Is Tennis too PC to handle it if Nicky ballgame fulfills his potential?

I have to say the first time I saw Kyrgios I was very intrigued by his raw talent and athleticism. I lost it once for Jerzy and his potential so I wanted to play it cool. And to a large extent I still do. I should have known that Jerzy was too linear in his tennis, too much like a bigger slower Berdych with drop shots at best. I still think he will be a very good pro and successful. And I still believe that the athletes on tour are going to become taller, bigger, and more athletic. But Tennis won't go from the six one or two champions of today straight to six 8, maybe never quite that tall. But Kyrgios is a unique package, for someone his size he moves like a gazelle and bombs serves. And then he just is an audacious shot maker. Both the good thing and the bad thing about him is he is really talented and he knows it.


So if he can fulfill his potential, is tennis ready for Nick Kyrgios world #1 and multislam champion? I know its premature, I mean myself I am split in the fact that he has acted like an absolute idiot so far in his career and generally in tennis stupid people don't rise to the absolute pinnacle of the game, or especially undisciplined and stupid. However, he is still young and literally the sky is the limit. And he is a ballsy shotmaker ready to try anything at anytime, its straight playground tennis.

Now here is the interesting part, lets assume for argument's sake that Kyrgios does what he can and realizes that he has to work like machine or hell even work and make decisions that are reasonably acceptable, and that he becomes a number 1 and multislam guy? What will Tennis' currently PC, corporatized atmosphere do with Kyrgios. How will the game, the media, the fans, the tour react from going from Roger to Nick? I mean poor Djokovic has been a pretty damn great player and role model and you have a whole lot of issues with him not being Roger. Does it help Nick that he plays so flashy, I think it does. Novak is a genius no question, the way he returns is unlike anyone ever, the way he moves and that BH; but his appeal is more subtle his victories are workmanlike and more like victory through a thousand little cuts. I think if he does win slams people will forgive him because he has genius in him and the best kind of genius really flashy and obvious. He is in basketball lingo a showboat, but a great showboat. So will people warm to him, will he become tennis' first real popular anti-hero since well a certain lefty New Yorker? And again for argument's sake lets say he does win a few slams and has a good run at number 1.

I have to say Jerzy is very quick around the court for his height, unlike Berdych who to me is considered slow. Jerzy is more like Cilic in his movement. He's injury prone so I feel he wont realize his full potential.

Monfils is also of Kygrios height, 6'4" but Monfils is even quicker around the court, so I dont feel Kygrios is anything special for his height. Murray is only one inch shorter but Murray is easily top three in his quickness (Monfils being no.1 and peak Nadal no.2).

Coming back to Kygrios and his popularity, I feel the Fedal popularity is hard to match - they're both charismatic, well behaved, very talented and play incredible tennis - but Kygrios will be popular esp after Fedal left and there's a void to fill.

I do think Zverev may be Kygrios main rival and Zverev himself is another attractive fella, looks and game wise. If they can form a rivalry of their own, perhaps their popularity may rise even further.

Belovedluckyboy wrote:I have to say Jerzy is very quick around the court for his height, unlike Berdych who to me is considered slow.  Jerzy is more like Cilic in his movement. He's injury prone so I feel he wont realize his full potential.

Monfils is also of Kygrios height, 6'4" but Monfils is even quicker around the court, so I dont feel Kygrios is anything special for his height. Murray is only one inch shorter but Murray is easily top three in his quickness (Monfils being no.1 and peak Nadal no.2).

Coming back to Kygrios and his popularity, I feel the Fedal popularity is hard to match - they're both charismatic, well behaved, very talented and play incredible tennis - but Kygrios will be popular esp after Fedal left and there's a void to fill.

I do think Zverev may be Kygrios main rival and Zverev himself is another attractive fella, looks and game wise. If they can form a rivalry of their own, perhaps their popularity may rise even further.

I agree about Zverev he kind of reminds of Safin although I thought Safin was more athletic. But his two handed backhand is sick, and his serve is going to improve and it is already so dangerous. I like that whole crop of players. By the way Berdych moves pretty well for a big man.

As for Nick, he is a bigger talent than Zverev because of his athleticism and how he has the power and moves a level or two better than Zverev. Zverev is a shot maker to, but Nick tried some crazy stuff tonight. I mean he charged in on Raonic's 1st serve and he did make the shot but he hit his first serve like right around the service line he just missed hitting a winner by a few inches on the return. The guy has shotmaking and he is ballsy you just have to say it on the court, the way he plays is very audacious.

Also I don't buy the monfils comparison. No way Monfils can play the way Nick can as great an athlete that he is he doesn't have Nick's hands and shotmaking. Plus Nick's BH is more steady and effective than it looks although no one ever talks about his backhand.

Im talking about Monfils movement around the court, second to none. Peak Rafa was just behind him, followed by Murray IMO.

No, tennis would not be too PC for him. They might even be quite happy with him and his antics if he manages to bring new fans in - even if they might not admit it.

Btw, I think he has a pretty good tennis brain. He does not just randomly take chances. He knows what he can and cannot do and he does not hit stupid shots just for the show.

My only worry is whether he will be sufficiently focused. As talented as he is, he will not make it to the top without hard work.

I like the Kyrgios/Hewitt combination. Hewitt can help Kyrgios mature and keep his focus while pursuing greater glory.

I also like Thiem in the younger crop, and he has a better head on his shoulders than Kyrgios does right now.

The issues Djokovic faces following Federer aren't because of his personality, it's that his game is efficient but, to most, uninspiring.

Kyrgios will not have a problem with his game, it's extremely entertaining even though he himself is a d1ck.

I think the issues facing Djokovic is that he was the third great player to arrive. By the time he had got to the very top everyone was either a Federer fan or a Nadal fan.

Federer v Nadal was the rivalry that had everyone captivated - old v young, attacker v defender etc. Djokovic was almost an unwelcomed guest who broke up the party.

I don't think Kyrgios will ever dominate like Federer or Djokovic. I suspect he will have spells where he is unbeatable, but his game will be streaky.

I agree with both BB and Guest82 re Djokovic.

ESPN has an article on Novak as being the bearer of bad news. I think there is some truth in it. He became the main obstacle to two massively popular players winning big tournaments. This rarely invites love from a crowd!

http://www.espn.co.uk/tennis/story/_/id/15093958/miami-open-tennis-novak-djokovic-bearer-bad-news

But his style does play a part too. It's not buccaneering enough to leap off the screen.

Kyrgios will entertain but he may be too much of arse to be loved.

I generally concur with the comments. One thing I really liked last night early in the match he sabre attacked Raonic on his first serve and he missed one badly, the other time he did it he blasted a cross court backhand that by just a couple of inches missed being an out and out winner. I mean it rattled Raonic. He just gave Nick a double take like are you serious. Even though he missed those two shots I think it helped him get that early break.

Although I think Nick Kyrgios is capable of winning several grand slams and reaching a number one ranking in the future I don't think he is going to have the consistency to be a dominant figure in the sport.

Very good match with Raonic, both played well I thought.

Well tennis will have to handle it. I don't think there are any rules deducting ranking points for having tattoos or lower class posture.

HM Murdock wrote:I agree with both BB and Guest82 re Djokovic.

ESPN has an article on Novak as being the bearer of bad news. I think there is some truth in it. He became the main obstacle to two massively popular players winning big tournaments. This rarely invites love from a crowd!

http://www.espn.co.uk/tennis/story/_/id/15093958/miami-open-tennis-novak-djokovic-bearer-bad-news

But his style does play a part too. It's not buccaneering enough to leap off the screen.

Kyrgios will entertain but he may be too much of arse to be loved.

Great article, I think its probably some of Bodo's best work. It explains a lot of Novak conundrum. He was the one who ended Fedal dominance, he isn't from a western country, he isn't an underdog, he isn't an ageing star so he gets very little love but a lot of respect. The fact, is this is part of the reason I gravitated to him. His style is subtle and a trained eye I feel can appreciate the things he does that are so unique to him and so amazing. But your run of the mill fan may not understand how incredible your ball striking has to be to center the return on your strings with these guys hitting 135 plus with heavy spin at you. Or to watch him change direction on both side as fluidly as any player ever. They don't understand how hard it is to change direction on shots that are smoked at you like that. So he does not reach out and grab you like some other players do, you kind of got to understand what he does out there to get it.

laverfan wrote:I like the Kyrgios/Hewitt combination. Hewitt can help Kyrgios mature and keep his focus while pursuing greater glory.

I also like Thiem in the younger crop, and he has a better head on his shoulders than Kyrgios does right now.

I'd prefer Lendl. I think Lendl is a bigger meaner version of Hewitt. I think psychologically Hewitt being an aussie might make it too easy for him. I like to think of Lendl being sort of version of the cruel eastern master like Pei Mei in Kill Bill, and that this could be a good thing for Nick. Where he actually has to earn his respect.

Well Nishikori beat him but it was a good effort from Kyrgios.

I reckon if Djokovic remains fit and focused he could win everything for the next 18 months. He already holds three grand slam trophies and needs the French for four slams in a row. He doesn't really have any challengers.

Kyrgios played really badly, too many errors. The BH was very ordinary, despite some good shots. The second server return percentage was 29% (7/24) compared to Nishikori at 59% (13/22).

Yes a very odd performance indeed by Nick. It was like he was struggling to keep more than one or two balls in. He kept going for more and more when he wasn't feeling it. He should of dialed it back till he could find his groove.

IMO the question is a bit odd because the ATP and the media are going out of their way to encourage Kyrgios to act like a spoiled brat on court. Must be worried sick about how they are going to get bums on seats post FeDal. Probably think with a charisma gap some of the public will be tricked into thinking boorishness is a substitute. Certainly is working to some extent. The amount of media coverage Kyrgios got this week for ranting about Nadal on court was far more than he got for his play. Admittedly perhaps most of the attention he received about this was due to a little coat tail riding.

Kyrgios is more watchable than the rest of the WTA put together HE. At least on this site more is talked about him then the rest of the weaker tour combined, except of course when we talk about how we resent their unfairly inflated prize money. You do know to shake yourself out of this fedal myopia. What is this charisma gap you are talking about? I think a player like him who attracts the attention he does with his flashy game and antics who hasn't won anything shows that if anything he is lacking it isn't charisma. Are you going to talk down any one who isn't Federer or Nadal, I thought maybe you would work it out of your system with doing it Djokovic and Murray. At least with Nick you could do all the "he has got a lot to learn" threads as you like and it would be true in this case.

I think Kyrgios played OK although the difference between him and Nishi was a significant number of UEs.

socal1976 wrote:Kyrgios is more watchable than the rest of the WTA put together HE. At least on this site more is talked about him then the rest of the weaker tour combined, except of course when we talk about how we resent their unfairly inflated prize money. You do know to shake yourself out of this fedal myopia. What is this charisma gap you are talking about? I think a player like him who attracts the attention he does with his flashy game and antics who hasn't won anything shows that if anything he is lacking it isn't charisma. Are you going to talk down any one who isn't Federer or Nadal, I thought maybe you would work it out of your system with doing it Djokovic and Murray. At least with Nick you could do all the "he has got a lot to learn" threads as you like and it would be true in this case.

I think you have forgotten what your question was socal. You asked if tennis was too PC for Kyrgios. My answer was based on that but from all the gushing about his flashy antics I think you agree with me. Tennis is not too PC for him it's just that we disagree on whether it should be. I even agree that there will be some that love Jeremy Kyle style entertainment but there will be others me included that have better things to do than watch such stuff. Nothing flashy IMO about his antics just tedious. Kyrgios makes tennis look like an unpleasant activity. He looks and acts as if he would rather be doing something else instead. Same goes for his buddy Murray. I wouldn't put Djokovic in that category and am surprised that you have grouped Djokovic together with Kyrgios and Murray.

hawkeye wrote:IMO the question is a bit odd because the ATP and the media are going out of their way to encourage Kyrgios to act like a spoiled brat on court. Must be worried sick about how they are going to get bums on seats post FeDal. Probably think with a charisma gap some of the public will be tricked into thinking boorishness is a substitute. Certainly is working to some extent. The amount of media coverage Kyrgios got this week for ranting about Nadal on court was far more than he got for his play. Admittedly perhaps most of the attention he received about this was due to a little coat tail riding.

Just curious but how do you think the ATP are encouraging him? Doesn't he get constantly fined and was recently subject to a suspended ban? Obviously the media is going to comment on him as they know people like to read about his crazy antics - they aren't doing it to encourage him.

I don't know if agree with your assessment here Hawkeye. I find his shotmaking and the antics aren't to different than what we have seen by other bad actors and in fact the controversy is part of it, some people will be drawn in to root against as some will be drawn in to support him. Judging by interest in this forum and some others he already seems like a bigger draw than the rest of the WTA combined.

I don't see an issue as per se as Nick being a future world number 1. Yes the guy is a naughty naughty boy, I don't think he has the marriage of talent and charisma going for him at the moment. 

Being foul mouthed for sake of insulting isn't my cup of tea, but probably appeals to the chavs and gobshites of this world.

legendkillarV2 wrote:I don't see an issue as per se as Nick being a future world number 1. Yes the guy is a naughty naughty boy, I don't think he has the marriage of talent and charisma going for him at the moment. 

Being foul mouthed for sake of insulting isn't my cup of tea, but probably appeals to the chavs and gobshites of this world.

Seems like a bit of double standards in this statement.

I do think he needs to tone it down a bit though and hope that he does. He does seem intent on pushing the boundaries of on court behaviour. That said a lot of the names people speak highly of on here (e.g. McEnroe, Connors, Hewitt) were not exactly PC but it didn't seem to affect their popularity too much or their ability to compete at the top of the game.

socal1976 wrote:

laverfan wrote:I like the Kyrgios/Hewitt combination. Hewitt can help Kyrgios mature and keep his focus while pursuing greater glory.

I also like Thiem in the younger crop, and he has a better head on his shoulders than Kyrgios does right now.

I'd prefer Lendl. I think Lendl is a bigger meaner version of Hewitt. I think psychologically Hewitt being an aussie might make it too easy for him. I like to think of Lendl being sort of version of the cruel eastern master like Pei Mei in Kill Bill, and that this could be a good thing for Nick. Where he actually has to earn his respect.

I never forget the repercussions when McEnroe failed to acknowledge the subtle, almost imperceptible nod of acknowledgement Ivan gave him. The guest box was a bloodbath.

Calder106 wrote:

legendkillarV2 wrote:I don't see an issue as per se as Nick being a future world number 1. Yes the guy is a naughty naughty boy, I don't think he has the marriage of talent and charisma going for him at the moment. 

Being foul mouthed for sake of insulting isn't my cup of tea, but probably appeals to the chavs and gobshites of this world.

Seems like a bit of double standards in this statement.

I do think he needs to tone it down a bit though and hope that he does.  He does seem  intent on pushing the boundaries of on court behaviour. That said a lot of the names people speak highly of on here (e.g. McEnroe, Connors, Hewitt) were not exactly PC but it didn't seem to affect their popularity too much or their ability to compete  at the top of the game.

So someone being foul mouthed for the sake of it and that appealing to a group of people is double standards?

I'd like an explanation for that.

Would one of the words you used not be described as foul mouthed if Krygios used it ?

Not really. 

Then it's interpretation and meaning. Certainly for me the e always lessened the tone as to which the forum must feel the same as it isn't filtered.

Oh well we will have to agree to differ on on that then.

Sorry legendkiller, he's got you there!

Don't see how, but hey ho.

He's good but not #1 material in my book, too inconsistent and prone to blow ups. He's also overrated...in a relative #1 sense. Once guys get used to his style, very whippy FH and short standby BH DTL, he'll not have it as easy. Plus at 6'4 movement is always going to be an issue vs guys like Djokovic.

In their handling of Kyrgios I suspect that the ATP will be keeping a weather eye on what their sponsors and potential sponsors think, and what the families of players on the Junior tour think.

Until the Fedal era tennis coped with a fair bit of 'bad boy' rivalries and antics and I'm not sure that there's no room for a return. I suspect that the main reason for it being so much less than the past is that the players themselves are more professional and appreciate that it's a distraction from the serious business of winning. Federer himself was a gobshite when younger.

The main reason we don't see as much bad boy behavior is because of shot spot. The linesman were really bad back in the day and there was no challenge method it was enough to drive a sane man insane.

I think the corporatization will bring the tolerance way down compared to what we saw in the 80s. Tennis I think is not as ready as we assume for a hip hop tennis champion