Kyrgiosmania at Miami Open

Been an avid reader for a good while, but your post on Kyrgios’ borderless appeal prompted me to share. I was lucky enough to see Nick at the Madrid masters last year. An outside court, early round (think he beat roger the next day), and he’s playing Spaniard Daniel Gimeno-traver but we were amazed that a group of about 20 young local kids were vehemently cheering on Nk. I know they were an impressionable age (easily swayed by a haircut) but it still showed the potency of his appeal. And not just to kids. I’m a life long addict to the sport and have seen many greats up close, but this dude is plain arresting. Not just his skill and athleticism but his engagement with the crowd. There’s caveats ofcourse. One, he’s got to stop sulking. At the moment his negative crowd interactions are on a par with his positive/funny ones. He has to tip this balance the right way soon. A surly teen is one thing, a surly 22/23 year old is just sad. The bigger question is can he keep that level of irreverent crowd banter/interaction – even if totally positive – and get o the very top. It’s a balance I guess. Picking the right time in matches. If he can produce (and reproduce) his best tennis and be the opposite of Raonic in terms of oncourt demeanour then this sport has found the replacement for the inevitable exits of the current aging giants. Long first post hey?

What to make of the Williams’s sisters these days? One remarkable thing about Serena is she’s gone from being the young Williams sister to being the only real viable Williams sisters. Venus is pretty much unwatchable these days from her odd bearing, her ungainly gait, her awful-looking serve and her matches are generally very boring.

Serena is once again acting like a prima donna in her very short press conferences. She complained about all her opponents getting up to play her. When would Federer or Nadal make such a ridiculous complaint? As BJK would say, “Pressure is a privilege.”

Serena can appear almost bored by playing at the beginning of her matches to crying and making faces only a 9-year-old would make later in her matches. She’s unbecoming of a champion in this regard and you wonder how much longer either or both of them will stay around the scene.

Interesting take on the psychology at play. I never thought of it that way, but I guess when a crowd senses it is directly influencing a performance they’ll feed off it as much as the player. Virtuous cycle for player and spectator. I’m Australian and knowing the sentiment and coverage here (not helped by seemingly taking the Davis Cup for granted – big sin in these parts) the sulking makes the wider public see him as spoilt and weak. In a country that worships the stoicism and toughness of rugby, that’s usually a life sentence in the popularity stakes. The jury is still out though, as the scent of possible greatness buys you some time. But I’d still take his displays over his upcoming opponent for one simple reason. When you take a liking or disliking to a player you’re engaged in the contest. It takes the enjoyment of the combative nature of this gladiatorial sport to another level. How do you take a position on a player who gives you nothing. Milos v a Berdych for eg is a great exhibition of skill. But exhibition is the key word. It’s something to appreciate rather than be part of.

Fritz has trouble versus short opponents. They keep the big fella on the run.

Berdych played great last night. He’s just unlucky for being around in this era of four great players. As to why he wasn’t the fourth – why Murray, not Berdych? I think that might be a money thing. Murray had a whole country footing the bill for his pre-Lendl training. Seeing Lendl coach Murray was like a sucker punch.

Very impressed with your posts, Stephen, and your analysis of Kyrgios. Makes it more cogent that you’re Australian and bring in the ideal persona of a rugged stoic Aussie rugby player that Nick certainly clashes with. I interviewed Kyrgios one to one in IW last year and I was taken by the difference in his in-match persona (against Kudla that night where I too was amazed by his ability to enlist the crowd; he was more business-like in his next match against Dimitrov) and his out-of-match persona where he was down to earth, somewhat soft-spoken and seemed like a good mate.

I wouldn’t put Berdie in Raonic’s category as I think Berdie has a nice personality to him and flashes smiles somewhat easily. Raonic is a total robot, but also more personable outside of the court. The interesting question as you state it well, is can Kyrgios still engage the crowd and play a bit of the bad guy role (I find it interesting he’s started wearing a big gold cross–is it to get more people on his side, sort of like saying, “Hey, I’m religious. I’m a God-fearing man”) because I think that rebelliousness and non-conformity will always be a part of his persona.

I think Serena wants what Connors, too, also wanted — that their peers stay in awe of their accomplishments (and mentally concede games, sets, even some matches). Just that Connors was much smarter at maintaining that “mystique” than Serena is (or ever was). That and I don’t see Serena mounting a Slam semifinal run at age 39. But, given the state of affairs on the WTA Tour, such might even be a possibility.

I think players can definitely care. If anything they use it, channel it – sometimes direct it. I know Tatiana Golovin “heard” the crowd some time back in Miami against Sharapova – she was behind and then fed off the crowd energy for sure and somewhere during the match decided to play for the crowd as much as for herself. It was a great show. Best match I’ve “participated” in.

Sometimes a player “uses” the crowd – like Harrison a year plus ago at a Virginia challenger. He was in front of a small crowd that was pro his opponent (and wanted to see an upset) and Harrison started using them as a way to get himself going. Every time he’d win a game he’d shoot a glance over to the bleachers at his vocal crowd critics, as if to say, “your cheering for my opponent is firing ME up and contributing to the beat down for him – you’re doing him no favors – sure you don’t want to back a winner here?”

So sometimes the crowd is a prop. I’d say for some Djokovic matches, where Djokovic faces a crowd that’s for his opponents, he takes it as a challenge – as in, they’ll be clapping for me by the time this is done.

Agassi knew this too.

Sampras knew it too late. The crowd carried him to his 14th slam and through his final match. He might have had 16, 17, 18 slams if he knew about how to work the crowd.

I agree with Catherine. It’s not the player’s job to work the crowd and the fact that Sampras was able to disengage himself from the crowd probably led to his success. We see what happened to Harry being too sensitive about what the crowd and the media was talking about.

I think what Stephen says though about Kyrgios being able to engage the crowd and still play stellar tennis is a rare quality. Yes, Connors had it, but I don’t think until later in his career. Monfils can do it too, but now he may be understanding that winning involves focus and now showmanship.

In terms of crowd participation I was talking mainly from my/our point of view – as spectators. From a players point of view some, of course some care and some don’t. Just like life, some people want to be the centre of attention and others just want to do their thing in peace. Prob a better way of looking at it – or categorising players – is how close to surface are their emotions. Because it’s not just crowd that’ll affect them. It’s line calls, the opponent’s demeanor, their own errors or winners. The crowd is just one current of many. Some players drop anchor and can keep it there while others get tossed about. The latter types will win some matches they should of lost but they’ll lose some matches they should’ve one.

Looks like the Rebel beat the Robot – this time anyway.

Scoop-

I don’t think Steffi cared either.

Andrew –

Just saw your comment about Murray ‘having a whole country footing the bill for his pre-Lendl training’.

Which country ? If you mean Britain most of Murray’s training was not funded by the Lawn Tennis Association.

So I don’t see your point.

Scoop –

I agree with you about Mac. He didn’t care at all – and I saw plenty of his matches and attended plenty of his press ‘conferences’ (read whinings) – he wanted to win.

Of course in his later years he may interpret his past differently.