its not a wise way to be dominant for how long they want to stay on top. It's not sustainable for any player with the exception of Federer. If Kyrigios wants to win he would cut a little bit back on "shot making" and "entertainment" and improving consistency along with conditioning. Then he would be greater. To have mental grit and be strong-willed is a talent as well... and that's what Djokodal have while Kyrgios is lacking in that department a bit.
 

Rago

Hall of Fame
#46
Not even close. Forget about movement where he is miles behind anyways.

When it comes to pure ballstriking, Nadal is in contention for having the best forehand (along with Fed) in the Open Era and Djokovic's backhand is second to none.

What does Kyrgios bring to the table to top this?
 
#48
Kyrgios has a good serve, most of the time. End of.

I believe the overrating of his talents and expectations have contributed a great deal to his lack of achievements because he knows he can't live up to the hype so he has decided to be apathetic and not even bother. He is now a fully paid up journeyman as he'll turn 24 years old in April and has only got 4 piddly titles to show for it. Marseille, Atlanta, Tokyo and Brisbane.

When you consider what Nadal and Djoker had achieved by the age of 24 which was in 2010 & 2011. Because the tennis establishment was protecting Fedr's legacy, Rafa and Djoker were denied the recognition they deserved as young players.
.
 
#50
Not even close

People take every highlight of him hitting some "trick" shot at face value while missing the 100 other attempts that failed miserably

Any one of these players can slap the ball around with extremely low percentage shots if they wanted too
 
Top