2018 Australian Open, Melbourne - ATP GRAND SLAM

[Federberg]

Me too. It didn't encourage me to start throwing my tennis racquet around either because it was against my principles & I was too mature for that. I knew it was wrong so didn't do it. I don't worry about things like that either. Some people are influenced a lot by other people, others aren't so much. My point is that for the people who are easily influenced by it, it does set a bad example. For people who know it's wrong so don't do it, it doesn't influence them at all. For people who'll do anything to get their own way, it's tempting.

I just don’t see much evidence that many people went the Mac way. Even the bad actors we’ve seen since playing top level tennis seemed to have their own unique issues. Certainly didn’t see people doing it on public courts. Worrying about evil influence just seems overblown as a concern to me. Just my opinion

 

[Horsa]

I know. McEnroe's famous "chalk flew up!" I can't help it. I love John McEnroe. One thing I will say: if anyone things they should take his lead, they are mostly wrong. McEnroe was able to convert negative energy into power. Most players just waste their own time and energy with it. (See: Safin, Marat; Murray, Andy; Kyrgios, Nick.)

Exactly. Just because 1 person does something & gets away with it doesn't mean everyone else should though some people use this as a way to get what they want & take advantage of the fact that "he did it & got away with it so I should be able to too" but that's the wrong attitude & people should stick to their values.

 

[Horsa]

I just don’t see much evidence that many people went the Mac way. Even the bad actors we’ve seen since playing top level tennis seemed to have their own unique issues. Certainly didn’t see people doing it on public courts. Worrying about evil influence just seems overblown as a concern to me. Just my opinion

O.K. I've seen no evidence of it either but I was just saying that's the way some people could see things. That is your opinion. You've got a right to it like I've got a right to mine. I respect your opinion. I don't disagree with it by the way. You respect my right to have an opinion too. :0)

 

[Moxie]

Exactly. Just because 1 person does something & gets away with it doesn't mean everyone else should though some people use this as a way to get what they want & take advantage of the fact that "he did it & got away with it so I should be able to too" but that's the wrong attitude & people should stick to their values.

That's not really my point. It's not about people getting away with bad behavior. It's that they waste their own effort with it. A few people were able to channel their own anger and bad behavior into good results. Ilie Nastase was one, and Conners was, in a big way. It's an art, if perhaps a dark one, and most can't pull it off. I don't object to bad on-court behavior so much for it's own sake. It can be entertaining. But it generally is detrimental to the player who's doing it, so I find it non-productive.

 

[Horsa]

That's not really my point. It's not about people getting away with bad behavior. It's that they waste their own effort with it. A few people were able to channel their own anger and bad behavior into good results. Ilie Nastase was one, and Conners was, in a big way. It's an art, if perhaps a dark one, and most can't pull it off. I don't object to bad on-court behavior so much for it's own sake. It can be entertaining. But it generally is detrimental to the player who's doing it, so I find it non-productive.

O.K. I see your point. I didn't see your comment about endeavour to start with. I must need new specs soon. If I don't answer some points immediately it's because I didn't see them, not that I'm ignoring them or don't understand them. It is entertaining though.

 

[herios]

I am happy that Grigor came through.

 

[I.Haychew]

I actually enjoyed watching his tantrums. It made the matches more interesting in my opinion. It did, however set a bad example to others & it under-mined authority which is the wrong thing to do. Authority is there for a reason. We need to respect it.

Sans the first two points, I agree. In my opinion, it depends on what you define as "interesting" in a sporting event. Temper trantrums/emotional displays in tennis or the game itself? Endzone celebrations/sack dances in football or the game itself? Chest pounding/staredowns after a dunk in basketball or the game itself? I'm a "the game itself" guy. I don't need the fluff in order to be entertained. Give me a Barry Sanders touchdown over any of these pre-orchestrated touchdown endzone choreographies.

 

[Horsa]

In my opinion, it depends on what you define as "interesting" in a sporting event. Temper trantrums/emotional displays in tennis or the game itself? Endzone celebrations/sack dances in football or the game itself? Chest pounding/staredowns after a dunk in basketball or the game itself? I'm a "the game itself" guy. I don't need the fluff in order to be entertained. Give me a Barry Sanders touchdown over any of these pre-orchestrated touchdown endzone choreographies.

I like seeing both. I like seeing players work very hard, do their best & win but I also find the tantrums interesting. I see what you mean though. For someone who just wants to see the games all these tantrums just waste time & they'd rather just cut to the chase. If there were less of these tantrums, less time would be wasted on 1 game which would mean more could be shown.

 

[britbox]

Sans the first two points, I agree. In my opinion, it depends on what you define as "interesting" in a sporting event. Temper trantrums/emotional displays in tennis or the game itself? Endzone celebrations/sack dances in football or the game itself? Chest pounding/staredowns after a dunk in basketball or the game itself? I'm a "the game itself" guy. I don't need the fluff in order to be entertained. Give me a Barry Sanders touchdown over any of these pre-orchestrated touchdown endzone choreographies.

You still got VHS Chewy?

 

[I.Haychew]

You still got VHS Chewy?

Beta. Just kidding! I do still have a VHS player in a closet somewhere, though. Ever notice how a lot of people say that they're gonna "tape" a TV show?

 

[brokenshoelace]

I don't care much for Mac as a player, but Jesus is he an awful commentator.

 

[I.Haychew]

I don't care much for Mac as a player, but Jesus is he an awful commentator.

I liked his game, but I hated his on-court demeanor. I agree that he is an awful commentator.

 

[brokenshoelace]

So I just watched Nick vs Dimitrov, great match, obviously. Kyrgios really has some point construction issues. As talented as he is, the fact that his backhand is so "slappy" makes it difficult for him off that wing, as he can't set things up to run around the next shot and use his inside out forehand (maybe developing a solid slice would help). Furthermore, as good as his forehand is, his rally forehand is actually fairly pedestrian and occasionally spinny/loopy, which again, doesn't compliment his power game too well.

Dimitrov is playing really well though. Very impressive.

 

[britbox]

So I just watched Nick vs Dimitrov, great match, obviously. Kyrgios really has some point construction issues. As talented as he is, the fact that his backhand is so "slappy" makes it difficult for him off that wing, as he can't set things up to run around the next shot and use his inside out forehand (maybe developing a solid slice would help). Furthermore, as good as his forehand is, his rally forehand is actually fairly pedestrian and occasionally spinny/loopy, which again, doesn't compliment his power game too well.

Dimitrov is playing really well though. Very impressive.

It was interesting to watch the contrast in styles... Kyrgios more of a "who dares wins" philosophy but if you're playing percentages then Dimitrov is the solid default choice. I thought they both played well. I'm not sure the end figures but Kyrgios won more points in the match up until the last breaker at least... but as soon as a rally unfolded you generally expected Dimitrov to win it more often than not.

Kyrgios has a murderous inside out forehand... but you're right on the rally shot and I'm thinking it might be more footwork/prep as sometimes it seems he's hitting the ball so late.

 

[Federberg]

It was interesting to watch the contrast in styles... Kyrgios more of a "who dares wins" philosophy but if you're playing percentages then Dimitrov is the solid default choice. I thought they both played well. I'm not sure the end figures but Kyrgios won more points in the match up until the last breaker at least... but as soon as a rally unfolded you generally expected Dimitrov to win it more often than not.

Kyrgios has a murderous inside out forehand... but you're right on the rally shot and I'm thinking it might be more footwork/prep as sometimes it seems he's hitting the ball so late.

I used to think that too mate, but it's not. It really is his style. Seems like Australia has encouraged some fairly unorthodox players in recent years. His shots are deceptive, and are actually much better than one things. I was having this conversation with @mrzz yesterday. It looks like faulty technique but it's a style thing. When he's in locked in though... jeepers, he's almost unstoppable. I think he's getting closer and closer to an emergence, and when he does I would actually favour him to be a dominant number one over the rest of the new breed. Well... him or Shapo

 

[britbox]

I used to think that too mate, but it's not. It really is his style. Seems like Australia has encouraged some fairly unorthodox players in recent years. His shots are deceptive, and are actually much better than one things. I was having this conversation with @mrzz yesterday. It looks like faulty technique but it's a style thing. When he's in locked in though... jeepers, he's almost unstoppable. I think he's getting closer and closer to an emergence, and when he does I would actually favour him to be a dominant number one over the rest of the new breed. Well... him or Shapo

I think he'll have his time on top of the pile at some stage too... but not sure he'd have the mindset to be dominant over a lengthy period. I'm seeing him as more of a Safin type character (albeit tougher mentally in matchplay) - not the kind of guy who's going to mesh mentally well with having that target on his back and the relentless stress that goes with it.

 

[Federberg]

I think he'll have his time on top of the pile at some stage too... but not sure he'd have the mindset to be dominant over a lengthy period. I'm seeing him as more of a Safin type character (albeit tougher mentally in matchplay) - not the kind of guy who's going to mesh mentally well with having that target on his back and the relentless stress that goes with it.

Ah... I think I know why you say that, but here's why I disagree. Safin was basically a guy who loved life, and tennis was what he did. I don't think he ever really committed to it. Kyrgios is different to me, I feel that he actually wants it, but his head keeps getting in the way. There isn't something else out there that he would rather be doing. You only had to look at Safin's box to see what he would rather be doing, and frankly I'm not sure I would have the will to argue against his predilections For me, I think with Nick it could just click all of a sudden, and if that's the case he'll be a handful. He has both the ability to blow guys off the court and just to play smothering tennis

 

[10isfan]

The London tabloids had various nicknames for McEnroe:
the mouth that roared
merchant of menace
the incredible sulk.

 

[mrzz]

Dimitrov looks the sharper today, but I do hope Nick makes a match of it, as in not going down in straights, even if tight ones. He's got a lot at stake in making a solid showing here. Not least of which is @mrzz's opinion of him. Oh, and then there are all of those folks at ESPN who picked him to play the final v. Roger.

Well, the folks picked him to play the final and I picked him to lose on round 3. They were far more wrong than me... I won't even ask about you guys, but, anyway, I'll show the courtesy of not answering back with a " ".


No, I will just .


What bothers me is that I actually like Kyrgios. If I had to chose one guy from the top 100 to share a court and hit a few balls, he would be on the short list. I like his attitude, his clutch play, and his appreciation for his fellow players.

Having said that, I saw two of his matches in this AO. Tsonga's and this. He could well have lost to Tsonga, who gifted all the tiebreaks. He actually played better than that against Dimitrov, and he is indeed improving. But he still loops most of the balls back in play. He has guts, but he is smart., he knows he cannot do much better than that. The difference between him and a player with great ground strokes is that those players are able to attack almost every ball. The obvious reason why Kyrgios fires just a handful of those insane winners per match is that he needs a very convenient ball to hit them. For every powerful forehand he fires, a Wawrinka, a Verdasco, and even a Rublev would have fired 10, to say the least.

As @Federberg mentioned Kyrgios has indeed an unorthodox style (which is one more thing I do like). -- But, sorry, unorthodox style is not a "superior talent" or skill. It is just different (and fun to watch, I never denied that). If he wants to improve his results, he needs to improve the fundamental aspects of his game. One thing he does quite well, which is improving by the day -- and I don't see anyone mentioning (what the hell are you people looking at?) is his side spin. He uses it well for defensive purposes, and also to attack short balls on the middle of the court -- something he struggled before.

The guy has a future, no doubt. But, hell, to compare him with big 3 (a lot of people have done that), sorry, it is too much. Now I should insert some final, balanced comment to show how reasonable and understanding I can be. But, no, is much more fun to remind everyone that the guy most of you picked to make the final lost (again) in the first week. But don't worry, stopped clocks, your time is gonna come.

 

[El Dude]

Grigor showed a degree of maturity in that match that really speaks well of him, and makes me optimistic for his next few years. He was able to hang in there when Kyrgios had the momentum, keep pace, and the push on the pedal and win when it most mattered. In a way it reminded me a bit of Rafa, who I've seen do that to Roger or Novak.

Anyhow, Grigor-Rafa should be epic.