Nadal’s brutal warning for Kyrgios

Rafael Nadal’s honesty was as brutal as his forehand when it came to assessing what the future holds for Nick Kyrgios.

Nick Kyrgios jumps to return a ball in his second round match against Rafael Nadal. Getty Images.

Rafael Nadal’s honesty was as ­brutal as his forehand when it came to assessing what the future holds for problematic talent Nick Kyrgios.

The Spanish legend and the Australian enigma engaged in an enthralling duel on Wimbledon centre court.

It was a thriller in every sense, from the sublime shotmaking to their astonishing athleticism; the rivalry enhanced further by the theatrics that tantalised beforehand and became a reality during the match.

As so often happens when the match becomes one of will, Nadal prevailed, 6-3 3-6 7-6 (5) 7-6 (3). But it took a sublime performance, as Kyrgios produced his finest ­effort at major level in years.

He clubbed 29 aces, conjured 58 winners to only 27 unforced ­errors, with the audacity of several of those shots breathtaking. He displayed the deftest of touch and acutest of angles, and concentrated for all bar a blink here and there.

The 24-year-old was understandably disappointed afterward. But as magnificently as he played, there is a despairing aspect.

For everyone in the sport knows he is capable of what he produced and more. And if the Australian No 3 could harness his talent on a regular basis, these thrillers would occur deep in the second week of grand slams, not in a second round.

Nadal, who edged to a 4-3 ­record against the Canberran, seized on the crucial precursor to almost every aspect about Kyrgios. If. If. If.

“If, if, if ... doesn’t exist,” he said.

“As I (have) said plenty of times, he’s a very top, talented player. But there is a lot of important things you need to do to become a champion, no? He has a lot of good ­ingredients. But, of course, (there) remains an important one … the love, the passion for this game.

“Without really loving this game that much, it is difficult to achieve important things.

“Anyway, with his talent and his serve, he can win a grand slam, of course. He has the talent to do it.

“It is true that things can be completely different for him if he wants to play all the matches the same way that he try today.”

Nadal, remarkably motivated even by his extreme standards, had studied Kyrgios closely. After a loss to Kyrgios in Acapulco in February, he bemoaned the disdain the former Newcombe medallist shows the sport. And he emphasised another flaw noted during the Aussie’s five-set win over compatriot Jordan Thompson on Tuesday.

“If you see the first round against Jordan Thompson, he was able to win but the intensity on court, the way that he played, the way that he was focused, was different than today,” Nadal said.

“He likes to play these kind of matches. But to win important things, you don’t need to play against the top players, you need to play against other players that are so good, too. You need to win those matches.

“Honestly ... the history of this sport is about respect and is about playing fair ... the whole time.”

Although the appraisal followed Kyrgios’s post-loss media debrief, the Australian would ­acknowledge Nadal is right. He ­effectively conceded the point, just as he literally did once during the match in a show of sportsmanship that actually occurs regularly but too often gets overlooked because of his devilishly fickle temper.

It is questionable if a squandered talent constitutes a sporting tragedy but however one construes Kyrgios’s career, and he ­lamented receiving questions like it aged 24, it is of his own making.

“At times today I was looking around. This is Wimbledon. (I’m) playing Rafa. I’m having a lot of fun. I was a little different, underarm serves. A lot of people were watching … but I’ll probably wake up tomorrow, there will be something negative about it, for sure.

“I know I’m capable. I know I can bring a level. I probably haven’t trained enough. I don’t have a coach. I haven’t been doing enough gym. I’m still going out there today and (be) able to bring a level that can compete with one of the world’s best and have chances to win.”

Kyrgios was asked whether he considered himself capable of winning a major. His answer will ­depress those who still hope he might be the Australian to break the drought dating back to Lleyton Hewitt’s success in 2002.

“At the end of the day, it’s just tennis. Is it that important?” he said. “I know what I’m capable of. (It) just depends. I’m a great tennis player, but I don’t do the other stuff. I’m not the most professional guy. I won’t train day in, day out. I won’t show up every day.

“So there’s a lot of things I need to improve on to get to that level that Rafa brings, Novak (Djokovic), Roger (Federer) have been doing for so long. It just depends how bad I want it. But, no, at the moment I don’t think I can contend for a grand slam.”

As is always the case after a grand slam or temper tantrum, the question has been raised as to whether Kyrgios would benefit from a stint away from the game. The success of world No 1 Ash Barty — of whom Kyrgios always talks highly – since her sabbatical is cited as a reason it might work.

The chatter that this might occur has intensified through Wimbledon. Perhaps it is the Barty effect. Asked what his intentions were in the coming weeks, Kyrgios noted he had a house in the Bahamas and might take a break.

Later he was quizzed as to whether he thought he would ever be back at Wimbledon. For a 24-year-old who had just produced a performance of significant merit, it might seem a bizarre question. But when it comes to Kyrgios, one must consider it.

For what it is worth, he said he would be back. “My record is pretty good on grass, no? So I would ­assume I’d probably play Wimbledon. I’m always willing to go out there and try and put on a show. People that bought a ticket today probably had a great day.

“(I’ve played) a lot of good matches on that court. That was a really good match. I enjoyed myself a lot out there.”

And most who had the good fortune to watch would probably agree; if only it happened regularly.