Kyrgios reveals similarities and differences when facing Djokovic, Federer, and Nadal

Nick Kyrgios has returned to the public eye. The "time" he was going to give himself after his suspension for consuming a prohibited substance has ended: after more than a month of meditation, away from social media, the Canberra native decided to take a stroll through Instagram and interacted with his followers in an interesting Q&A. It seems, judging by the tone and cordiality of many of his phrases, that there is a desire for change: conciliatory, less hurtful, and showing that analytical side that made him successful during many events without having a coach by his side.

He talked about Medvedev, Tsitsipas, Sinner... but the response that caught the most attention from fans was, without a doubt, the one that referenced the Big Three. Few have faced off more times than Nick against Novak Djokovic, Rafael Nadal, and Roger Federer; moreover, the Australian can boast of having beaten all of them, rising to the occasion when the importance and status of his opponent were world-class. This is not the first time the oceanic player has spoken about them, but this time he did so in a very original way, marking a weakness, a strength, and a curious diagnosis about each of them. The results and reflections might, perhaps, surprise some.

This is what Kyrgios reveals about Djokovic, Federer, and Nadal

The Australian started by making it clear that the strategies were "extremely different" depending on which member of the Big Three he decided to face, going on to list these three master guides about each player.

ROGER FEDERER

Strength: His ability to take time away from rivals. Additionally, he was an extremely creative player.

Weakness: High balls to his backhand; you could generate short balls if you played him there.

What makes the difference: He was the most aggressive of the three.

RAFAEL NADAL

Strength: He was incredibly physical; it was practically impossible to find his backhand after his serve, which meant you were constantly at his mercy. 

Weakness: He struggled when you broke the cross-court backhand to his right, and from there you could put his backhand in jeopardy. Moreover, his second serve was sometimes vulnerable.

What makes the difference: He was a sublime competitor; you never knew whether he was winning or losing.

NOVAK DJOKOVIC

Strength: In his prime, he really had no weaknesses. He loved it when you played him quickly; he enjoyed being the one in control, and at the same time, he didn’t mind taking charge.

Weakness: His second serve wasn't incredible, but then it improved, and he became a precise server. He also drastically improved his volleys, although he wasn’t the best at the net.

What makes the difference: He is the GOAT (emoji of the goat).

Many things stand out from these messages: first, Nick's ability to step out of his persona, take off the mask, and show us that behind the character there is someone who meticulously analyzes the strengths and weaknesses of each tennis player he faces (although perhaps this only occurred, as we mentioned earlier, against rivals who truly motivated him). Secondly, he makes it clear that Djokovic is, for him, the greatest of all time: he is the only one he mentions as someone "without weaknesses," especially emphasizing that any weaknesses he had were able to be improved over time. Perhaps it is Federer who receives the fewest kind words or from whom he has less to highlight, something strange that has likely changed over time, since Nick was always a fervent follower of the Swiss in his early years on the circuit. And what do you think of these definitions? Do you agree with the Australian?

This is an automatic translation. You can read the original news, Kyrgios desvela parecidos y diferencias al enfrentar a Djokovic, Federer y Nadal