2019 Men's Wimbledon Championships

[Moxie]

A big server who today really didn't serve anywhere near as well as he can. I reckon Tsonga will serve better than this though I don't expect him to win. Kyrgios today reminded me of Janowicz (who incidentally was scheduled to possibly return for Wimbledon but seems he hasn't made it back on tour yet from injury) when he played against Murray in that semi (forget the year and too lazy to check). He served well at times but it was way, way too predictable and he rarely mixed it up like Janowicz that year. Too many down the T. Needed to go for body serves to mix things up but didn't and the 2 tiebreaks Kyrgios played very poorly. I was expecting a better match today tbh. Kyrgios over hit a ton of backhands too. Nadal didn't need to do too much imo to win and the scoreline made it look closer than it really was given Kyrgios was really poor in both TBs.

Oh, please. Kyrgios served 71% for the match. You're just mad because he didn't win. And Nadal played a great TB in the 2nd, that wasn't NK. The 2nd was terrible, though. He was cooked by then.

 

[Front242]

Oh, please. Kyrgios served 71% for the match. You're just mad because he didn't win. And Nadal played a great TB in the 2nd, that wasn't NK. The 2nd was terrible, though. He was cooked by then.

That goes without saying or maybe I'm just mad in general ? 71% is all fine and well but he didn't serve well when he needed to, ie the tiebreaks. No point keeping things level till the TB and then playing well below par there. Btw, I wasn't expecting him to win from the moment I saw how slow the courts are playing.

 

[herios]

There is simply no comparison between Tsonga's FH and Kyrgios FH. No comparison. For one simple reason, and it really baffles me how people refuse to see it. Kyrgios can only hit hard when the ball is high enough -- he needs to hit a flat shot, facing forward or slightly downwards. Otherwise he loops the ball to the back of the court. Tsonga can play hard almost every single shot (actually, he goes for it too much), he has the talent/technique to do that. He is a completely different player than Kyrgios. It should be a good match.

You know I am on the same page with you when it comes to Kyrgios. I simply don't understand why so many posters here are blindsided and do not see the weaknesses in his game.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

Oh, come on. Tsonga hasn’t beaten a Top 10 player in almost two years (yes, I checked), and that was Zverev, which almost doesn’t even count.

But, Tsonga got a set off of Federer at Halle. So, I would not write him off. May be he is on the verge of making a come back.

 

[mrzz]

You know I am on the same page with you when it comes to Kyrgios. I simply don't understand why so many posters here are blindsided and do not see the weaknesses in his game.

Yes, his inability to transition from neutral rallies to offense cost him dearly today (as always). He might connect the occasional highlight, but misses idiotic ones the other 90% of the time.

Anyway, I am repeating what I have posted before and I kind of kick myself when I do that.

In the end, I "like" Kyrgios, in the sense that I think that he has a very effective game plan -- all his antics and strange tactics give him results, even if inconstant.I think he got slightly better in some areas (CC forehand), but the serve is worst. Less consistency on the first and considerably weaker second.

 

[mrzz]

But, Tsonga got a set off of Federer at Halle. So, I would not write him off. May be he is on the verge of making a come back.

I saw Tsonga play in Halle, not only against Federer. Grass court wise, very few people playing better than that around at the time.

 

[kskate2]

Wimbledon Results for Round 2 Day 4 - Thursday, July 4, 2019

 

[Carol]

I saw Tsonga play in Halle, not only against Federer. Grass court wise, very few people playing better than that around at the time.

If you were waiting for the Kyrgios win I think that you also will very disappointing for Tsonga loss, hater!

I'm Stakhovsky-fan

STAKHOVSKYFAN

STAKHOVSKYFAAAN!!!!!!!!

 

[Horsa]

If you were waiting for the Kyrgios win I think that you also will very disappointing for Tsonga loss, hater!

I'm Stakhovsky-fan

STAKHOVSKYFAN

STAKHOVSKYFAAAN!!!!!!!!

"You cannot be serious." calling Mrzz. a hater.

I'm a McEnroe-fan

MCENROEFAN

MCENROEFAAAN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!.

 

[El Dude]

You know I am on the same page with you when it comes to Kyrgios. I simply don't understand why so many posters here are blindsided and do not see the weaknesses in his game.

I can't speak for anyone else, but it isn't that I don't recognize that he has weaknesses, it is just that I think his main weakness is...him, his psychology. If he was more psychologically stable and focused, he'd be a top 10 player, at least a prime Berdych/Tsonga, if not a del Potro level talent. That isn't a perfect player, not a big three, but someone who could win multiple big titles, even Slams.

One thing that sets the big three apart, even Andy, is that they have no major weaknesses. They have weaker aspects of their game relative to other aspects and each other, but they're pretty much good at everything...or were, in their primes. I suppose Andy's serve, especially his second serve, is sub-par, and Rafa has had phases in which his serve was nothing to write home about, and of course Roger's lapses in his second act, and Novak's weird "smash yips," but all relatively minor.

I think the allure of Kyrgios is that he's a dynamic, fun player to watch. He does a few things really, really well - and is capable of some amazing shots. But in a way he fits in a category with someone like Gael Monfils...lots of talent, but just not the necessary champion's mentality that will work on his weaknesses, let alone recognize them. A true champion never rests on his laurels, is always wanting to improve. I don't see that with guys like Monfils or Kyrgios, both of whom could have had better careers if they had wanted it more.

Now how good Kyrgios "could be" if he focused is up for debate. I think at the very least it is clear that his ranking and title history don't adequately represent his upside - like a Monfils, or numerous other players.

 

[DarthFed]

Oh, please. Kyrgios served 71% for the match. You're just mad because he didn't win. And Nadal played a great TB in the 2nd, that wasn't NK. The 2nd was terrible, though. He was cooked by then.

Nick was pretty bad both TB's but the last was especially atrocious.

 

[kskate2]

Wimbledon Order of Play for Round 3 Friday, July 5, 2019

 

[Carol]

More than 20 aces from Kyrgios for 9 of Nadal, I can imagine the opposite, the match wouldn't have last more than 3 sets. The best player won but not because the serve but because he has much better game, that's all

 

[Ricardo]

You know I am on the same page with you when it comes to Kyrgios. I simply don't understand why so many posters here are blindsided and do not see the weaknesses in his game.

you two are just so ridiculously self-entitled about your tennis knowledge, actually you probably know too little....I am sure all those professionals know what they are talking about when discussing Nick. Its funny to see people with no qualification these days actually feel so entitled to refute people who are pro, and actually some of the greatest in history.

Or you forgot to take meds, tell your mate too.

 

[Moxie]

Nick was pretty bad both TB's but the last was especially atrocious.

Oh, right, I forgot that it can't have anything to do with how Nadal plays. Must be Nick (*shock*) playing poorly/inconsistently. And, of course, the grass being so darned slow.

 

[Ricardo]

Yes, his inability to transition from neutral rallies to offense cost him dearly today (as always). He might connect the occasional highlight, but misses idiotic ones the other 90% of the time.

Anyway, I am repeating what I have posted before and I kind of kick myself when I do that.

In the end, I "like" Kyrgios, in the sense that I think that he has a very effective game plan -- all his antics and strange tactics give him results, even if inconstant.I think he got slightly better in some areas (CC forehand), but the serve is worst. Less consistency on the first and considerably weaker second.

so his antics is how he gets to win against the best players? and in some twisted way how he uses it to hide something and is an act? forget your bs analysis, as if you can analyse his technical weakness, nobody as weak as the one you described would've got wins over all of the big 3, no chance. Even players who despise him recognize his ability so stop telling us your 'expert' analysis as if you know something they don't. Nick simply didn't play well today, not to his true capability anyway.

 

[Ricardo]

Oh, right, I forgot that it can't have anything to do with how Nadal plays. Must be Nick (*shock*) playing poorly/inconsistently. And, of course, the grass being so darned slow.

Nick didn't play well, not the level of energy he used to have which is pretty clear to see. He is an adrenalin player, found him pretty subdued in the big moments (ie both tiebreakers)….was not a good match from Nick, even then there was nothing in it except the two tiebreaks.

 

[atttomole]

Oh, right, I forgot that it can't have anything to do with how Nadal plays. Must be Nick (*shock*) playing poorly/inconsistently. And, of course, the grass being so darned slow.

It could have something to do with Nadal. However, in the second tie break in particular, he netted a volley with an open court to lose the first point of the tie break. Kyrgios seemed to be fading physically as the match progressed. I expected Kyrgios to win both tiebreaks honestly. Nadal's celebration after the match said it all.

 

[Moxie]

Nick didn't play well, not the level of energy he used to have which is pretty clear to see. He is an adrenalin player, found him pretty subdued in the big moments (ie both tiebreakers)….was not a good match from Nick, even then there was nothing in it except the two tiebreaks.

For sure he started slow. (Shouldn't have been at the pub until 11.30 last night? Should consider a warm-up before a match?) But there was plenty of good play from him, too. It's worth remembering what an inconsistent player Kyrgios is, generally.

 

[Moxie]

It could have something to do with Nadal. However, in the second tie break in particular, he netted a volley with an open court to lose the first point of the tie break. Kyrgios seemed to be fading physically as the match progressed. I expected Kyrgios to win both tiebreaks honestly. Nadal's celebration after the match said it all.

"Could have?" That's generous of you. I know what Nick did wrong in the TBs. Point is, he did. I don't know that he seemed to be fading all along the match, but, as I said, he sure seemed done by the TB in the 4th. His fitness isn't great, and that's on him. Sure Nadal was relieved when it was over...as were his fans. It was a tense match. Nick is a tricky player, but not anywhere near Nadal's level, either of talent, commitment or focus. We've seen Nick bring his best to the big matches, but doesn't mean he's always going to do it.