PDA

View Full Version : Nadal/Djokovic vs Bryan Bros


Lawn Tennis
12-21-2011, 11:53 PM
Assuming Nadal and Djokovic would have the chemistry and eagerness to commit to doubles for a career like the Bryans, who would win in a doubles match? The Bryan Brothers or Nadal/ Djokovic? The aggressive net players or the ball bashing, rpm baseliners?

nadalwon2012
12-22-2011, 12:44 AM
Bryan Brothers, comfortably. But Nadal-Federer would be unbeatable.

The Bawss
12-22-2011, 01:04 AM
Bryan Brothers, comfortably. But Nadal-Federer would be unbeatable.

I agree that Naderer would be pretty monstrous as their games complete eachother's. Imagine seeing 26 grand slams across the net! With that said, the Bryans have sweet net games though, and a lot of doubles experience so no bakery products would be dished out I don't suppose.

Anyway, Naderer would never happen - it's a massive waste of both of their time.

CMM
12-22-2011, 02:23 AM
Nadal/Djokovic got defeated by Raonic/Pospisil at the Rogers Cup in 2010.
The Bryan brothers would probably beat them too.

MichaelNadal
12-22-2011, 02:26 AM
Nadal/Djokovic got defeated by Raonic/Pospisil at the Rogers Cup in 2010.
The Bryan brothers would probably beat them too.

Even Nadal/Federer would get beaten by the Bryans. Doubles is just a different beast.

MariaRafael
12-22-2011, 03:59 AM
Nadal won 2 Masters tournies in doubles, and Federer is an Olympic champions. Also Bryans are old. My bet is on Fedal.

darrinbaker00
12-22-2011, 04:08 AM
Nadal won 2 Masters tournies in doubles, and Federer is an Olympic champions. Also Bryans are old. My bet is on Fedal.

You disqualified yourself from being taken seriously with that statement. Unless you're a gymnast or a high-school student, 33 is not old.

MariaRafael
12-22-2011, 04:31 AM
33 is a retirement age. A lot of players retire even earlier than that.

Andres
12-22-2011, 04:45 AM
Nadal/Djokovic got defeated by Raonic/Pospisil at the Rogers Cup in 2010.
The Bryan brothers would probably beat them too.
The Bryans lost in straight sets vs Cabal - Schwank at the French Open, and they're not even doubles players. Heck, they're not even good singles players.

TennisLovaLova
12-22-2011, 05:20 AM
^^^^^exactly what I was gonna say

pvaudio
12-22-2011, 01:23 PM
Bryans easily. People keep assuming that great singles players in doubles automatically works. Hence, the caveat and condition in the first post that not only do they need their A-game, they need to be a good doubles team.

ben123
12-22-2011, 01:33 PM
33 is a retirement age. A lot of players retire even earlier than that.

lol you know that doubles is not singles right?

niff
12-22-2011, 01:38 PM
33 is a retirement age. A lot of players retire even earlier than that.
Dan Nestor says...

http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lvqqowVMeb1r3ovdbo1_250.gif

celoft
12-23-2011, 07:09 AM
Bryan Brothers.

Xizel
12-23-2011, 07:14 AM
33 is a retirement age. A lot of players retire even earlier than that.

There's a reason why old men play doubles and not singles. There's much less movement involved.

Nadal and Djokovic would never work. Doubles is a net game. You need Fed in there somewhere.

pvaudio
12-23-2011, 07:14 AM
33 is a retirement age. A lot of players retire even earlier than that.
There was that one lady, she won a GS mixed title in 2006. Hmm....can't recall the name off the top of my head......

Cup8489
12-23-2011, 07:16 AM
33 is a retirement age. A lot of players retire even earlier than that.

proof you know nothing of doubles. Daniel Nestor was winning majors with Zimonjic in his late 30's, and was number 1 in doubles in his late 30's.

As MichaelNadal said, Doubles is a different beast.. far more important are feel and reflexes than speed and stamina. The best doubles players out there tend to be those with the most experience, ie the older players.

Crisstti
12-23-2011, 08:38 AM
The Bryans lost in straight sets vs Cabal - Schwank at the French Open, and they're not even doubles players. Heck, they're not even good singles players.

Yeah... I remember they lost to Massú - González in DC years ago.

sunof tennis
12-23-2011, 08:56 AM
33 is a retirement age. A lot of players retire even earlier than that.

Often true in singles, but historically doubles players can last quite a bit longer on the tour.

kishnabe
12-23-2011, 11:42 AM
33 is a retirement age. A lot of players retire even earlier than that.

There are doubles slam champions who are past the 40's!

Think of doubles of having 1.5 times the lifespan of singles.