skibbarriz wrote:

---

indiana wrote:

---

Going to be interesting to see the dynamics between Kyle and the crowd today. Kyle normally gives so little out during a match and won't naturally invite them in to his zone and it would be folly to suddenly try and markedly change. Hopefully the crowd will still be very encouraging and he can at least embrace that support.

More generally over the longer term it was interesting to hear Leon Smith chatting about Kyle with Sue and Tim ( yes I know many folk would prefer less chat ). Without criticising it was fairly clear that Leon would prefer he had more presence and talked for instance of maybe jogging to the baseline, basically looking more up for it, no doubt as much to send that message back across the net as anything. But as I say that would be a longer term thing if he is to change at all, though I imagine he will in at least small ways over time and with hopefully more success and confidence.

All the best today, Kyle. Go make it happen.

---

 

So how do you reckon Kyle did with that, and the way the crowd took to him?

---

Ah our posts crossed, timing is everything    As you can gather I think 'not great' on either count. But Rome wasn't built in a day.

Vandenburg wrote:

---

Someone needs to get a hold of Kyle and manage expectations. He is not top 20 potential, he is top 50 at best, and his ranking reflects that, and there is nothing wrong with that, it is something as a nation we have longed for, for so long, just steady eddy top 75 players in depth. He has made it onto the main tour. When compared to the many failed generations before him, anything in between henski and murray, this lad must be regarded as a success.

---

I agree to an extent that Kyle's ranking at the moment reflects accurately where he is in his career.  But to suggest that his "potential" is "top 50 at best" (which is what I think you are saying) is something I can't agree with.  Kyle reached 40 in the rankings last Oct and to suggest that ANY player has already maxed out his potential at the age of 21 is absurd, particularly when players are all maturing at a much later age.

As has been discussed many times on here, there are many aspects of Kyle's game that require improvement - net play, movement, finding a plan B etc.  This suggests to me that the potential to go much higher is definitely there.  Whether or not he goes on to fulfill that potential is a completely different question.

I also agree with you that if he doesn't go any higher, that will not constitute a failure.  We would all love to have 5 or 6 Kyle's floating around the top 50 mark.  It would increase substantially the chance of one or two breaking from the pack and going a lot higher.

A131 wrote:

---

Can't believe it - the guy that beat Jay Clarke in qualifying just beat Sock.

---

Yep, through to meet Sascha Zverev in the last 32.

Vandenburg wrote:

---

Someone needs to get a hold of Kyle and manage expectations. He is not top 20 potential, he is top 50 at best, and his ranking reflects that, and there is nothing wrong with that, it is something as a nation we have longed for, for so long, just steady eddy top 75 players in depth. He has made it onto the main tour. When compared to the many failed generations before him, anything in between henski and murray, this lad must be regarded as a success.

---

 His biggest problem will be the weight of expectations

Bob in Spain wrote:

---

I still get the feeling sometimes with Kyle that he sees himself and the young player being allowed to play against the "big boys" and he doesn't quite believe yet that he belongs. I have only really seen him once play in a way that he looked like he believed he could win and that was a set and a half in Monte Carlo against Nadal where he really dominated for an extended period.

Having said that, 7-6 6-4 6-4 against a top 16 player is by no means a poor scoreline. Kyle played very well at times, but on those big points, the confidence wasn't quite there.

As has been said before, some players take longer than others to find their feet at the very top level and I remain as confident as ever that Kyle will get there.

At least there is no more grass for him until next year.

---

 I felt at times when he had the initiative and Monfils was starting to feel the pace, he couldn't quite raise his level ( tightened up ), certainly I felt there was at least one set there, and with Monfils dislike of the grass, he could easily have gone away from the match, if Kyle had seized his opportunities. There's a sense now that Kyle needs to elevate mentally, and its probably a fair analysis. Still think he's got top 20/10 potential, and will get there eventually.

A131 wrote:

---

Vandenburg wrote:

---

Someone needs to get a hold of Kyle and manage expectations. He is not top 20 potential, he is top 50 at best, and his ranking reflects that, and there is nothing wrong with that, it is something as a nation we have longed for, for so long, just steady eddy top 75 players in depth. He has made it onto the main tour. When compared to the many failed generations before him, anything in between henski and murray, this lad must be regarded as a success.

---

 I agree he has done well to reach the top 50 at a young age in a very competitive sport and well -  who knows whether he will reach the top 20. Just curious as to why you think he is not top 20 material potentially. On his day I think he could at least beat a few of those that are currently there - Goffin, Sock, Kyrios? He has already beaten Bautista- Agut.

---

 You have to win consistently - not just on your day. A mark of a top player is that they will guts out a win when not at their best.

Interesting comments from Kyle on the BBC website

"It was a great match to learn from," said Edmund.

"I got my game out on court, which is something I wanted to do, and just lack a bit of maturity at this stage.

"A few shots in certain points or match situations I just needed to be better on. I'm only 22 years old, I don't know all the answers. That's why it's a great thing to learn from."

Seems to be aware of where the problems lie.