These days, when Novak Djokovic loses, the tennis world takes notice. That would be due in part to the fact that he has won the last three Grand Slams. Also because when he gets on a roll, he’s as close as tennis-possible to unbeatable (if you need proof, look at his 2015 season). And Novak Djokovic just lost in two lackluster sets to Philipp Kohlschreiber, a player to whom he had not lost in a decade. Seriously.
So when commentators and journalists watch the title holder of Wimbledon, the U.S. Open, and the Australian Open shank forehands like he hit them with his eyes closed…yes, they’re going to wonder if something is wrong. An illness or injury. An ingrown toenail. Sore eyebrow. Something. Anything. Because it’s just so bizarre.
Nick Kyrgios, another Kohlschreiber victim this week…well…he noticed the concern, and suffice it to say that he was NOT impressed. Consider exhibit A:
Lol yeah, something has to be wrong with him right? I lose to Kholi and get absolutely shredded ‘same old kyrgios’ how about the guy is just good? And he knows how to win matches? Hate this, why we always gotta kiss these guys when they lose 😂 https://t.co/4nwxBWUiQi
— Nicholas Kyrgios (@NickKyrgios) March 12, 2019
There is so much juicy goodness to unpack there…but let’s start with the obvious. Nick Kyrgios is no Novak Djokovic (which might be my biggest understatement this entire decade). Yes, Kohlschreiber has proven that he’s playing well in the desert, as he’s now 1-12 against world No. 1s. He was 0-11. And yes, I think it’s safe to say that Kyrgios’ second-round loss to Kohli had as much to do with the German playing well as it did Kyrgios playing…not well.
But come now. Kohli’s win over Kyrgios was only an upset in the strictest sense of the word, which is that NK is ranked higher. The truth of the matter is that nobody is shocked when Kyrgios loses. He could literally lose to anyone at any time for any reason or no reason at all. If I heard that Kyrgios lost to a qualifier ranked 575th in the world, my response would be, “Hmm. Okay, yeah. I can see it.” Want to know why his title in Acapulco was such big news? Because it’s surprising when he wins, not when he loses.
Tennis journalists are expected to be able to somewhat decently predict winners (though I’ll be the first to admit that ALL of us stunk up the place in IW. There is quite literally nothing left of the top half of the draw). But when Kyrgios is involved, a prediction of “hell if I know” is not only an acceptable answer, it is rather universally agreed upon. None of us know. We never know. I’m pretty sure Nick doesn’t, either. So he loses to Kohlschreiber? Yeah, that’s normal.
But for Novak Djokovic to lose to Kohlschreiber is so decidedly NOT normal that it pings on everyone’s radar. Indeed, Djokovic losing anytime is sort of not normal these days. He and Rafael Nadal are two of the most consistent players to ever pick up a racket. It’s not that he isn’t allowed to have a bad day at the office once in a while, it’s just that it happens so rarely that when it DOES happen, we all wonder why.
To be fair, I personally didn’t think Djoko looked sick or hurt in Tuesday’s match. I thought he looked rusty. And as he was back out on court with Fabio Fognini in a doubles match not two hours following his loss, it appears he was just playing crappy tennis. It happens. Still, I doubt Craig Gabriel (whoever you are) feels at all bad for wondering. I know I wouldn’t. NK hasn’t only been fined for lack of effort in the past, he was suspended for a few months. Sorry not sorry, Nick. You earned your reputation fair and square.
A few other things I should add. The first of which is that nobody was taking the mickey out of Kohli. He really HAS played well this week. And even when Nole the Shanker makes an appearance, it’s no guarantee that he’ll lose. Kohlschreiber kept his nerve (and his backhand) and he earned that upset, just as he did against Kyrgios. So kudos to him for staying the course.
Next, nobody is saying that Kyrgios isn’t a good tennis player. He IS good. He’s talented. Perhaps that’s why it’s so disappointing to watch him perform so far under his abilities. This is about his WANTING to be a tennis player, which is frankly in doubt a fair amount of the time. How can you be a professional athlete and then deliberately lose matches? It’s almost an unforgivable transgression in a sport in which players are struggling to grind out a living playing futures and challenger events.
Last, I kind of like the fact that NK has a….well…we’ll call it a healthy lack of hero-worship for Nadal and Djokovic-and that he isn’t afraid to say it loud and proud. Yes. I laughed. “Kiss these guys” indeed.
[polldaddy poll=10263432]
You can’t blame Nick because the only reason he was put on a pedestal was because he beat Rafa at Wimbledon in 2014 as a 19-year-old. At that time, he had nothing to lose so he simply went for a winner on every shot. He was suddenly in the conversation along with the Big3 who had consistently been at the top of the game for well over a decade. The worst was Marcus Buckland describing Nick as a virtual #1 in his build-up to the final against Rafa, the real #1, in Beijing in 2017 only for Rafa to send him packing 61 62. Now that he is expected to blow everyone off the court and he can’t live up to that, he claims lack of interest in the sport.
One of the American commentators actually said recently that Kyrgios is the most talented player since Federer. Why wouldn’t that go to his head, when commentators show such lack of respect for Rafa and Djoker, two of the all-time greats, ever? Every pundit waits with bated breath to see where he is in the draw, because, according to them, he is the most feared player in any draw until he is sent packing. This is a player who turns 24 next month and has never ever been in the top 10. By age 24, Rafa and Novak had double-figure slams and titles to their names and Rafa was #1 at the age of 22 for the first time.
You cannot put the genie back in the bottle. Nick has already been declared an all-time great with 5 minor titles – four 250s and one 500 hence his arrogance.
NK is worshipping Federer. I would call it a sick worship.
I doubt NK worships Fed, he very much would like to beat Fed each time they meet.
I think he likes Fed’s style of play, ie relies heavily on the serve and finishes points quickly; that may be why Kyrgios doesn’t like playing on clay and think that clay court tennis is not real tennis! He dislikes Rafa and Djoko because both of them could stay in the point longer than most players could, and make him grind instead of allowing him to win or finish points quickly.
I feel that may be why when facing Rafa, he does all sorts of tricks to irritate or rattle Rafa, trying to break Rafa’s concentration, so that he can have better chances of winning. I think Rafa’s consistency in a match is a big challenge for many, Kyrgios included. I can see that once Kyrgios thinks he’s not going to win the match, he would either tank or lose interest in the match and so lose it quickly.
Luckystar MARCH 13, 2019 AT 5:17 PM,
Fed is Kyrgios’s role model:
http://www.tennis.com/pro-game/2015/09/kyrgios-federer-hes-one-role-model-i-have/56478/
I have never seen Nick as incredibly talented – he does what other professional players generally don’t do – go for broke on virtually every shot – it’s his only strategy – sometimes it works – but mostly it doesn’t. Every other top 50 player could likely do similar if they wanted to but they know it’s playing measured tennis and consistency that benefits in the long wrong. The top guys all pull off incredible shots every day – in practice – they know playing matches is a different game entirely. Kyrgios has made a career playing go for broke tennis and it’s why we never know if he will win or lose.
totally agree w/all that Cheryl has to say….and Kohl wins again!
KYRGIOS ON FEDERER: “HE’S THE ONE ROLE MODEL I HAVE”
That doesn’t say much for Fed, does it? Given NK’s bad behaviour.
Federer appeals to NK because he makes it LOOK easy. Where NK is clueless is that Fed actually does work at his game and plays smart, not lazy, tennis.
Otoh, I’m sure NK hates Rafa because Rafa makes it look hard. Runs, sweats, never takes a point off, trains hard, is incredibly disciplined, always polite and accomodating, and is NEVER EVER disrespectul to anyone.
Ramara, I had that exact same thought last night. Sure he likes Fed, because Fed looks like he relies only on talent. Rafa and Nole are talented, but it’s so obvious that they work harder than everyone else. I’m not surprised that somebody who does not like to work hard isn’t a fan.
First, Rafa lost to Kyrgios at Wimbledon because he could not read his serve. It was the first time he played him. It did get a lot of attention, but it was not what put Kyrgios on the map.
Second, he is extremely naturally talented. It is not about going for broke all the time. His serve is for real. His groundstrokes are for real. His problem is that he does not want to work hard and put in the effort required to play well consistently. He is also injury prone. But Cheryl pretty much nailed it when she described Kyrgios. He does not love the sport and does not appreciate what it means to have the opportunity to play professionally.
Kyrgios is on the way to becoming an asterisk in tennis. He has not realized his considerable potential.
Cheryl got it right – it is news when Novak loses early to a Kohls. When it comes to Kyrgios losing in the first round, it’s business as usual.
NNY, what put Kyrgios on the map?
nadline,
It was his antics, obscene behavior on court, his unquestionable game and talent. He did beat other top players. Rafa May have been the first, but he was certainly not the last.
If you are trying to say that beating Rsfa is a big deal, I agree. But there are others who did it and sunk into obscurity. The undeniable talent that the young Kyrgios has was a big part of what put him on the radar. That is why many predicted great things for him. He had the game to certainly succeed in this sport.
Kyrgios also got attention for really bad behavior like what he said about Wawrinka’s girlfriend that caused a fight in the locker room between him and Kyrgios. I think he hit on the map because of his attitude and behavior on court.
But I am not here to start an argument. If you believe that beating Rafa resulted in the attention, then so be it.
I guess with those three good men around, the only way to get attention is to be the bad guy!
I think Kyrgios is one attention seeker, and hence he enjoys playing in the big arenas with the top guys. He may feel that he’s as talented if not more talented than the big three or four hence he wants to beat them despite not putting in the hard work.
He thought Fed doesn’t need to put in the hard work to be where he is; and maybe he thinks talent > hard work to make it big in the sport. Perhaps he’s really not interested in playing tennis week in week out, I wonder if he’s playing Basketball, will he be more enthusiastic.
You got the wrong end of the stick. Go back and read my comment. I was adding to what Cheryl said that Kyrgios is comparing his loss to Khols with Khol beating Djoker, pointing out that he was made to believe he was on the same level as the B4 when he beat Rafa at Wimbledon in 2014. He was a WC then so he wasn’t a household name until he beat Rafa.
As you say, Rafa was the first of the B4 he beat so that’s when his claim to fame started. It could have been any one of the B4.
^^^^Reply to NNY
Nativenewyorker MARCH 13, 2019 AT 10:59 PM,
Kyrgios was NObody before beating Rafa at Wimbledon. Fedfans’ propaganda apparatus (i.e. anti-Rafa campaigners) made Kyrgios a hero after he defeated Rafa. (Like they made Söderling and Rosol heroes and have constantly written about their victories over Rafa on tennis websites since Söd and Ros beat Rafa).
You are so spot on. I enjoyed your article immensely.
Good article, Cheryl. I do think Kyrgios is fascinating to many (love him or (mostly) hate him) in part because he is the ultimate combination of bad-boy and talent.
He is probably the biggest bad-boy who anyone recognizes since Connors. And he is probably the most talented tennis player out there after Fed. Having a 6-6 record against the three greatest players ever, while basically not training, shows it. Is there any player, ever, who has a .500 record against those 3 with a total of 12 or more matches? I seriously doubt it.
When Kygrios comes to play he is as good as anyone. And because he is nearly 10-15 years younger than the big 3, there is no doubt in my mind that if he got his head screwed on straight he would dominate the game.
I doubt Kyrgios could dominate, because he belongs to the easily injured category, not unlike Delpo. To dominate, one has to be fit enough week in week out. I doubt players like Tsitisipas, Sasha, Shapo and FAA in time to come are just pushovers that an often injured Kyrgios could dominate over them.
To dominate, one needs hard work and fitness in addition to talent, and the discipline and motivation to take the weekly grind. I doubt also that Kyrgios would be able to win all the slams within a year to dominate over the field if he’s not going to play a full schedule.
^The injury problems won’t go away either, they are relevant to his style of play.
He’s very talented, but some of his technique is rubbish, he basically slaps the ball on his groundstrokes and that’s always going to be a problem.
Well, technically he is a bit unorthodox on his ground-strokes. But his BH is very solid and, I think very consistent when he wants it to be. His FH is unusual, too much arm, but that’s part of what generates the explosive power. His serve is beautifully fluid and a very compact motion for his height.
I don’t think the injury problems are related to his style of play. I think they’re mainly due to not training, maybe not even playing much, and then going and playing a tournament.
Marcelo Rios. Remember him? I don’t but from what I’ve heard he could have given NK lessons in being bad. Huge talent, never won a slam but did get to #1 briefly, I believe.
Connors could be a total jerk to other players but he took tennis very, very seriously and loved to play. Nothing like NK who is mostly nice to other players off court, at least. Connors still leads Federer by about 9 titles, I think.
Ramara MARCH 14, 2019 AT 5:59 AM
“Connors still leads Federer by about 9 titles, I think.”
______________________________________________________________________________________________________
That means Connors is the GOAT!
Connors’ many titles helps to put him pretty high on the GOAT list, actually.
https://www.ultimatetennisstatistics.com/goatList
Connors is the GOAT tongue in cheek , but its not really a joke. He had to contend with Borg, McEnroe, Lendl etc. and achieved a lot over a long career .Incredibly motivated and who could play like him.
Being 6-6 against the B3 is hardly a measure of greatness. Against the B3, he is 3:1 against Fed, 3:3 against Rafa and 2:0 against Djoko. The measure of his greatness is what he has actually achieved. He turned pro 6 years ago and has only won 5 minor titles. He’s never been in the top 10. To say he is the most talented since Federer is just ridiculous.
Agreed Nadline.
Kyrgios’ 6:6 vs the big four isn’t any proof that he’s so talented that he’s going to dominate the tour if he’s serious with his tennis career. He’s fortunate to meet the big three when they’re past their peak. The other players like Murray, Stan, Delpo for examples, have the misfortune of meeting the big three during their peak and so they’re beaten more often than not by the big three. Had Kyrgios met them during their peak and many times more, I doubt he would get a 50% win over them.
But Kyrgios doesn’t work a tenth of what they do,and still manages to beat them.
Interesting comment about the Big Three at their peak ,as if it happened all at the same time.In fact they’ve all had several peaks over long careers when standards change a lot .
How would Kyrgios 2019 v Federer 2006/2017 ? or was Djokovics peak 2011 or 2013 ? 2018 -9 hasn’t been too shabby for Nole either.
You want to compare Kyrgios to the big three and their respective peak? If he’s struggling to beat them now, do you think he’ll beat them in their peak? Don’t forget, Kyrgios beat Djoko in 2017 when Djoko was having his worst year since he became a prominent player. The Djoko of 2011/2015 would beat this Kyrgios comfortably, maybe like Rafa beating Kyrgios at Beijing 2017?
Big Al, why is Kyrgios not able to beat enough people, enough times to make it to the top 10, at least. He is turning 24 next month and has been on tour for 6 years, that’s long enough for a so-called talented player to achieve something.
Some players play kamikaze tennis when up against the top players, Dustin Brown, as an example. He’s beaten Rafa twice because he hit every ball for the fence and hoped for the best but he is still outside the top 200.
I remember a lot of noise about Tomic’s talents long before he was on the main tour but I’d never heard the name Kyrgios until he came on tour 6 years ago. Having been on tour for a whole season he still needed a WC to play at Wimbledon in 2014. How talented is that?
Corr
nadline10 MARCH 14, 2019 AT 9:39 AM
Against the B3, he is 1:3 against Fed, 3:3 against Rafa and 2:0 against Djoko.
Nothing to do with lack of talent,everything to do with lack of interest
All the pros are talented some more than others but Kyrgios is not manifestly one of the most talented.
Yes, Rios was definitely bad, but I don’t remember him having the kind of on-court antics that NK has. Yes, Connors took tennis seriously, but I would say he mostly took winning very seriously. But he was a total a**hole pretty much his whole career. If I remember correctly, he called a lineswoman an “abortion” during his 1991 run to the SF at the US open. That was when he was 39. I may have been overly influenced by what Agassi says about him in his autobiography, but it matches my childhood memories perfectly.
Such a lot of talent, even only he would just STFU and play tennis, he has the potential to be an amazing player, shame he lacks the self discipline to actually make that happen, way too volatile ….
I agree that Nik’s record against the top theee is nothing to write home about. I also think the idea that he is the most talented player since Fed, is total rubbish.
I mentioned Ernests Gulbis previously as an example of an extremely naturally gifted player. On any given day he could battle the top players if he was in a mood to play good tennis. But he was lazy and not motivated and he has done nothing in this sport and wasted his talent.
I also think of Marat Safin. He was incredibly talented, but his temperament did him in. He let his emotions get the better of him. Also, he bumped up against Fed when he was starting to dominate the game.
Fed would not be the player he is without work, practice and effort. Kyrgios is not willing to make that commitment. What he could do, what natural talent he has, means nothing without putting in the hard work. He has done nothing in this sport when it comes to his actual record. He should be in the top or top five, competing for Masters titles and slams. But he is nowhere near that. He will another might have been who will slip into obscurity. More often than not he only gets attention for his boorish behavior on court.
Yeah, great post NNY! 👍
Federer could well have been another Gulbis or Kyrgios ,it’s interesting what factors make the difference in a hugely successful or ordinary career.Talent or ability isn’t the only factor.
Rory McIlroy is regarded as hugely talented but he hasn’t won a major for four years.Other players are simply better
Great post NNY 🙂
Same old, same old, a player gets an amazing win, only to lose so tamely in the next round pftt ….
I’ve said this before: talent does not (obviously) necessarily lead to greatness. I don’t know what to say to someone who can’t see that Kygrios has insane talent. But of course talent is not enough to be the best. Hard work and the ability to apply yourself is required. Until and unless NK acquires those traits, he will stay where he is in the tennis world.
H’mm, I just watched a bit of Djoker’s presser and he definitely does sound like he had a cold, sniffles, something going on.
Hmm. The talent vs. hard work debate. I’ve been noodling that for a long time. Maybe I should write a blog post.
Please do! I’d love to read it.
I look forward to your blog Cheryl.
I look forward to your blog Cheryl.
Cheryl, I look forward to your blog on this subject but, how is tennis talent measured? It’s all very subjective. Here is one measure that ranks the players according to points given based on what, on this occasion, is deemed to be the measure:
GAME INSIGHTS
27 AUGUST 2018
Rafael Nadal: The greatest teen in men’s tennis history?
Published by Stephanie Kovalchik
Which male player hit the greatest heights in their teens? And how do the current generation compare? Game Insight Group investigates.
After Stefanos Tsitsipas became the youngest player to beat four top-10 players in a single event at the Rogers Cup earlier this month, it feels like an appropriate time to ask who has been the ‘Teenage GOAT’ in men’s tennis?
Using Elo rating*, an alternative to more traditional rankings aimed at giving a greater insight into a player’s performance ability, Game Insight Group has tracked the peak performances by male players in their teenage years.
The top 10 based on that stat are listed in the table below:
Player Peak teen Elo Year
1. Rafael Nadal 2500 2006, Roland Garros
2. Boris Becker 2424 1986, Paris
3. Novak Djokovic 2387 2007, Roland Garros
4. Bjorn Borg 2369 1975, Barcelona
5. Mats Wilander 2363 1984, Milan
6. Lleyton Hewitt 2319 2000, Scottsdale
7. Alexander Zverev 2315 2017, Montpellier
8. Andy Murray 2305 2007, Miami
9. Andrei Medvedev 2300 1994, Rome
10. Andre Agassi 2294 1988, Los Angeles
19. Roger Federer 2209 2001, Wimbledon
https://tennismash.com/2018/08/27/nadal-becker-greatest-tennis-teenagers/
I know this would appear as bias on my part but I googled the subject and this was what came up.
Me too 🙂