The Volley: Is it renaissance or redemption for Kyrgios in North America?

The Summer of Nick

As tennis players and fans make their way toward the US Open, we'll take a closer look at the past, present and future of Nick Kyrgios—someone who has made plenty of headlines, good and bad, in previous hard-court summers. Like Kyrgios, where this series takes us in anyone's guess.

Most memorable moment, Washington, D.C.: This one's clear: in 2019, Kyrgios won the title, his third at the ATP 500 level. In 2017, Nick lost his opening match in D.C.; in 2021, the same thing happened. But he'll probably take those results given how outstanding he was three years ago. Kyrgios dropped just one set—in the semifinals to Stefanos Tsitsipas—before topping Daniil Medvedev in a two-tiebreak final.

If a tennis career mirrors a hero’s journey, Nick Kyrgios’ arc has turned from tragic to romantic through what has so far been a summer of love in North America.

The former world No. 13 has backed up his Wimbledon final with an unbeaten start to the US Open Series, winning a doubles title in Atlanta and barreling through two clean singles victories at the Citi Open. (He's also 1-0 in doubles with Jack Sock in Washington, D.C.)

This is somewhat of narrative whiplash from an All England Club nadir that featured a chaotic clash with Stefanos Tsitsipas and the surfacing of domestic abuse allegations from a former girlfriend. One never knew what to expect from Nick in the past, but the spectrum has somehow widened so far in both directions that it’s impossible to guess what will happen next.

Kyrgios has long asserted that he breaks the mold of a traditional tennis player, and though he’s never neatly filled the brief of hero or villain, the tennis world won’t stop trying to cast him in either role—or both all at once. It's the subject of this edition of The Volley, from TENNIS.com's David Kane and Stephanie Livaudais.

David Kane: Hey Steph! The Summer of Nick began on your watch in Atlanta and has continued on mine in Washington, D.C. Is it safe to say American fans have caught the fever?

Stephanie Livaudais: Hey David! It’s more of a chronic condition at this point. Kyrgios Fever is back and hotter than ever at these US Open Series events—something you could feel even as fans walked up to Atlantic Station before play started. There was definitely a buzz in Atlanta, is it the same in D.C.?

DK: I’ve never known an American crowd to ignore one of their own, but such was the case Wednesday night when Kyrgios outplayed No. 14 seed Tommy Paul in straight sets on Stadium Court. Beyond a lone “Tommy!” call from the rafters, the Citi Open was firmly behind the enigmatic Aussie, as they'd been all week—confirming everything many (including Nick himself) have said about his box office appeal. It certainly wasn’t the reception one would expect from what others in tennis consider to be the sport’s biggest villain.

SL: It was a similar situation in Atlanta, where Nick likes to kick off his post-vacation return to tennis. The 2016 champion had such an emotionally charged summer—between the results on court and aforementioned personal life issues—that I wasn’t sure how crowds would react. Would there be the same love for Kyrgios, or more of a cold shoulder?

The most telling moment for me was the reaction from the crowd when he announced he wouldn’t play singles after tweaking his knee in doubles the night before. Seeing a player come out on court in a hoodie five minutes before their match is supposed to start is never a good sign, but it didn’t dim their support for him in the slightest.

And Kyrgios paid them back in kind: he was signing autographs all week, holding his practice sessions where fans could watch, and continuing on in doubles with Thanasi Kokkinakis. He ultimately won the title, playing the semis and final on the same day to do it. It would have been easy and understandable to pack it in after being injured, but I argue he earned a lot of respect by sticking around.

In a classic case of Twitter vs. Real Life, the fans showing up for a night match featuring the cool guy hitting trick shots while dressed in basketball drag aren’t necessarily as plugged into umpire antics from last month, or even a court appearance set for next.

DK: Sports love their heroes and villains, but I think it’s important to clarify who fills those roles for different audiences. The more “online” community has had years to soak in, shall we say the "fullness" of Nick, and have therefore come away with an (at best) more nuanced view of an undeniably complicated figure. In a classic case of Twitter vs. Real Life, the fans showing up for a night match featuring the cool guy hitting trick shots while dressed in basketball drag aren’t necessarily as plugged into umpire antics from last month, or even a court appearance set for next.

Hardcore and casual fans have often diverged in tastes: while many in the proverbial intelligentsia turn their noses up at defensive tennis, courtside spectators are known to get a thrill out of an extended rally—​​even if it’s a result of so-called “pushing.” I suppose the question remains: should there be a universal reaction to Nick Kyrgios, and given his many complexities, is such a reaction even possible?

SL: It’s probably impossible to have a universal reaction about anything, much less about someone who is so multifaceted and tugs on so many emotions—outrage, delight, suspense, etc. Tennis fans are sports fans, at the end of the day, emotional and irrational even within the polite confines of our sport.

DK: And they love winners. It’s not a coincidence that the media reception of Kyrgios audibly softened with every victory. As the second week of Wimbledon unfolded, we went from hearing commentator Patrick McEnroe encourage Tsitsipas to confront Kyrgios and excuse the Greek’s repeated attempts to hit his opponent at net, to the ESPN booth's nervous reluctance to criticize Kyrgios' (admittedly smaller) outbursts in subsequent matches. Jimmy Connors and John McEnroe were “villains” on court not unlike Kyrgios, but are given respect and even deference for their ability to channel that behavior into major titles and stints atop the ATP rankings.

The message by the end of Wimbledon was clear: behave in any way you want, so long as you get the last ball over the net.

SL: It appears that would also apply to even more serious (alleged) conduct, with those domestic abuse allegations and a court notice emerging during the second week of the fortnight. By this point, the media’s criticism of Nick and his behavior was so blunted that this news was largely kept off the mainstream coverage.

If anything, it was being framed as an “off-court distraction” that Kyrgios would now have to overcome, another “challenge” that’s testing his focus—rather than a (alleged) crime.

It’s as if we’re in a Twilight Zone where Kyrgios was perhaps too harshly criticized for petulance in the past, and the tennis world has over-corrected at exactly the wrong time.

DK: There is undoubtedly a universe in which Kyrgios loses his match to Tsitsipas, the allegations emerge, and it’s at that point that I believe the ATP would have moved far more decisively than they have, say, in the case of Alexander Zverev—a case that remains ongoing.

It’s as if we’re in a Twilight Zone where Kyrgios was perhaps too harshly criticized for petulance in the past, and the tennis world has over-corrected at exactly the wrong time.

While he hasn’t commented directly on the allegations, what the media has largely gotten is a more reflective Kyrgios, one who acknowledges an immense amount of toxic behavior that he’d like to forget. We’re getting a Nick who has seemingly mastered a work-life balance with the help of a limited schedule, overcame various mental health struggles, and credits much of his new perspective to a vastly improved personal life.

The villain is yet to jump out this summer, an observation which is itself perhaps a testament to the fact that Kyrgios can and has been his own worst enemy. Can Kyrgios keep out of his own way long enough to achieve complete redemption, or will he remain a man of multitudes?