Talent in tennis

[Street]

What makes a player talented? Why is Kyrgios always hailed as being extremely talented? Is it just because he hits hard? What makes him more talented than say Medvedev who isn't really called talented too often?

Federer is another player who is always referred to as talented while Nadal's and Djokovic's success is usually attributed to their hard work. What is the reason for that? Is it just because Federer's game is prettier?

 

[tonylg]

Obviously the most talented player is the one who is proficient at the most strokes. The ability to take the ball early or make reflex volleys also shows good hands .. which points to talent more than retrieving from miles behind the baseline.

In today's era of poly and slow high bouncing courts, players are winning with massive deficiencies in some strokes. They are disciplined, well drilled and show good endurance, more so than talent.

 

[MichaelNadal]

Consult Gilles Simon:

Drawing a comparison between compatriot Richard Gasquet and Rafael Nadal, Simon said, 'When Richard Gasquet sends a backhand ten miles from the corner of the stands, they say it's talent. They're right. But when Rafael Nadal does the same with a forehand, they say it's strength and that it's physical. There's complete agreement about Federer's talent, but when it comes to Djokovic, there's doubt. They say he has no great shot. Except that when you serve at him at 275 kph and he takes it every time, in the middle of the racquet. That's incredible talent. If you ask Jan de Witt, who has the most talent, Roger or Novak, he'll hesitate to reply.'

Elaborating further, he said,'Television distorts perceptions. People don't see what's so special about Kei Nishikori. He has the best two-handed backhand I've ever seen. He finds incredible angles but that doesn't make an impression. I often use the example ofMichael Llodra. He had an amazing volley and touch but he couldn't hit a correct forehand. Was he gifted? Safin had a patent on talent his entire career, but when it came to hands, he was like me. Now, Ernests Gulbis is the same. He's talented, full stop. If he loses, it's because he doesn't feel like playing.'

He also mentioned, 'In France, in the beginning, I had the impression that it was better to be less good. With talent that Gulbis who's ranked 50th is more esteemed than a Ferrer who's third. Now, I couldn't care less whether people see if I have talent or not. I usually answer that my talent is my timing. Talent is weighing 70 kg and hitting 50 winners against Rafa in Rome (last year). I hope it doesn't get taken the wrong way, but when I see that they think that I have less talent than Jo-Wilfried Tsonga, it's impressive. Jo hammers every shot. It's very forceful. Between us four, Gael Monfils is the one who has the most talent.'

https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/index.php?threads/talent.563824/#post-10324044

 

[tonylg]

Consult Gilles Simon

Or just site him as an example of how far one can go in the modern game with limited talent.

 

[-NN-]

skills are the expressed actuality of talent


that's all that really matters anyway

skill meaning the ability to win tennis points, not how pretty your backhand is.

 

[davced1]

Benoit Paire is talented. Doesn’t seem to care most of the time, can’t hit a forehand and still maintains a decent ranking year after year. Compare him to all the hard workers out there who are nowhere close to the top 100 and it’s obvious Paire must be very talented.

 

[Street]

Consult Gilles Simon:

Drawing a comparison between compatriot Richard Gasquet and Rafael Nadal, Simon said, 'When Richard Gasquet sends a backhand ten miles from the corner of the stands, they say it's talent. They're right. But when Rafael Nadal does the same with a forehand, they say it's strength and that it's physical. There's complete agreement about Federer's talent, but when it comes to Djokovic, there's doubt. They say he has no great shot. Except that when you serve at him at 275 kph and he takes it every time, in the middle of the racquet. That's incredible talent. If you ask Jan de Witt, who has the most talent, Roger or Novak, he'll hesitate to reply.'

Elaborating further, he said,'Television distorts perceptions. People don't see what's so special about Kei Nishikori. He has the best two-handed backhand I've ever seen. He finds incredible angles but that doesn't make an impression. I often use the example ofMichael Llodra. He had an amazing volley and touch but he couldn't hit a correct forehand. Was he gifted? Safin had a patent on talent his entire career, but when it came to hands, he was like me. Now, Ernests Gulbis is the same. He's talented, full stop. If he loses, it's because he doesn't feel like playing.'

He also mentioned, 'In France, in the beginning, I had the impression that it was better to be less good. With talent that Gulbis who's ranked 50th is more esteemed than a Ferrer who's third. Now, I couldn't care less whether people see if I have talent or not. I usually answer that my talent is my timing. Talent is weighing 70 kg and hitting 50 winners against Rafa in Rome (last year). I hope it doesn't get taken the wrong way, but when I see that they think that I have less talent than Jo-Wilfried Tsonga, it's impressive. Jo hammers every shot. It's very forceful. Between us four, Gael Monfils is the one who has the most talent.'

https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/index.php?threads/talent.563824/#post-10324044

His comments are really interesting. I always feel like if you have a visually pleasing shot like E.g Gasquet, you' ll automatically be called talented and i've never thought that talent has too much to do with aesthetics.

 

[-NN-]

In really dull basic terms, talent is how good you are. At least that's what it should be.


A lot of people like to use talent to mean how good one could potentially be.


You might as well equate talent with the sort of dominance and superiority one is able to show over others with their tennis ability. So Nadal is arguably the greatest talent ever on the dirt.

Sure, a lack of work ethic can demonstrate in a more obvious way how a player might not be maximising their POTENTIAL, (or their talent to some), but no amount of work ethic, for example, is going to fix Kyrgios' returning ability.

His level is his level. He's not talented enough to be god of the new world.



I bet most people still think Federer is more talented than Djokovic. But mounting evidence is clearly showing that they are in a similar bracket. The proof is in their results and various markers of dominance.


The definition of talent meaning natural aptitude, a sort of quickness and ease of learning, is pretty much useless and doesn't guarantee some higher ceiling of tennis talent in the long run. Borg and Nadal are not definitively more talented than Federer and Djokovic. All top pros are talented in the general sense of being far more prodigious than your average Joe in the game of tennis.

 

[CYGS]

What makes a player talented? Why is Kyrgios always hailed as being extremely talented? Is it just because he hits hard? What makes him more talented than say Medvedev who isn't really called talented too often?

Federer is another player who is always referred to as talented while Nadal's and Djokovic's success is usually attributed to their hard work. What is the reason for that? Is it just because Federer's game is prettier?

Because talent is determined only by Fed fans' eye test and nothing else.

 

[daphne]

If MSM see a huge potential in clicks they pronounce a particular player talented. That's about it.

There are many talented players that never get mentioned because they are of no interest to MSM.

 

[Forehanderer]

If MSM see a huge potential in clicks they pronounce a particular player talented. That's about it.

There are many talented players that never get mentioned because they are of no interest to MSM.

Not everything is a fault of the MSM. There's a reason why Sampras, Edberg and Becker are more liked compared to the likes of Courier who won 4 championships. Courier has an outgoing personality compared to Sampras and yet Sampras generates more clicks.

 

[tonylg]

Not everything is a fault of the MSM.

Everything is the fault of MSM and angry Croats, when you have a victim mentality

 

[Arak]

To me, talent has always meant to have certain skills and abilities without the need for too much training. Talented players are usually considered as somewhat lazy. A talented player may need to practice very little while a less talented player has to put in hours of daily training to reach a similar level. Federer is considered as talented because his technique and movement look effortless, and his volleys, feel shots are outstanding. Kyrgios is considered talented because he doesn’t practice, but always produces some spectacular results (for someone who doesn’t practice).

 

[Forehanderer]

Everything is the fault of MSM and angry Croats, when you have a victim mentality

I don't know what you did but it sure did trigger him/her lol. If I'm not wrong, daphne is a female name, no? I don't understand the hate for Croats. Nole's coach is Goran, no?

 

[Forehanderer]

To me, talent has always meant to have certain skills and abilities without the need for too much training. Talented players are usually considered as somewhat lazy. A talented player may need to practice very little while a less talented player has to put in hours of daily training to reach a similar level. Federer is considered as talented because his technique and movement look effortless, and his volleys, feel shots are outstanding. Kyrgios is considered talented because he doesn’t practice, but always produces some spectacular results (for someone who doesn’t practice).

But kyrgios lacks the work ethic of Federer. That's why he fails. Such a shame that Fed's coach in the initial years Peter Carter is from Australia.

 

[tonylg]

I don't know what you did but it sure did trigger him/her lol. If I'm not wrong, daphne is a female name, no? I don't understand the hate for Croats. Nole's coach is Goran, no?

I could explain, but she'll get that other thread deleted .. best to leave it at just one.

 

[Sport]

The definition of talent meaning natural aptitude, a sort of quickness and ease of learning, is pretty much useless and doesn't guarantee some higher ceiling of tennis talent in the long run. Borg and Nadal are not definitively more talented than Federer and Djokovic.

That is the dictionary definiton of talent, and thus the only valid one: natural aptitude and ease of learning. Otherwise, you are inventing a new meaning for the word. Federer is defintely not more talented than Nadal. Nadal won his first Slam aged 19 and a week, almost 18. Nadal was a teenage tennis prodigy, which is the higher indicator of talent among GOAT candidates. By the time Nadal was 20, he had reached Slam finals on two surfaces (grass and clay). At age 20, Federer had 0 Slam finals. Federer won 0 Slams as a teenager and reached his first Slam final aged 21. Nadal is the younger player ever to achieve the Career Grand Slam (age 24), while Federer had to with till his 27th birthday to achieve the Career Grand Slam.

 

[Sport]

But kyrgios lacks the work ethic of Federer. That's why he fails. Such a shame that Fed's coach in the initial years Peter Carter is from Australia.

WTF? No, that's not the only reaosn why he fails. Kyrgios lacks Federer's talent as well. Kyrgios always wanna give the impression that he doesn't try to fool people and make it look like he loses because he doesn't try.

25 years old Kyrgios tried hard and played seriously against the worst version of Thiem at the AO 2021. He still lost. 25 years old Federer would have murdered that version of Thiem.

 

[Forehanderer]

WTF? No, that's not the only reaosn why he fails. Kyrgios lacks Federer's talent as well. Kirgios always wanna give the impression that he doesn't try to fool people and make it look like he loses because he doesn't try.

25 years old Kyrgios tried hard and played seriously against the worst version of Thiem at the AO 2021. He still lost. 25 years old Federer would have murdered that version of Thiem.

Are you sure that Kyrgios plays anything with an intent to win. He was two sets up v Theim and plays an unnecessary between the legs shot in the third set which let Thiem in. IIRC, that was in a breakpoint in Thiem's first service game in the third set. If theim lost that game, Kyrgios had the match in a platter. Kyrgios played to the crowd for some cheap trickshots and lost that match. I'm not saying Kyrgios is Fed level but he could have won a slam here and there and not be such a mug. Also he needs to stop talking trash about famous players such as Nole and Rafa and focus on winning. It looks like he wants to be a twitter troll from his actions like mimicking Nole's boob throw celebration.

 

[MichaelNadal]

Are you sure that Kyrgios plays anything with an intent to win. He was two sets up v Theim and plays an unnecessary between the legs shot in the third set which let Thiem in. IIRC, that was in a breakpoint in Thiem's first service game in the third set. If theim lost that game, Kyrgios had the match in a platter. Kyrgios played to the crowd for some cheap trickshots and lost that match. I'm not saying Kyrgios is Fed level but he could have won a slam here and there and not be such a mug. Also he needs to stop talking trash about famous players such as Nole and Rafa and focus on winning. It looks like he wants to be a twitter troll from his actions like mimicking Nole's boob throw celebration.

Imagine if he had the mentality the big 3 have. Dude could be unstoppable, and he simply doesn't care lol.

 

[Thriller]

What makes a player talented? Why is Kyrgios always hailed as being extremely talented? Is it just because he hits hard? What makes him more talented than say Medvedev who isn't really called talented too often?

Federer is another player who is always referred to as talented while Nadal's and Djokovic's success is usually attributed to their hard work. What is the reason for that? Is it just because Federer's game is prettier?

Because lots of people seem to think that a talent for ball striking and a talent for tennis are synonymous (see #2). It is not. I am sure we have all played the intimidating warm up world champion with beautifully produced strokes and seemingly no weaknesses and 6-1, 6-2 later you realise (un)fortunately he has no talent for movement, shot selection, strategy, emotional management, reading the game, adjusting to the wind etc etc etc. And off the court, possibly no talent for the hard work necessary to acquire these skills. All of these and a hundred more are essential skills for a tennis player, and some players are naturally gifted in many of these areas and also crucially have a talent for hard work, drive, motivation whatever you want to call it to work on the weaknesses not dine out on their strengths. But there are some who are only interested in 'shots' and not all the other elements that need to be there for a player to hit the right shot at the right time over and over again.

If they are lucky these lesser flashy players will get a day in the sun when they take down a big name and delude themselves that they are at least as talented as the top players but, if only, but, excuses, but etc etc etc And then they go out in the next round.

So if you naturally have and/or have acquired through hard work a talent for tennis, you will win points, games, sets, matches and tournaments and lots of them. That's the only proof. If you merely have a talent for ball striking ... good luck with that!

 

[Forehanderer]

I could explain, but she'll get that other thread deleted .. best to leave it at just one.

This from Nole fan thread ombelieable dedication, no?

NOTE - all Djok's supporters

My suggestion is to address Djok in any further conversation as "the GOAT" without using his real name.

All in favour - and do it in real time.

P.S. If you do it, the haters will be getting a hissyfit so this is a particular profilactic measure that will help them heal and come to terms faster. Let's help them overcome this obstacle in their lives.

 

[RaulRamirez]

Sometimes, we collectively overthink this stuff and sometimes we underthink it.

To win (besides, at times, having some good fortune) the following are all important ingredients (not in order of priority): athleticism, talent, skill, work ethic, court intelligence. Obviously, these categories are not mutually exclusive and obviously (to me) you don't get to the level of a Federer, Nadal or Djokovic without scoring very high in every area.

If you see one as being so much more athletic or talented or skilled, or having so much more court intelligence or work ethic than the others, I don't see it.

Let's not overthink this, either. Roger is oozing with talent, but he still scores high in every other area. Rafa is an amazing athlete with great mental toughness, and is also phenomenally talented. Novak is incredibly skilled with a great on-court mentality (yes, he has a temper, but that's beside the point) - and he's incredibly talented.

But, we tend to categorize players in all sports as the athletic one or the skilled one, or the hard worker, etc. And sometimes, we miss the big picture.

I won't unlock the riddle of Kyrgios, but in which categories does he rank high? Yes, he's talented, and fairly athletic. He has power and touch and anticipation. But how skilled is he at developing good strokes? How is his work ethic and his mentality on court?

 

[CYGS]

Imagine if he had the mentality the big 3 have. Dude could be unstoppable, and he simply doesn't care lol.

Stop this stupid narrative. He obviously cares but is just not good enough. Plenty of people can stop him, or he would not have so many early exits in slams.

Lots of crap.

 

[CYGS]

Are you sure that Kyrgios plays anything with an intent to win. He was two sets up v Theim and plays an unnecessary between the legs shot in the third set which let Thiem in. IIRC, that was in a breakpoint in Thiem's first service game in the third set. If theim lost that game, Kyrgios had the match in a platter. Kyrgios played to the crowd for some cheap trickshots and lost that match. I'm not saying Kyrgios is Fed level but he could have won a slam here and there and not be such a mug. Also he needs to stop talking trash about famous players such as Nole and Rafa and focus on winning. It looks like he wants to be a twitter troll from his actions like mimicking Nole's boob throw celebration.

If choking means playing without an intent to win, is that your excuse for why Federer had 3 40-15s against Djokovic? What a bunch of bs.

Loser.

 

[MichaelNadal]

Stop this stupid narrative. He obviously cares but is just not good enough. Plenty of people can stop him, or he would not have so many early exits in slams.

Lots of crap.

It's not a narrative lol, you don't stay out at the pub drinking till wee hours of the night the morning you play Nadal at Wimbledon if you care.

Nick Kyrgios blushes as he recognises a female journalist from the pub

Three minutes into the conference, the journalist said 'Nick you played a great match'. Kyrgios turned to face her and his eyes lit up. 'You were at the pub last night,' he said,

www.dailymail.co.uk

 

[Deleted member 688153]

Stop this stupid narrative. He obviously cares but is just not good enough. Plenty of people can stop him, or he would not have so many early exits in slams.

Lots of crap.

nah, he would have been in the semis this year at a minimum if he put in anything like the time and effort other players do

 

[CYGS]

nah, he would have been in the semis this year at a minimum if he put in anything like the time and effort other players do

Woulda shoulda coulda - boring Fed fans’ eye test is not sufficient as an argument.

 

[MichaelNadal]

Woulda shoulda coulda - boring Fed fans’ eye test is not sufficient as an argument.

Why are you so aggressive all the time? lol

Chill out broooooooooooooooooo

 

[CYGS]

It's not a narrative lol, you don't stay out at the pub drinking till wee hours of the night the morning you play Nadal at Wimbledon if you care.

Nick Kyrgios blushes as he recognises a female journalist from the pub

Three minutes into the conference, the journalist said 'Nick you played a great match'. Kyrgios turned to face her and his eyes lit up. 'You were at the pub last night,' he said,

www.dailymail.co.uk

So did a bunch of nobodies who did it. All the Rosols are more talented than players with actual proven track records? Even your mum doesn’t think so.

 

[CYGS]

Why are you so aggressive all the time? lol

Chill out broooooooooooooooooo

If truth sounds aggressive to you, it’s on you.

 

[MichaelNadal]

So did a bunch of nobodies who did it. All the Rosols are more talented than players with actual proven track records? Even your mum doesn’t think so.

 

[Thriller]

I won't unlock the riddle of Kyrgios, but in which categories does he rank high? Yes, he's talented, and fairly athletic. He has power and touch and anticipation. But how skilled is he at developing good strokes? How is his work ethic and his mentality on court?

Kyrgios is a coward. He is that kid who says he never revises for exams so if/when he fails, it is not because he is thick, it is because he couldn't be bothered.
Really trying hard to maximise everything, giving his all and finding out that he still gets whipped by the best would be devastating for his ego. So he doesn't take the risk. He can earn a good living faxing it in and dine out on the rare occasions where he took down a big name. I have nothing but contempt for him. Zero respect.

 

[CYGS]

As expected, no real argument except for blindly spilling out nonsense and hype invented by Fed fans.

 

[Thriller]

It's not a narrative lol, you don't stay out at the pub drinking till wee hours of the night the morning you play Nadal at Wimbledon if you care.

Nick Kyrgios blushes as he recognises a female journalist from the pub

Three minutes into the conference, the journalist said 'Nick you played a great match'. Kyrgios turned to face her and his eyes lit up. 'You were at the pub last night,' he said,

www.dailymail.co.uk

If you are a coward with a fragile ego, you need a 'cool' excuse for when you lose.

 

[MichaelNadal]

As expected, no real argument except for blindly spilling out nonsense and hype invented by Fed fans.

 

[Deleted member 688153]

Woulda shoulda coulda - boring Fed fans’ eye test is not sufficient as an argument.

its funny how the eye test comes from actually watching tennis and enjoying ourselves rather than arguing about wikipedia stats and being mad and aggressive all the time

 

[CYGS]

its funny how the eye test comes from actually watching tennis and enjoying ourselves rather than arguing about wikipedia stats and being mad and aggressive all the time

Everyone and their mum can have one.

 

[MichaelNadal]

Everyone and their mum can have one.

I saw the 2 matches he had with Djokovic very clearly

 

[Forehanderer]

If choking means playing without an intent to win, is that your excuse for why Federer had 3 40-15s against Djokovic? What a bunch of bs.

Loser.

Kyrgios choked all over Djokovic to hold the h2h 2-0. Stay salty my friend

 

[CYGS]

Kyrgios choked all over Djokovic to hold the h2h 2-0. Stay salty my friend

21-10

 

[Sysyphus]

in normal language, talent means a person's natural aptitude to be good at something. Natural aptitude + smart, deliberate practice = your realized level.

pretty much all tennis players work very professionally and have trained since childhood, so their actual achievements will be pretty much reflective of their natural aptitude. But obviously it isn't a completely 1-to-1 relationship either. Some people do maximize their natural aptitude better than others in this world. Guys like Safin or Kyrgios would be examples of players whose achievements do not quite match up to their innate ability, but the gap obviously isn't nearly as big as some would have it.

thank you for coming to my ted talk

 

[Red Rick]

Consult Gilles Simon:

Drawing a comparison between compatriot Richard Gasquet and Rafael Nadal, Simon said, 'When Richard Gasquet sends a backhand ten miles from the corner of the stands, they say it's talent. They're right. But when Rafael Nadal does the same with a forehand, they say it's strength and that it's physical. There's complete agreement about Federer's talent, but when it comes to Djokovic, there's doubt. They say he has no great shot. Except that when you serve at him at 275 kph and he takes it every time, in the middle of the racquet. That's incredible talent. If you ask Jan de Witt, who has the most talent, Roger or Novak, he'll hesitate to reply.'

Elaborating further, he said,'Television distorts perceptions. People don't see what's so special about Kei Nishikori. He has the best two-handed backhand I've ever seen. He finds incredible angles but that doesn't make an impression. I often use the example ofMichael Llodra. He had an amazing volley and touch but he couldn't hit a correct forehand. Was he gifted? Safin had a patent on talent his entire career, but when it came to hands, he was like me. Now, Ernests Gulbis is the same. He's talented, full stop. If he loses, it's because he doesn't feel like playing.'

He also mentioned, 'In France, in the beginning, I had the impression that it was better to be less good. With talent that Gulbis who's ranked 50th is more esteemed than a Ferrer who's third. Now, I couldn't care less whether people see if I have talent or not. I usually answer that my talent is my timing. Talent is weighing 70 kg and hitting 50 winners against Rafa in Rome (last year). I hope it doesn't get taken the wrong way, but when I see that they think that I have less talent than Jo-Wilfried Tsonga, it's impressive. Jo hammers every shot. It's very forceful. Between us four, Gael Monfils is the one who has the most talent.'

https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/index.php?threads/talent.563824/#post-10324044

That is the best answer.

Tennis "talent" in most media is just a circlejerk and self reinforcing hypothesis to some extent. When ANYONE calls a player "most talented since Federer" I immediately stop listening cause those 2 players are obviously Nadal and Djokovic. At some point "talent" is just literally jerking off on a player and hyping them with 0 substance.

Fans and pundits don't look at talent. They first decide a player is super talented, then they retroactively ******** their explanation for why they're not winning. This is also why so many people vastly overrate the importance of mental strength.

 

[zagor]

What makes a player talented? Why is Kyrgios always hailed as being extremely talented? Is it just because he hits hard? What makes him more talented than say Medvedev who isn't really called talented too often?

Federer is another player who is always referred to as talented while Nadal's and Djokovic's success is usually attributed to their hard work. What is the reason for that? Is it just because Federer's game is prettier?

In general, because people have a very narrow definition of talent when it comes to tennis. It basically boils down to good hands, reflex shots, improvisation etc. without giving enough weight to tennis fundamentals and reliable weapons. I've seen often people (even famous former players, coaches etc.) refer to Kyrgios as an ATG talent, a potential multiple slam winner if only he had a solid work ethic. Yet I certainly can't think of any multi-slam winning player who had such utterly mediocre movement and return game (someone correct me if I'm wrong).

Goes without saying that Nadal and Novak are extremely talented, and in varous areas of the game.

 

[6august]

Talent is a player who has visual and nasal problems but still manages to win double-digit Slems.

D

 

[Arak]

But kyrgios lacks the work ethic of Federer. That's why he fails. Such a shame that Fed's coach in the initial years Peter Carter is from Australia.

But that’s exactly what I am saying. Talent alone is not enough. Hard work and natural athleticism are also important. You need to have the right balance of all three to be on the top in any sport.

 

[-NN-]

That is the best answer.

Tennis "talent" in most media is just a circlejerk and self reinforcing hypothesis to some extent. When ANYONE calls a player "most talented since Federer" I immediately stop listening cause those 2 players are obviously Nadal and Djokovic. At some point "talent" is just literally jerking off on a player and hyping them with 0 substance.

Fans and pundits don't look at talent. They first decide a player is super talented, then they retroactively ******** their explanation for why they're not winning. This is also why so many people vastly overrate the importance of mental strength.

We're speaking the same language here.

 

[zagor]

But kyrgios lacks the work ethic of Federer. That's why he fails. Such a shame that Fed's coach in the initial years Peter Carter is from Australia.

You do realize that even a fully 100% committed Kyrgios would still be a 10x worse mover than Fed (just to name one thing).

 

[Sysyphus]

There is of course an unfortunate tendency to use 'talent' in a way that is synonymous with 'flair' and 'panache' or to describe a mercurial player whose performance frequently swings from the dazzling to the appalling.

But at the same time I think there is a very understandable reason why people are drawn to and fascinated by these perceived-to-be talented players. I think people do correctly identify that there is a slight gap between potential and actual achievement with some of these players, and this gap is what makes them fascinating. It is hard to identify with the thorough perfection of someone like Djokovic, who possesses innate gifts that we can only dream of but who is also a complete machine who every day strives to perfect his abilities to the utmost, pushing himself to the limits of what is possible. With guys like Safin or Kyrgios, they still possess gifts that are far beyond us mere mortals, but these gifts are combined with a self-destructive, immature, imperfect side that makes them more relatable, complex and captivating. It's hard to identify with hitting a perfect backhand down the line while down a break point, but much easier (for some) to identify with staying up late to have a bit too much fun the night before a grand slam final. And when these self-destructive fools can still paint the occasional masterpiece, it makes that ability seem closer to the grasp of the rest of us who are not obsessive, perfect machines like the likes of Djokovic or Nadal.

 

[Forehanderer]

Are you sure that Kyrgios plays anything with an intent to win. He was two sets up v Theim and plays an unnecessary between the legs shot in the third set which let Thiem in. IIRC, that was in a breakpoint in Thiem's first service game in the third set. If theim lost that game, Kyrgios had the match in a platter. Kyrgios played to the crowd for some cheap trickshots and lost that match. I'm not saying Kyrgios is Fed level but he could have won a slam here and there and not be such a mug. Also he needs to stop talking trash about famous players such as Nole and Rafa and focus on winning. It looks like he wants to be a twitter troll from his actions like mimicking Nole's boob throw celebration.

I answered your post already.

You do realize that even a fully 100% committed Kyrgios would still be a 10x worse mover than Fed (just to name one thing).