Nick Kyrgios is one win away from completing an epic run to the Abierto Mexicano Telcel title. The No. 1 seed couldn’t stop him; another multi-Grand Slam champion couldn’t stop him; the best server in tennis couldn’t stop him.
Now the last hurdle is second-seeded Alexander Zverev, who will go up against Kyrgios in a blockbuster final matchup on Saturday night. The head-to-head series stands at an even 3-3, but Zverev has won three of their last four encounters since losing to the Australian back-to-back in the Indian Wells-Miami double two years ago. They faced each other twice in 2018, with the German prevailing 6-2, 7-6(3), 6-2 in a Davis Cup rubber (on the road in Australia) and 6-4, 6-4 at the Miami Masters.
Zverev has to be considered the favorite once again based not only on his recent success at Kyrgios’ expense but also because of current form. Although the reigning Nitto ATP Finals champion started the season slow (lost to Milos Raonic in round four of the Aussie Open), he has been by far the most dominant performer this week in Acapulco. Zverev booked a spot in the title tilt with straight-set defeats of Alexei Popyrin, David Ferrer, Alex de Minaur, and Cameron Norrie.
Unsurprisingly, Kyrgios took a much more circuitous route through the bracket. The world No. 72 followed up a victory over Andreas Seppi by taking out Rafael Nadal, Stan Wawrinka, and John Isner all in dramatic three-setters. He even saved three match points from 6-3 down in a third-set tiebreaker to stun Nadal 3-7, 7-6(2), 7-6(6) in round two. Kyrgios also went the maximum distance with Isner on Friday, surviving 7-5, 5-7, 7-6(7).
“It was an amazing, fun match with John today,” Kyrgios commented. “I was pretty pumped because I knew there wasn’t going to be a lot of running. He’s a good mate of mine and has always been incredibly supportive. To go out and battle against him was a special moment for me.
“This is going to be an incredibly tough match (against Zverev). He’s an amazing player; very professional; ticks all the boxes. I grew up playing juniors with him, so I know him very well. It’s going to be a lot of fun.“
“I’m very happy to be in the final,” Zverev said after beating Norrie 7-6(0), 6-3 in the first semifinal. “That was the goal at the start of the week. This is so far a very special week for me and I hope I can continue it.”
This is, of course, a dangerous match for the world No. 3. The conditions suit Kyrgios well (just as they do for Zverev, for that matter) and he can see the finish line of what has been a grueling week, so he most likely won’t be in one of his foul moods–especially not on this big stage of a 500-point final against a marquee opponent. That is why this one will be competitive, but Zverev has much more left in his tank and he will also take confidence from having won five sets in a row against Kyrgios.
Pick: Zverev in 3
[polldaddy poll=10254022]
WWW?
Putting personalities to one side…attrition remains a large factor in tennis. Kyrgios has suffered more injury concerns than any other on tour and with his stooped bent-over posture those concerns will most likely continue.
“more injury concerns than any other on tour?” Have you been paying attention? More than Delpo, Nadal, Murray, Djokovic, Federer, Goffin, Monfils, Tsonga, Wawrinka, Berdych? In the immortal words of Johnny Mac: YOU CANNOT BE SERIOUS!
Nk was whining about not playing this tournament at all. He’s GOOD at whining. He’s terrible at doing the hard yards that help to prevent injuries. Anyway, he does not have injuries, he’s got aches and pains, mostly from playing AT tennis without training FOR it.
Kyrgios in three; the guy is just so lucky and he’ll beat Sasha in three tight sets again.
Kyrgios is a huge talent, be it natural or otherwise.
Interesting posts earlier comparing different types of talent , with Nadal being described as pugilistic, not sure what that means but it sounds pretty brutal. But, while I don’t find his physical game appealing, I can understand why most of his fans seem to be female.
Zverev in three
Wrong assumption about most of his fans being female. Look at the crowd at Acapulco, they supported Rafa more than anyone else and how many are males and how many are females??
Rafa’s game being more physical – and that’s because Rafa loves the tussle and the fight. I’m sure with a great serve, he’s more than capable of winning with short point tennis, too bad, his coach Toni didn’t concentrate on Rafa’s serve (and so not getting any help to improve Rafa’s serve from young, until 2010).
Perhaps, Toni felt that because Rafa loves/d the tussle, so he thought Rafa would not like playing short point tennis and so had not given much thought to the serve. I believe Toni once said that he would prefer Rafa to play like Fed, but Rafa played with such intensity that Toni said he would not want to stop him from playing that way.
There’re pros and cons about Rafa playing with such intensity and not helped by having a great serve – he has won and achieved so much despite not having a great serve and playing his unique brand of tennis; his dominance on clay is unparalleled. However, he often gets injured because he plays with such intensity and sustaining it throughout a match and match after match, not helped by his genetic foot issue. A great serve may cut down on the grinding and the injuries.
Those youngsters who had played against Rafa attested to that, ie he played with such intensity and would not let loose, it’s incredible. According to Rafa, his way of playing offensive tennis is to make things difficult for his opponents, and that’s suffocating for his opponents.
The most visible and vocal fans are female. Guys aren’t going to carry signs or scream “will you marry me?” (er, well, not most guys, lol) But Rafa has lots of fan support across both genders. Rafa and Roger are still the biggest tournament draws in tennis. And there’s plenty of guys who get selfies with him and post them online.
Exactly!
Lucky at 11.20 I meant his fans on here ,maybe Ive picked that up wrong and you’re all men !
After watching the final , I don’t agree that anyone in the big 4 is more talented than Kyrgios .The big difference with Nadal, IMO, is that NK is about short back swings and easy power , much easier on the eye .I wouldn’t compare him to Delpo either .
Of course, sheer talent isn’t enough if he cant improve his overall match consistency.
Zv in 3, although there will probably be 3 tb’s so really anything can happen.
Zverev in 1.
I’ve to say, among all of Kyrgios’ opponents so far, Rafa was the toughest; it’s just unlucky for Rafa that he had three MPs but couldn’t convert any. It’s no wonder Kyrgios played all his dirty tricks just to rattle and upset Rafa.
If I’m not wrong, Kyrgios once said that Rafa (maybe include Djoko here) isn’t playing real tennis; maybe to him, real tennis means playing short points and banging down all those big serves! He keeps saying that Rafa takes his own sweet time regardless of whether Rafa is serving or returning serves; Kyrgios wants to play fast pace tennis, perhaps Rafa’s slow pace really irritates him, making him very determined to beat Rafa all the time!
I think most of the young players these days want to play quick pace tennis, hence they come with big serves and big FHs and wish to win the point as quickly as possible, no wonder most of them have Fed as their idol. When Rafa’s generation of players are gone, I feel tennis will no longer played primarily at and from the baseline, but more inside the court with players wanting to end points quickly.
I see not only Rafa, but Monfils too, trying to shorten points by moving to the net more often these days. This will be the trend for many if not everyone, going forward. It’s all court tennis, not purely S&V nor solely baseline tennis. I think the courts are also being sped up these days to help cut down on the long rallying.
lucky,
Honestly, anything Kyrgios says about Rafa is just pure bs! Rafa has not had a problem with the shot clock. He has seemed to handle it well. Saying Rafa takes his time to return is an idiotic comment. He just does not seem to like Rafa. Kyrgios has zero class, so maybe he doesn’t understand someone like Rafa, who is a good sportsman and treats his opponents with respect.
For what it’s worth, I think the men’s game will change after Fed, Rafa and Novak retire. And I am not at all sure that will be a good thing. I am rooting for Zverev, but if Kyrgios has enough left in the tank, he could end up winning it.
For myself, Kyrgios is just trailer trash. I guess he decided that this would be a good time to try to win a tournament and move up in the rankings.
I think Kyrgios may just have enough in his tank to win the final. I doubt he doesn’t want to win the title to prove a thing or two. It makes me laugh when he said that Sasha is very professional, ticks all the boxes, it’s ironical coming from his mouth!
Going with Sascha. It’s a better story if Kyrgios wins, but it doesn’t seem like he could possibly have enough in the tank to do it.
Kyrgios doesn’t deserve to win the title because he’s motivated for the wrong reasons and IMO, he’s not that good and that’s why he doesn’t perform well in grand slams.
Zverev in 2 and a similar scoreline to Miami.
With Kyrgios, he so whimsical that he might win or lose depending on so many things that it’s completely unpredictable. He lives in the moment. There really doesn’t seem to be a bar for his behavior, except to do what pleases himself at the time. That was a great match with Monfils. Have to admit.
Kyrgios in 3. Been backing him the whole week, not sure why I’d quit now. He’s got the hunger to win
I didn’t see the match against Isner, but if Kygrios isn’t injured or totally worn out I’d put him as the favorite here. He’s playing great and there’s basically nothing he can’t do when he puts his mind to it. Most of his game besides his serve is under-rated, particularly his rallying ability from the baseline. He can be incredibly consistent when he wants to, especially on the BH. Overall he has more natural talent than anyone after Federer, and if he ever decides to put 100% effort into tennis he’s going to be the sport’s best player. Maybe that will never happen but maybe this is the start of it happening.
Excuse me, he ‘can be incredibly consistent’, how often? Definitely not throughout a match! And that’s the problem!
He just doesn’t have the patience to be rallying all day! Natural talent? What’s natural talent? I doubt he’s better than any of the big four and I also doubt that Fed is the best with natural talent to start with! Each of the big four comes with their own natural talent, hard to measure who’s the best with natural talent.
I think it’s utter nonsense to state that Kyrgios has more natural talent than the big four. Absurd! You know, it’s what you do with your takent that matters in the end, a guy whose ranking has slipped into the 70’s and has not won a Masters tournament or a slam. Kyrgios has not done anything in this sport except run off his big, nasty mouth.
I cannot get over the statements that get made here at times, when you look at the big four and see what they have achieved with their considerable natural talent along with hard work and dedication, you understand what it means to succeed in this sport.
Think about Ernests Gulbis, Talk about natural talent! But what did he do with it? Kyrgios will end up in the scrap heap of p,Ayers who had talent but never fully realized it.
I don’t know what happened with the above comment posted under the user name “Ana”. I was having trouble putting in my user name and then I got knocked out of the window I was in. But somehow it posted using the beginning few letters that were incorrect.
I wrote that comment, so it should be attributed to Nativenewyorker. I posted another comment when I though my first one never got posted. Sorry for any confusion.
Ha ha NNY, what a coincidence, that I also thought of Gulbis when this ‘natural talent’ topic is brought up.
Gulbis during his younger days, with all his talent, did mention that he want to win a slam to prove that he had the talent to do so even without putting in the efforts the way the big four did. We know what happened after that! Nothing, no slam for him!
I was wrong earlier on when I said Kyrgios may be more talented than any of the big four when I saw him hitting some crazy shots at ease. I made the mistake of assuming that the big four couldn’t do that judging by how they played, without taking into consideration that they won’t play tennis like Kyrgios because they’re more serious with their career than to risk playing hit or miss tennis. It’s only when they knew it’s do or die situation, that they allowed themselves to play some crazy shots, eg Djoko’s so called ‘lucky’ shot to save MPs vs Fed at the USO; Rafa during the third set of AO2014 final, when he knew he wasn’t winning so he just threw caution to the wind and hit freely.
To me, the trio of Rafa, Djoko and Murray have natural talent in abundance! I just want to bring up one aspect, that of ROS. They’re the TOP three in the ROS department esp during their heydays. There are many players who can hit big serves, but to be able to return well serves after serves, esp those big serves, is something special and that requires plenty of special talent.
It’s harder to find good returners of serves than good servers. The trio’s ROS talent has been underrated so often, when people concentrate so much on attacking tennis and hence the ability of serving great.
NK is very “talented”. He’s a sort of cosmic joke, given all that natural “talent” and none of the attributes real champions need.
Federer might have turned out like him – although certainly a nicer version – but he decided he didn’t like his image (he used to lose his temper easily), so he cut down on the tantrums and while his original major interest in tennis was shot making – he might have become a less athletic Monfils – he learned to get his game under control and WIN.
Yeah, and Monfils is also a natural talent, if he puts his mind into making it a serious career for himself, I’m sure he will do better than what he’s doing now. Instead, he spends most of his career being an entertainer in the sport, and often injured himself, esp after doing all the unnecessary running.
We see now that when he gets serious, he’s able to start winning title(s) and going deep in tournaments, just hope that he can persist and not going back to his old ways again.
For Kyrgios, maybe he’ll wake up and be serious one day like Monfils, until that really happens, I don’t think he’ll achieve anything great in the sport.
He does remind me of Monfils, so much talent but an entertainer at heart.
Er, well, ok, if you’re entertained by a tanking whiner who bad mouths his opponents and doesn’t give a damn for the people who PAID to see him.
People will always want to watch the controversial.
Anyone who watches tennis knows that it takes more than natural talent to succeed in this sport. I also disagree with this notion that Kyrgios has the most natural talent, The big four each have their own unique and special abilities. They also have the work ethic, dedication and commitment to being the best they can be. Natural talent only takes you so far. Remember Ernests Gulbis, anyone? I have seen too many guys come along and burn bright with natural talent, but who wound up on the scrap heap.
Kyrgios has done nothing special in this sport. Maybe he decided to play some decent tennis to get his ranking up out of the 70’s. His attitude stinks, he is a rude jerk on the court and has not cone close to realizing his potential. I think even mentioning him in the same sentence as any of the big four is a colossal insult.
Has been a wild week, for sure, but I like Zv in 2.
Obviously, the whole point of distinguishing natural talent from other attributes is to stress that talent is never enough. By saying that Kyrgios is the most talented player after Fed (McEnroe by comparison thinks he is the most talented of the last 10 years), I by no means make any prediction about his success long-term. He needs to get his head screwed on right for just a start, which is a long way short of having the mental toughness that the best players have.
But in terms of sheer natural talent and athletic ability, he is just about unique. You have to remember, the guy probably barely trains at all. He has open disdain for the sport. And he outright tanks in some matches. Yet he has a .500 record overall against the big three (6-6), many of those wins in big tournaments. There is no other player outside the top 10 (or maybe anywhere) who has that kind of record against them. You don’t get those kind of results without insane natural ability, which he has.
Ha ha, he played only twelve matches against those three, compared to say a Delpo, who played Fed alone more than 20 times! And Delpo had beaten Fed six times, ie equal to the total number of times Kyrgios had beaten the three!
Come on, you don’t have to big him up! What he has is a great serve plus his athleticism, and I’m sure he’s trained to play tennis. The basic strokes are there so it’s not like he comes untrained and yet could hit some crazy shots! It’s just that he doesn’t put in the effort in training hence once he’s being dragged into baseline wars, he couldn’t sustain it and so becomes impatient and most of the times resulting in errors. He can hit some wild shots to impress, just like Monfils; but that’s not enough proof that he’s more talented than say Rafa or Djoko or Murray ( and I don’t rank Fed any more talented than the trio, when the trio have his numbers, and even though Murray is now 11-14 vs Fed, he had led the H2H earlier on). Don’t forget too that the big three are all older now and have already past their peak even though they’re still ranked in the TOP five or six, so Kyrgios is lucky to meet them now than say in their peak or prime, unlike say Delpo or many others.
I see Coric also had beaten Fed and Rafa twice each; and now Tsitsipas has beaten both Fed and Djoko, are they more talented than say Rafa/Djoko/Murray??
And, Kyrgios is 1-5 against Murray! So, he’s 7-11 vs the big four, so he’s 0.389 vs the big four!
Tsisipas and Coric are two of the more talented young players out there, along with Zverev, Shapavolov and maybe a couple others. Kyrgios has more talent than any of them. His combination of power and movement is just about perfect, imo.
Nonetheless, he has two big minuses: his work ethic and being prone to injury. In his case (unlike, e.g Nadal), I’m pretty sure they go together, so that if he starts working/training harder he will become less susceptible to injury. You’ve seen in the past four matches what he can do against some of the world’s best players. If he can get his head screwed on straight and commit to playing tennis seriously, I see no reason why he can’t continue like that.
He’s at best a Delpo in the making imo. His height, his built tells me he’s more susceptible to injury like a Delpo. He’s not built like a Rafa, and you can’t change your body type. Rafa is born with good genes, look at his uncles and his father, they’re muscular, it runs in the family.
If you try changing your body type, it may have undesirable consequences; Murray for example is more the lanky type but he has chosen to build up his muscles to look more like a tank now, and his body now suffers and breaks down.
Not everyone can be like Rafa or plays like him. Kyrgios has his athleticism but he’s not built like a Rafa, he’s more like a Monfils, who can sprint around the court but can’t be a marathon runner, so he won’t be like the big four who are both sprinters and marathon runners all in one.
You keep saying Kyrgios is more talented than this or that player, but, theres no proof that he is, as his good results are at best ad hoc, if he’s so talented, then he should be winning more often despite not putting in the efforts; and I’m not even talking about the major events, more the 250s and the 500s events when most of the big three or four are not playing.
I find Tsitsipas at least as talented, if not more talented, because he has the court craft, the ability to know when to play what shot, and when to move in for the kill and when to hold back, and he has all the shots in the book. The coach can only teach you so much, it’s up to the player to go figure it out there on the tennis court, and Tsitsipas has applied all he learnt so well even as a 20 year old.
As for Kyrgios, he can hit some insane shots, not unlike Monfils, but when things get complicated, they can’t figure their way out, and that’s why they are not winning that many titles that their so called talent should enable them.
Strange comment about Rafa having good genes compared to Kyrgios , hasnt helped him avoid injury though.
Court craft is over-rated at the top level, lucky. Kyrgios has an easy power that no one his size has, especially on the serve and forehand. He easily hits second serves at 120 mph+ when he wants to, which is insane. He has great touch on the drop shot, even if he over-uses it sometimes.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m not a huge fan for the same reasons many others aren’t. But unlike Ramara, I do think people can change, and I’m hoping that he does.
That’s about all he has, I don’t see that as having more natural talent than the big four, or Tsitsipas! They have the complete package, Kyrgios doesn’t. Delpo has more easy power than Kyrgios, he could hit with easy power all day long even though he may not have Kyrgios’ deft touches.
You seem to think that only power and movement are considered as natural talent! Don’t you think the big four have much more on offer in addition to their power and movement (as their natural talent)?
Kyrgios is just like a Monfils, Monfils is even quicker than Kyrgios and he could also hit with power and serves big, but, does anyone consider Monfils as more naturally talented than the big four?
I think of natural talent as something mostly beyond one’s control, that one can’t improve. Raw athletic ability such as foot-speed and jumping ability, along with strength are some examples. In contrast, things like mental toughness and strategy, court craft, etc, are more susceptible to improvement, imo.
Anyway, natural talent is clearly not enough, though the big three have it spades (Murray less so, imo). Regarding comparisons, Delpo has at least as much power, of course (maybe not on serve, actually), but he is much less mobile than Kyrgios. Monfils may be a better comparison, and Tsisipas is virtually the same size as Kyrgios and has many of the same strengths, and a more elegant game, but not as much explosive power.
I just think for pure natural tennis ability, I can’t think of anyone with more. I would guess the big three would rather face any other player besides him (and themselves) in a big match (maybe Wawrinka in a slam for Novak).
Yes, foot speed and jumping abilities are natural abilities but you still can improve on them to some extent. Of course if you’re not born with them at all then there’s not much you can improve on.
I would say that court craft, though it can be trained to some extent, there are those who are exceptionally good at it. It’s just like some are exceptionally good at maths, some at music for examples, normal ‘journey man’ could still learn to do reasonably well to some extent, but they’ll never be excellent at them compared to some genius or some who are gifted with those talent.
Tsitsipas is exceptionally good at his court craft for a 20 year old, that to me is something rare. As I said earlier on, a coach can only do so much for the player, it’s up to the player himself to go out there to figure things out himself.
The big three are blessed with natural talent – their foot speed and footwork are exceptional; they’ve no shortage of physical power too; good reflexes etc and etc.
I also think that Murray is also blessed with natural talent – he’s naturally quick, has deft touches too, maybe not so much raw power.
@Joe Smith
But when “tennis experts” speak of “natural talent” they’re talking about shot makers. Richard Gasquet, for instance, was often referred to as a “natural talent”. Dimitrov too. Federer, of course. But Nadal never impressed anyone as a “natural talent”. He was world class as a junior, of course, but not a “natural talent”.
This is not to say that Kyrgios doesn’t possess exceptional natural talent, it’s just that I don’t think he’s better than the big three (and to certain extent Murray too), because, if they’re less blessed with natural talent than Kyrgios, they won’t get to 20 or close to 20 ( and counting) slams plus many Masters titles, especially when they’re playing in the same era, even with hard work and effort.
IF Kyrgios is serious with his career and puts in the effort, I doubt he’s able to get as many slams as any of the big three even if he plays in an era without them; and that’s because physically he’s not built for the grind, and it takes more than natural talent plus effort to be an ATG like them. He has to be fit, disciplined, motivated, dedicated and plays consistently well to win all those titles. He may be a multiple slam winner , but not when there are the big three there imo, hence my Delpo inference where slam achievements is concerned.
Kyrgios drop shot is killing Zverev. Nick is in the driver’s seat to win this tournament, even though it seems that there are about 13 people cheering for him in the stands.
and he’s done it, allez
Congrats to Nick Kyrgios on just his second ATP 500 title and first since 2016. A very solid match where he stuck to tennis. Incredibly clutch serving down the stretch, and a glimpse of what could be if it puts his mind to tennis.
A jerk who wins tennis matches? 🙂 Ah, well, Rafa is a firm believer in the human capacity for improvement. I am not.
and the winner is Luckustar who managed to write the word ‘Rafa’ 12 times in one post on the thread that is not Nadull related. congrats!
I wish Kyrgios would play like this all the time, he’d be no.1
Hard! He can’t win week in week out, and he’s fortunate that Rafa choked big time, if not he won’t even reach the QF. Don’t expect the TOP players to choke all the time when facing him. They’ll figure a way to beat him once they play him often.