Kyrgios most talented player

ibbi said:
Yes, very talented. Unfortunately, as has been proven time and again, talent doesn't mean anything by itself.
Click to expand...

No, it means talent by itself.

No one can know about someone's talent unless it is somehow revealed. That is enough. All the talk about how it translates to later success etc is BS. A musician who displays talent at the age of 8 provides pleasure to those around him. Whether he makes a good career at 40 is not relevant, since most other people would not have even provided one second of such musical pleasure to anyone in their lives.

Watching Kyrgios play against Fed now is good enough for me - he doesn't have to win 19 Slams to "prove" anything. He has shown that he is better than Nadal and Federer, and that is good enough.
 
sureshs said:
No, it means talent by itself.

No one can know about someone's talent unless it is somehow revealed. That is enough. All the talk about how it translates to later success etc is BS. A musician who displays talent at the age of 8 provides pleasure to those around him. Whether he makes a good career at 40 is not relevant, since most other people would not have even provided one second of such musical pleasure to anyone in their lives.

Watching Kyrgios play against Fed now is good enough for me - he doesn't have to win 19 Slams to "prove" anything. He has shown that he is better than Nadal and Federer, and that is good enough.
Click to expand...
Well, what can I say... I wish I was so easily pleased. Doesn't watching great talent amount to nothing get frustrating after a while? I guess if you don't like or care about a player you can watch them repeatedly blow it on the biggest stage, and be satisfied.
 
sureshs said:
No, it means talent by itself.

No one can know about someone's talent unless it is somehow revealed. That is enough. All the talk about how it translates to later success etc is BS. A musician who displays talent at the age of 8 provides pleasure to those around him. Whether he makes a good career at 40 is not relevant, since most other people would not have even provided one second of such musical pleasure to anyone in their lives.

Watching Kyrgios play against Fed now is good enough for me - he doesn't have to win 19 Slams to "prove" anything. He has shown that he is better than Nadal and Federer, and that is good enough.
Click to expand...
Pretty subjective, but okay. Also don't agree with your bit about talent not ending up as success. How do you quantify talent then? Trick shots? Flashy play? See my point now? And hence the premise that your implication about Kyrgios being most talented is subjective. Discipline is also a big part of being talented. You need that bit to be consistent and win grand slams.
 
That punde-ka-baal is the most talented? Impossible! :)

sureshs said:
Watching him play against Federer now in the LC, I think he is the most talented when compared to Fed, Nadal, and Djokovic, and probably the most inherently talented guy in the Open Era.
Click to expand...
 
Sure. Top of the talent charts, but at the bottom of the chart with past players who lack the sense and appreciation to use it.
 
. Discipline is also a big part of being talented. .[/QUOTE]

Real talent requires no discipline. You either have real talent or you don't. Discipline is only required if you have marginal talent.
 
texasleaguer said:
. Discipline is also a big part of being talented.

Real talent requires no discipline. You either have real talent or you don't. Discipline is only required if you have marginal talent.
Click to expand...
Like he said, that is pretty subjective. You cant define real talent objectively. To you maybe its flashy shots or tricks or in between leg shots. To some talent is being consistent in play and winning. Being consistent and having discipline to be consistent is also a talent in itself. Saying players who have won double digit grand slams are less talented than showboating kids around is nonsensical especially when these kids like Kyrgios have not won diddly squat to show for it. The real talent for some legends IS being consistent in performance and winning.
 
Last edited:
Talent can easily be identified but hard to explain. It's that combination of raw athleticism and coordination that makes even difficult athletic tasks look easy.

Kyrgios has that. But talent alone doesn't lead to success. Talent with discipline and mental toughness usually does.

There are few players I enjoy more than Kyrgios when it comes just to watching elite level athleticism. But his head games and antics sadly lead to him being a second tier player.

I will say that Laver Cup is the perfect place for him. He can express himself and get the team and fans into it. He was a star of the weekend along with Rafa and Sock.
 
I think no one is questioning his instincts, coordination and shot making skills. But there are other factors involved:
Motivation for achievement, strong physicality, emotional stability/ concentration, toughness in crucial moments


Kyrgios clearly ranks above Federer, Nadal and Djokovic with regard to talent, but only in the Sewretchian Galaxy :cool:


 
He is very talented but he is an idiot. His attitude and maturity level are that of an overgrown frat boy, and his commitment and work ethic is less than one. I am pretty sure he will never achieve anywhere near his potential (whatever that may be), but still may get him a couple slams at some point considering how weak the mens game will probably be for awhile in the future.
 
sureshs said:
Talentwise, these are my rankings

for the Open Era:

1. Kyrgios

2. Nadal
3. Federer
Click to expand...
You'd put Fed below slap-happy-forehand Nick Kyrgios??!!

Sureshs, either seek professional help or get to the nearest diner or catered affair in your area...your stomach's playing tricks with your mind.

Open era? ...let's start with:

Hicham Arazi, "the Moroccan McEnroe" who had wins over former #1's and GS champions Fed, Agassi, Safin, Hewitt, Ferrero, Moya, Courier and Kafelnikov.
This dude had "hands" that would've made Kyrios look like Venus de Milo by comparison.

Speaking of "ball-bearing hands" how about Marcelo Rios?

Speaking of lefty's, how about J. McEnroe?

Speaking of not-wrapped-too-tight, what about Ille Nastase?

Speaking of 'oily' people, Kyrios should just quit tennis and go into the oil business......the guy's a tanker
(yes that was very lame, but tell me Nick's "act" isn't?).​

images
 
Dedans Penthouse said:
You'd put Fed below slap-happy-forehand Nick Kyrgios??!!

Sureshs, either seek professional help or get to the nearest diner or catered affair in your area...your stomach's playing tricks with your mind.

Open era? ...let's start with:

Hicham Arazi, "the Moroccan McEnroe" who had wins over former #1's and GS champions Fed, Agassi, Safin, Hewitt, Ferrero, Moya, Courier and Kafelnikov.
This dude had "hands" that would've made Kyrios look like Venus de Milo by comparison.

Speaking of "ball-bearing hands" how about Marcelo Rios?

Speaking of lefty's, how about J. McEnroe?

Speaking of not-wrapped-too-tight, what about Ille Nastase?

Speaking of 'oily' people, Kyrios should just quit tennis and go into the oil business......the guy's a tanker
(yes that was very lame, but tell me Nick's "act" isn't?).​

images
Click to expand...

The commentators said that Kyrgios ability to place the serve is unparalled in the history of tennis. Then one of them added reluctantly that Federer was also good.
 
uscwang said:
I think Kyrgios' backhand is really weak. There is also something wrong with his movement/technique that got him injured easily.
He can be fun to watch. But I wouldn't say he is the most talented of his generation.
Click to expand...
Agree, Kyrgios is an entertaining player to watch if he's not tanking, but no way is he more talented than Federer or Nadal. His backhand is too weak - did you watch Dimitrov break him down in the Cincy final? Nadal is more athletic, but Federer definitely has more tennis talent and skills than either of them.
 
ncgator said:
Agree, Kyrgios is an entertaining player to watch if he's not tanking, but no way is he more talented than Federer or Nadal. His backhand is too weak - did you watch Dimitrov break him down in the Cincy final? Nadal is more athletic, but Federer definitely has more tennis talent and skills than either of them.
Click to expand...

Then why is Federer 14-23 against Nadal?
 
Nicky is the only player to beat Fedalovic the very first time he played against each of them. That is incredible talent - actually it proves that he is 3 times as talented as any of them.
 
sureshs said:
Nicky is the only player to beat Fedalovic the very first time he played against each of them. That is incredible talent - actually it proves that he is 3 times as talented as any of them.
Click to expand...
Agree that Kyrgios is very talented, but he's also a head case who doesn't always gives his all to win points, games and matches, unlike Nadal. That is why he may never win a major even with all of his talent since he needs to win 7 matches in a row, which he may not have the mental fortitude to do.
 
ibbi said:
Yes, very talented. Unfortunately, as has been proven time and again, talent doesn't mean anything by itself.
Click to expand...
If you say that about Fed to one of his fans, then expect a massive backlash.

But yeah, Nick is super talented, but sometimes doesn't put in 100% effort :(
 
uscwang said:
I think Kyrgios' backhand is really weak. There is also something wrong with his movement/technique that got him injured easily.
He can be fun to watch. But I wouldn't say he is the most talented of his generation.
Click to expand...
The backhand is becoming his most regarded shot behind the first serve.:rolleyes:
 
ncgator said:
Because Nadal is more athletic than Federer and has won 13 of his matches against Federer on clay. Clay courts neutralize Federer's shot-making skills, and give an advantage to a player like Nadal who can stand 10' behind the baseline and run down shots that would be winners on other surfaces.
Click to expand...
Federer showed again today that he has more tennis skills than Nadal, on a court that puts a premium on shot making rather than shot retrieving.
 
accidental said:
If he's so talented then explain these stats:

Grand slams won: 0
Grand slam semis: 0
Grand slam matches won in 2017: 2
Years since grand slam quarter final reached: 3
Masters won: 0
Total career titles: 3
2017 titles: 0
Ranking movement from 2016 to 2017: -7
Click to expand...
That's a talent itself by some definition isn't it? ;)
 
Wait, but I thought Sureshs is the most talented tennis player. Sureshs can jump in the area (over 100 feet) and hit a spinning tweneer and hit an easy winner.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

peRFection
  • Locked
Annacone: Kyrgios is the most talented player since Roger Federer arrived
2 3
Replies
127
Views
11K
nolefam_2024
N
Nadalgaenger
  • Poll Poll
Is Fed the most TALENTED player ever?
2 3 4
Replies
160
Views
11K
mike danny
mike danny
D
Who do you think is the most talented player on the tour?
Replies
31
Views
4K
samurai13
samurai13
clout
Is Kyrgios really more talented than players like Nadal and Djokovic?
2
Replies
70
Views
7K
JasonG2019
JasonG2019
ARIARAIDEN
Who do you think is/was more talented than Federer?
2 3
Replies
139
Views
21K
Fabresque
Fabresque
Back
Top