China Open 2017, Beijing, China, ATP 500

[brokenshoelace]

Broken is a realistic Nadal fan and said that call in the first game was why he lost that match so badly.

Read again, that's not quite what I said.

 

[Carol]

Broken is a realistic Nadal fan and said that call in the first game was why he lost that match so badly. Most would agree. Trying being unbiased and realistic for once. Go read the comments section on tennis.com and you'll see most people said Nick tanked the match after that bad call. It's not the first time he's done this and it's not the last. The match against Federer he lost by 2 points while leading the decider. Hardly the same thing now is it?![/

Then let’s go to be realistic too...... Kyrgios is an idiot head to toe and never will be capble to win tournaments and less to be a #1 with that poor/weak mentality
And continuing been realistic, Rafa has played a brilliant tournament from the begining to the end against tough opponents and today he left his signature as the #1 and well deserved win it doesn’t matter what his detractors are trying to deny to give him the credit that he deserves. I saw that match with my own eyes and also I’ve read some articles by excellent writers with a good knowledge of this sport and all of them say the same thing: “Nadal is playing great and suppostly in one of his worst surface”
What Roger’s fans and negative people say is not important, it’s just what it is. I can’t expect something better from you

 

[Jelenafan]

Kyrgios is all of 22, so maybe he could still pull himself together mentally (one would hope), he just oozes so much talent.

Everything matters, in the SF's Zverev had negative body language that Kyrgios I'm sure picked up on and so Nick's momentum fed on his own playing well plus his opponent's struggles, etc, etc. Contrast that it was obvious Rafa was going to have to be dragged off the court for Kyrgios to win the final. Add that it was a final, and that does things to the players who are not used to getting to that stage all that often.

All the discussions of past matches as to whose playing well, whose playing worse, XYZ should have won in 3 sets instead of 5, brain farts, just one service break, etc puzzles me because that's the whole point of competition, there are going inevitably to be ebbs and flows within a match, within a set, hell, within a game...LOL.

Helps me keep my sanity because of course Stefan Edberg should have won at least 4 more Majors...but I'm not bitter. ; )

 

[the AntiPusher]

Kyrgios is all of 22, so maybe he could still pull himself together mentally (one would hope), he just oozes so much talent.

Everything matters, in the SF's Zverev had negative body language that Kyrgios I'm sure picked up on and so Nick's momentum fed on his own playing well plus his opponent's struggles, etc, etc. Contrast that it was obvious Rafa was going to have to be dragged off the court for Kyrgios to win the final. Add that it was a final, and that does things to the players who are not used to getting to that stage all that often.

All the discussions of past matches as to whose playing well, whose playing worse, XYZ should have won in 3 sets instead of 5, brain farts, just one service break, etc puzzles me because that's the whole point of competition, there are going inevitably to be ebbs and flows within a match, within a set, hell, within a game...LOL.

Helps me keep my sanity because of course Stefan Edberg should have won at least 4 more Majors...but I'm not bitter. ; )

Sampras had no business loosing to Edberg. Pete tried to play Stefan’s game instead of his own the way unlike the way he mastered and dismantled Boris Becker.. maybe Sampras respected Edberg’s game to much to conquer that player.

 

[Jelenafan]

Sampras had no business loosing to Edberg. Pete tried to play Stefan’s game instead of his own the way unlike the way he mastered and dismantled Boris Becker.. maybe Sampras respected Edberg’s game to much to conquer that player.

Ah that 1992 USO. Chang fans to this day say that Michael should have won the SF's against Edberg who had no business playing in the final...Wasn't Chang up at least a break twice (or 3 times) to close out the match. As to the final, I agree that Pete's brain didn't quite know how to play that match. As an Edberg fan I'm not complaining , but yes, mental component is so big, if my favorite players all had temporary lobotomies before big matches they would have won more....

It goes on and on. I still cringe thinking of the 1989 FO when Edberg was a break up on Chang in the FO finals in the 5th set , and don't get me started when Edberg's back started up in that AO final with Lendl when he was leading....

 

[Front242]

Thats the dumbest analysis EVER,WHO DUMPS a TENNIS MATCH because of one line call in the very first game that was a replayed point.. That’s asinine and weak of any tennis player , fan or watcher..Nicky is bipolar and didnt have his happy meds to make him want to compete. That line call was just an excuse and a way to say he checked out. Nick never checked in. Same with you..you look for every excuse to discredit any Nadal’s victory. Thats what I like about KS and Darth, they dont fancy Rafa but they don’t spit out this nonsense of anti Rafa Narratives you consistently hurl at us like a drunken passenger whose alcohol and food intake are no longer able to co exist or reside in the same area.

Yeah, sure they don't. I'm sure they'd both tell you Nadal's USO 2017 ranks as one of the most amazing feats ever. No need to out BS yourself. Everyone, and that includes you and Carol, knows that if Kyrgios is not serving well, he won't win. Last time they played, he served great and guess what, he won. He beat Djokovic 2 straight matches recently and served great in both. The times he's beaten Federer he served great. Are you seeing a pattern here maybe? If Kyrgios serves well, he's a nightmare for anyone, except Murray it seems as he's never beaten him. Bad match up I guess. If he doesn't win but still serves well, the opponent usually barely beats him, see Federer Miami 2017.

You'd want to be a complete lunatic to think Nick's serving today didn't determine the result and also, newsflash to both you and Carol, never once today did I say Nadal did not play well. That's the problem with the 2 of you...you both get all riled up and angry over nothing. I never said Nadal didn't play well, I said Kyrgios served poorly as anyone could see. When his biggest weapon isn't working, he's not going to win. Would you really expect Isner or Raonic to win serving below 50% ? No, you wouldn't. So stop with the nonsense saying I'm biased and realize what i'm saying is no different than what any logical person would say and, that is, Kyrgios serving badly against ANYONE, will likely lose.

 

[Carol]

Well, at least Kyrgios seems to be more real than "some" Roger's fans......he says : " Rafa has destroyed me, I don't have any excuse for that loss"
Some players should learn that the serve/aces is not everything, they should improve another weapons in case that the serve is not working well, otherwise they won't get too many wins and titles

 

[Busted]

Just saw the score and shook my head. Kyrgios can't string together 2-3 big matches to save his life. Unless he's playing Roger he simply cannot be arsed. I had hoped that participating in the Laver Cup and being surrounded by not one, not two but FIVE of the all-time greats would light a fire under his ass. He got hyped the other day to beat Sascha Zverev - and not can't back it up against Nadal on Nadal's worst surface? Pathetic. Just pathetic.

As for Nadal winning another hard court title? Still SMH at the fact that he's not really being anyone that good. Sure, Kyrgios has his moments, but his inconsistency means he's not even that good a win for Nadal. His 2 hard court title wins - #32 Kevin Anderson and #19 Kyrgios. Yawn. Seriously don't know how his fans can celebrate these kinds of "wins." He should beat guys ranked 20-30 spots below him with his left hand tied behind his back. And he's got an easy draw in Shanghai so if he doesn't at least make the final there I'll be shocked.

 

[Carol]

Just saw the score and shook my head. Kyrgios can't string together 2-3 big matches to save his life. Unless he's playing Roger he simply cannot be arsed. I had hoped that participating in the Laver Cup and being surrounded by not one, not two but FIVE of the all-time greats would light a fire under his ass. He got hyped the other day to beat Sascha Zverev - and not can't back it up against Nadal on Nadal's worst surface? Pathetic. Just pathetic.

As for Nadal winning another hard court title? Still SMH at the fact that he's not really being anyone that good. Sure, Kyrgios has his moments, but his inconsistency means he's not even that good a win for Nadal. His 2 hard court title wins - #32 Kevin Anderson and #19 Kyrgios. Yawn. Seriously don't know how his fans can celebrate these kinds of "wins." He should beat guys ranked 20-30 spots below him with his left hand tied behind his back. And he's got an easy draw in Shanghai so if he doesn't at least make the final there I'll be shocked.

:lulz2::sleep::suicide::bloodsucker2:

 

[the AntiPusher]

Yeah, sure they don't. I'm sure they'd both tell you Nadal's USO 2017 ranks as one of the most amazing feats ever. No need to out BS yourself. Everyone, and that includes you and Carol, knows that if Kyrgios is not serving well, he won't win. Last time they played, he served great and guess what, he won. He beat Djokovic 2 straight matches recently and served great in both. The times he's beaten Federer he served great. Are you seeing a pattern here maybe? If Kyrgios serves well, he's a nightmare for anyone, except Murray it seems as he's never beaten him. Bad match up I guess. If he doesn't win but still serves well, the opponent usually barely beats him, see Federer Miami 2017.

You'd want to be a complete lunatic to think Nick's serving today didn't determine the result and also, newsflash to both you and Carol, never once today did I say Nadal did not play well. That's the problem with the 2 of you...you both get all riled up and angry over nothing. I never said Nadal didn't play well, I said Kyrgios served poorly as anyone could see. When his biggest weapon isn't working, he's not going to win. Would you really expect Isner or Raonic to win serving below 50% ? No, you wouldn't. So stop with the nonsense saying I'm biased and realize what i'm saying is no different than what any logical person would say and, that is, Kyrgios serving badly against ANYONE, will likely lose.

This is what bothers me about these boards, your post is very latent with Troll puss but no one says anything. Not one thing you posted had any bearing on the results,but Rafa just plainly kicked Nick' s junk in the dirt. You call me a lunatic but is it the pot calling the kettle Black. Heck, I actually like you as a poster but you are one sick twist.

 

[the AntiPusher]

Just saw the score and shook my head. Kyrgios can't string together 2-3 big matches to save his life. Unless he's playing Roger he simply cannot be arsed. I had hoped that participating in the Laver Cup and being surrounded by not one, not two but FIVE of the all-time greats would light a fire under his ass. He got hyped the other day to beat Sascha Zverev - and not can't back it up against Nadal on Nadal's worst surface? Pathetic. Just pathetic.

As for Nadal winning another hard court title? Still SMH at the fact that he's not really being anyone that good. Sure, Kyrgios has his moments, but his inconsistency means he's not even that good a win for Nadal. His 2 hard court title wins - #32 Kevin Anderson and #19 Kyrgios. Yawn. Seriously don't know how his fans can celebrate these kinds of "wins." He should beat guys ranked 20-30 spots below him with his left hand tied behind his back. And he's got an easy draw in Shanghai so if he doesn't at least make the final there I'll be shocked.

Busted, that's cheap and low Rent..no Fed, no Stan, No Andy , No Novak..who in the world is left for Rafa to play against besides the field that participated in the tournament (500 series)..really low Rent by you to lessen Rafa victories..thats why I will Never be view like someone like Kieran. It's too much to consistently suffer this foolishness gladly..i am not built that way

 

[Front242]

This is what bothers me about these boards, your post is very latent with Troll puss but no one says anything. Not one thing you posted had any bearing on the results,but Rafa just plainly kicked Nick' s junk in the dirt. You call me a lunatic but is it the pot calling the kettle Black. Heck, I actually like you as a poster but you are one sick twist.

No one says anything? You and Carol are moaning about everything I post even when it's the truth lol. Last time on this....Kyrgios served below 50% and his serve is his biggest weapon. How do you therefore expect him to win? As I said already, would you expect Isner or Raonic to win serving 50% ? You know damn well you wouldn't so stop ranting for nothing. What exactly pray tell is "troll puss" about stating the truth? Nadal played very well but he also played only as well as he needed to given his opponent who normally hits either a lot of aces or many serves that, even if returned, set him up to win the next point. Is that REALLY so hard to comprehend without the need for you and Carol to have a muppet attack tag team?!

 

[Carol]

No one says anything? You and Carol are moaning about everything I post even when it's the truth lol. Last time on this....Kyrgios served below 50% and his serve is his biggest weapon. How do you therefore expect him to win? As I said already, would you expect Isner or Raonic to win serving 50% ? You know damn well you wouldn't so stop ranting for nothing. What exactly pray tell is "troll puss" about stating the truth? Nadal played very well but he also played only as well as he needed to given his opponent who normally hits either a lot of aces or many serves that, even if returned, set him up to win the next point. Is that REALLY so hard to comprehend without the need for you and Carol to have a muppet attack tag team?!

And who cares if Kyrgios served below 50%? then I'm right to say that some players like him should learn to have better weapons than aces which obviously only works when the opponent is not playing well
And hey, you and Busted are moaning about everything and honesty it sounds already laughable

 

[Front242]

And who cares if Kyrgios served below 50%? then I'm right to say that some players like him should learn to have better weapons than aces which obviously only works when the opponent is not playing well
And hey, you and Busted are moaning about everything and honesty it sounds already laughable

No one is moaning about anything and my initial reply was in response to your comment below:

"A bad call at the begining of a match has to do nothing with the final result, he just has got a good clinic by one of the greatest player of the history."

Yes, the bad call did have a huge outcome on the match. Kyrgios shouldn't have let it get to him as badly as he did but clearly it DID get to him and did cause him to play and mostly serve like crap. This is not moaning, this is telling you that your post above couldn't be further from the reality of why he won. Kyrgios also does possess more than just a good serve but clearly his serve is definitely his biggest weapon. What's mostly laughable here is you and AP denying that reality. Want more to laugh about, then go read your post that Soderling "looked very strange"....whatever in the name of hell you meant by that is anyone's guess. He looked like a pretty normal guy to most people!

https://www.tennis-prose.com/tennis...beijing-china-atp-500.5769/page-3#post-313311

 

[Carol]

If you like Söderling I don’t see any problem, I like Muzz and you always are critizing him
And yes, Söderling was famous to be an antisocial person, a little strange and for that reason he didn’t have too much sympathies. And by the way what kind of sickness he had or has? I’ve read that meanwhile he had a bad “mono” his wife got pregnant, I’m surprised that he was able to.......whatever :whistle:. My question is if he had mono or something else that we don’t know......weird

 

[GameSetAndMath]

Congrats to Rafa. YE #1 is now further solidified, not that any one had any doubts about it.

 

[britbox]

Thought Nadal might win but this is a beatdown.

 

[britbox]

Ah that 1992 USO. Chang fans to this day say that Michael should have won the SF's against Edberg who had no business playing in the final...Wasn't Chang up at least a break twice (or 3 times) to close out the match. As to the final, I agree that Pete's brain didn't quite know how to play that match. As an Edberg fan I'm not complaining , but yes, mental component is so big, if my favorite players all had temporary lobotomies before big matches they would have won more....

It goes on and on. I still cringe thinking of the 1989 FO when Edberg was a break up on Chang in the FO finals in the 5th set , and don't get me started when Edberg's back started up in that AO final with Lendl when he was leading....

Edberg was a break down in the final set of three successive five set matches in the 92 USO - Krajieck, Lendl and Chang and then obviously nailing Sampras in 4. Incredible tournament.

Stefan always played Pete tough.

 

[Moxie]

Yeah, sure they don't. I'm sure they'd both tell you Nadal's USO 2017 ranks as one of the most amazing feats ever. No need to out BS yourself. Everyone, and that includes you and Carol, knows that if Kyrgios is not serving well, he won't win. Last time they played, he served great and guess what, he won. He beat Djokovic 2 straight matches recently and served great in both. The times he's beaten Federer he served great. Are you seeing a pattern here maybe? If Kyrgios serves well, he's a nightmare for anyone, except Murray it seems as he's never beaten him. Bad match up I guess. If he doesn't win but still serves well, the opponent usually barely beats him, see Federer Miami 2017.

You'd want to be a complete lunatic to think Nick's serving today didn't determine the result and also, newsflash to both you and Carol, never once today did I say Nadal did not play well. That's the problem with the 2 of you...you both get all riled up and angry over nothing. I never said Nadal didn't play well, I said Kyrgios served poorly as anyone could see. When his biggest weapon isn't working, he's not going to win. Would you really expect Isner or Raonic to win serving below 50% ? No, you wouldn't. So stop with the nonsense saying I'm biased and realize what i'm saying is no different than what any logical person would say and, that is, Kyrgios serving badly against ANYONE, will likely lose.

Today it really wasn't about Kyrgios not serving well. It's about that he can't string 2 great matches together. (And even yesterday wasn't great, it was just fine. Zverev was underperforming.) He got unnerved in the first game, and he let things unravel him. One of them was Rafa, for sure, who played a very fine game. I'm not as down on Nick as @brokenshoelace is, but I do agree that he can't let one thing unnerve him, in the first game of a match, and petulantly let that be his undoing, for the rest of the match. And it was a final. He's got to pull his head together, or he's going to start rising to the top of our list of squandered talents.

 

[brokenshoelace]

Really moving post by Kyrgios himself. I hope he gets his act together but more than that, massive respect for what he's doing here:

https://www.playersvoice.com.au/nic...r.com&utm_campaign=buffer#Xq3EtbJRvRuXVxp3.97