2018 Australian Open, Melbourne - ATP GRAND SLAM

[Moxie]

Again you guys are missing the point. I'm not saying these guys aren't fierce competitors or that they don't relish challenges but if you think they prefer a much lesser chance to win just so they can feel extra challenged I think you're just wrong. Like you said, they play who is in front of them. That USO Rafa won last year counts the same as the 2913 USO when he beat Novak. The 2009 RG doesn't count any less since it was Sod in the finals.

Point taken, but the other point is that we don't really know. We don't know how much they feel like 'Let me at him!' Surely, though, they spend their careers mentally preparing the play the best one. They can't afford not to. If they get an easier day at the office, sometimes, I'm sure it's a bonus. Same for all of us.

 

[mrzz]

I always thought Kyrgios was better than Zverev, technically speaking.

With all due respect, technically speaking? Apart from the serve, technically what does Kyrgios better not only than Zverev, but better than any top 50 (or even top 100) player? The answer is nothing.

Kyrgios is a clutch player, which is a giant asset, and all credit to him. He is big, strong, and fast. And has very quick reflexes. But his lack of technique is glaring. I bet he knows that quite well, as he seems to be a smart guy.

I am answering to your post, but I am actually answering to whole flow of comments about Kyrgios, and I promised myself that I would keep out of this conversation. My honest opinion is that most people in fact never ever saw an entire Kyrgios match, maybe just the ones against their favorite players. It seems that all talk derives from the (very short) highlight clips out there.

 

[Federberg]

Point taken, but the other point is that we don't really know. We don't know how much they feel like 'Let me at him!' Surely, though, they spend their careers mentally preparing the play the best one. They can't afford not to. If they get an easier day at the office, sometimes, I'm sure it's a bonus. Same for all of us.

Are you sure we don't really know though? At the start of the tournament these guys are being asked questions about their chances to win. No one's asking them about their chances to play their rivals. There is a implied understanding that they have a singular priority. Win the tournament

 

[DarthFed]

Main issue with Roger so far in this tournament is being way too passive on the return. That and the backhand is what made him the best player last year.

 

[DarthFed]

He breaks out of nowhere to win the 2nd set, hit a few nice winners. Overall solid performance, looks more energetic than he did against Struff.

 

[Moxie]

With all due respect, technically speaking? Apart from the serve, technically what does Kyrgios better not only than Zverev, but better than any top 50 (or even top 100) player? The answer is nothing.

Kyrgios is a clutch player, which is a giant asset, and all credit to him. He is big, strong, and fast. And has very quick reflexes. But his lack of technique is glaring. I bet he knows that quite well, as he seems to be a smart guy.

I am answering to your post, but I am actually answering to whole flow of comments about Kyrgios, and I promised myself that I would keep out of this conversation. My honest opinion is that most people in fact never ever saw an entire Kyrgios match, maybe just the ones against their favorite players. It seems that all talk derives from the (very short) highlight clips out there.

That is your prejudice speaking, I think, and I say that most respectfully. I've watched a lot of Kyrgios' matches, and not just v. Nadal or etc. It's a matter of opinion. That happens. Our old buddy Cali refused ever to admit that Nadal was "talented." "Talent" is very difficult to quantify. You see lack of technique in Nick and I see astonishing fast-twitch reflexes and creativity. Time will tell what he makes of it, but you can't really tell others that if they only watched enough, they'd see what you're seeing. He's polarizing, and people see him very differently.

 

[Federberg]

With all due respect, technically speaking? Apart from the serve, technically what does Kyrgios better not only than Zverev, but better than any top 50 (or even top 100) player? The answer is nothing.

Kyrgios is a clutch player, which is a giant asset, and all credit to him. He is big, strong, and fast. And has very quick reflexes. But his lack of technique is glaring. I bet he knows that quite well, as he seems to be a smart guy.

I am answering to your post, but I am actually answering to whole flow of comments about Kyrgios, and I promised myself that I would keep out of this conversation. My honest opinion is that most people in fact never ever saw an entire Kyrgios match, maybe just the ones against their favorite players. It seems that all talk derives from the (very short) highlight clips out there.

I sort of see where you're going with this. His shots don't look fluid. His backhand in particular always seems like it's ever so slightly mis-timed, so instead of really cracking it he just gets it back deep. But that's what makes him so interesting. If you watch him often enough you realise that's really just his style. I think the only thing Zverev has on Kyrgios is mentality. Kyrgios is so much better with his movement it's not even funny. I'm with you about his matches. They're rather boring if he's not playing one of the top guys. You know who he reminds me of? Murray.. and I'm not even sure I can explain why

 

[Moxie]

You know who he reminds me of? Murray.. and I'm not even sure I can explain why

That's funny: generally disgruntled on-court demeanor. Occasionally playing possum. Bag of odd tricks. Wearing the mantle somewhat uncomfortably. I could see it.

 

[Federberg]

That's funny: generally disgruntled on-court demeanor. Occasionally playing possum. Bag of odd tricks. Wearing the mantle somewhat uncomfortably. I could see it.

Lol! I don't know why I couldn't figure that out myself!

 

[brokenshoelace]

I missed the Kyrgios match last night so catching up some highlights. He's looking pretty focused and zoned in.

Definitely Nadal's biggest obstacle before the final. He's sort of worrying me.

 

[atttomole]

Gasquet is going after Roger's backhand whenever he can

With all due respect, technically speaking? Apart from the serve, technically what does Kyrgios better not only than Zverev, but better than any top 50 (or even top 100) player? The answer is nothing.



Kyrgios is a clutch player, which is a giant asset, and all credit to him. He is big, strong, and fast. And has very quick reflexes. But his lack of technique is glaring. I bet he knows that quite well, as he seems to be a smart guy.

I am answering to your post, but I am actually answering to whole flow of comments about Kyrgios, and I promised myself that I would keep out of this conversation. My honest opinion is that most people in fact never ever saw an entire Kyrgios match, maybe just the ones against their favorite players. It seems that all talk derives from the (very short) highlight clips out there.

I beg to differ. I like Kyrgios and I have watched many of his matches. Aside from the serve, Kyrgios can hit big forehands and he has a good backhand. Ha can hit those shots from pretty much any place on the court. I think he can still improve his net play and volleying. Those will come as he accumulates more experience. As a young player, there is no doubt that there is room for improvement in all facets of his game. And if he can be more focused, he will be a top player. In my opinion, his attitude could be his biggest undoing.

Having said that, the same applies to Zverev, who I think is also a potential top player.

 

[Federberg]

Definitely Nadal's biggest obstacle before the final. He's sort of worrying me.

would that be a semi-final? If it's that on one side and Federer Djokovic on the other I'll be spending a lot of time in the toilet

 

[brokenshoelace]

Still a little too much rust for my liking on Djokovic game. Confirmed though that at least the service speed has not suffere as a result of the serve change.

Agreed, but the draw has really opened up super nicely for him. He'll be in the semis.

 

[kskate2]

While discussing the merits of competition, rivals and winning, Roger has dismantled Richie in the battle of the one-handers

 

[mrzz]

That is your prejudice speaking, I think, and I say that most respectfully. I've watched a lot of Kyrgios' matches, and not just v. Nadal or etc. It's a matter of opinion. That happens. Our old buddy Cali refused ever to admit that Nadal was "talented." "Talent" is very difficult to quantify. You see lack of technique in Nick and I see astonishing fast-twitch reflexes and creativity. Time will tell what he makes of it, but you can't really tell others that if they only watched enough, they'd see what you're seeing. He's polarizing, and people see him very differently.

We can ping pong this all day, as I think that in your case is the bias speaking. Believe me, I made a giant effort to watch his matches with an analytic eye -- judging shot for shot. Yes, Cali failed to see Nadal's talent (even if he later backtracked in a lot of points), but in my defense you can see that I don't use the world "talent" anymore precisely because it is too general a notion, and I recognize his talent of clutch play, and his talent on serve.

About your phrase on technique and reflexes... well, I explicitly appreciated his quick reflexes. But it is not one thing or the other... I am perfectly ok with the fact that he has quick reflexes and poor technique.

Yes, I cannot tell how much others saw him playing, but I can tell my opinion that it seems to me they have seen just the odd highlights clip. I stand by that comment.

That he is polarizing there is no question. Scoop called that shot long ago, and while I respectfully disagree with a lot of over-enthusiastic posts, I agree 100% about this...

 

[brokenshoelace]

would that be a semi-final? If it's that on one side and Federer Djokovic on the other I'll be spending a lot of time in the toilet

Yeah. This first week has been somewhat slow on the men's side, and Zverev + Wawrinka being out weakens the bottom half of the draw, and by extension, the quality of some quarter finals, but the semis are shaping up to be amazing. Still some ways to go though,

 

[atttomole]

Main issue with Roger so far in this tournament is being way too passive on the return. That and the backhand is what made him the best player last year.

True. And that is a bit worrying because he will need to return aggressively if he wants to break serve against the other top players.

 

[mrzz]

Finally seeing some real Federer playing...

 

[Federberg]

Gasquet is going after Roger's backhand whenever he can

I beg to differ. I like Kyrgios and I have watched many of his matches. Aside from the serve, Kyrgios can hit big forehands and he has a good backhand. Ha can hit those shots from pretty much any place on the court. I think he can still improve his net play and volleying. Those will come as he accumulates more experience. As a young player, there is no doubt that there is room for improvement in all facets of his game. And if he can be more focused, he will be a top player. In my opinion, his attitude could be his biggest undoing.

Having said that, the same applies to Zverev, who I think is also a potential top player.

I think the difference is that with Zverev it's mental and physical stamina holding him back at the moment, as well as a need to develop in match strategic thinking. For me with Kyrgios it's attitude and refining his front court skills as you pointed out. I'm not sure there's anything Kyrgios won't end up being good at technically. Zverev could do with some serious volleying practice, that doesn't seem so natural for him at the moment, whereas with Nick you know he can do it, he just needs the repetition

 

[DarthFed]

Roger's forehand has been pretty crappy this tournament too. Also seeing some of the old awful approach shots he used to hit. He is going to have to step it up in the second week.