PDA

View Full Version : Bryan brothers vs prime McEnroe/Fleming


mcenroefan
07-05-2012, 06:10 PM
With the Bryan Brothers roaring to all sorts of records, and the desire to throw out a thread that didn't include Fed, Nadal, or Nole, I ask this question:

Would the Bryan Brothers thrash a prime McEnroe/Fleming?

TeflonTom
07-05-2012, 06:43 PM
**** no. they would get their asses handed to em

more interestin question is woodies v mcenroe/fleming. even then, reckon mac n flem prolly got the wood on the ozzies. no pun intended

doubles is 2nd rate tennis played by 3rd rate players these days. real shame cos its a beautiful form o the sport

mcenroefan
07-05-2012, 06:46 PM
**** no. they would get their asses handed to em

more interestin question is woodies v mcenroe/fleming. even then, reckon mac n flem prolly got the wood on the ozzies. no pun intended

doubles is 2nd rate tennis played by 3rd rate players these days. real shame cos its a beautiful form o the sport

One positive of the Olympics might be that some of the singles stars will play serious doubles. Tasty if they did.

I agree about doubles being a wonderful form of the sport. Would love to see some Fed, Nole, Nadal, Murray doubles action.

kishnabe
07-05-2012, 06:49 PM
I would say non-prime McEnroe/Fleming would thrash Peak Bryan Brothers.

Bryan Bros though good are overrated. They win in a era based on guys who can't win in Singles and have to go Doubles to win.

In McEnroe...era the doubles players were good singles players as well. There were tougher teams to play too.

floridatennisdude
07-05-2012, 06:53 PM
It would be a helluva matchup. 5 setter with tiebreaks and a mental duel til the end. Would love to be able to know, but never will know who would win. 2 of the best pairs ever!

TeflonTom
07-05-2012, 06:55 PM
One positive of the Olympics might be that some of the singles stars will play serious doubles. Tasty if they did.

I agree about doubles being a wonderful form of the sport. Would love to see some Fed, Nole, Nadal, Murray doubles action.
trouble is that most top players dont train doubles skills any more coz (a) they never play n (b) singles is all about baseline

nadz and muzz are okay doubles players but really not that great compared to singles talent. nole is really, really bad - volleys r rubbish but the worst part is he has nfi bout strategy n positioning n stuff. he would be the weak player on most pro doubles courts

fed is probably the best dubs player of top singles guys, cos he plays a lot in dc and also when he was younger cos he was a late bloomer. hewitt was the last world no 1 to actually take doubles seriously though

last yr, davis cup wg playoffs, australia v switzerland was good doubles. fed/wawrinka v hewitt/guccione on proper fast grass in australia

TeflonTom
07-05-2012, 07:13 PM
I would say non-prime McEnroe/Fleming would thrash Peak Bryan Brothers.

Bryan Bros though good are overrated. They win in a era based on guys who can't win in Singles and have to go Doubles to win.

In McEnroe...era the doubles players were good singles players as well. There were tougher teams to play too.
yeah. up til 80s, dubs was just another form of the game played by the best tennis players.

even in the 90s, you still had a lot of good singles guys playing regularly on the doubles tour n not just in the slams. very top guys like Sampras, Agassi, etc. ignored doubles but lots of guys in top 30 still played dubs seriously while they were top players. u look at latter rounds of slam dubs tournaments n u see names like rafter, kafelnikov, edberg, bjorkman, etc. Even dubs specialists had singles pedigree. woodies made a wimby semifinal each n were both ranked top 20 at one point in their careers. Much tougher comps

think most damning evidence against bryans is how badly they got their asses kicked round the tour in first half of 00s by most of the previous generation. u had an ancient bjorkman n woodbridge given em bagels in slams when the bryans were in their mid 20s

didnt start winning slams regular til 2005/06 when most of the previous gen dubs teams who had been good singles players retired.

reckon they woulda got demolished by the dubs fields in the mid 90s, let alone what teams like mcenroe/fleming n edberg/jarryd woulda done to em in their prime

nereis
07-05-2012, 07:26 PM
Not even close.

McEnroe was a viable tour doubles player paired with just about anyone into his late 30s.

Defcon
07-05-2012, 09:00 PM
You could give them a set handicap and they'd still lose every single time.

I reckon Mac today has a net game as good as anyone today once he's at net.

TheRed
07-05-2012, 09:21 PM
The Bryan brothers are a very solid doubles team but that's pretty much it. They play percentage doubles, generally hitting up the middle but they tend to be a little predictable and don't really have that extra gear. When they play a team that is playing very well, a team that has 1, if not 2 very good doubles players that play solid with just a bit of unpredictability and creativity, the brothers get outmaneuvered.
Mac and Fleming are in another class. They really know how to play. They had creativity and flair without being wild.

borg number one
07-05-2012, 09:27 PM
McEnroe and Fleming would have a clear advantage I think. Fleming was a great doubles player too. Sometimes people overlook how dominating he could be at the net and on serve. Fleming was a big guy, who had a great overhead and he could do some damage with his groundstrokes as well. McEnroe is simply one of the greatest doubles players of all time and he had a great doubles partner in Peter Fleming. I remember watching them play some indoor matches during which they would just be all over the net and McEnroe would be crossing at the net a lot during points and just volleying up a storm. The Bryan Brothers are also a great team, but I think McEnroe-Fleming would trouble them greatly.

timnz
07-05-2012, 09:40 PM
If the McEnroe/Fleming were so great, why did they only barely beat Newcombe/Stolle at the US Open open when the latter were in their 40's?

baseliner
07-06-2012, 07:50 AM
Mcenroe/Fleming(or anyone else) in straight sets. Mcenroe and anyone else were the best doubles team at his peak

TeflonTom
07-06-2012, 09:08 AM
bryans out of wimby in 4 to an unseeded pair

THUNDERVOLLEY
07-06-2012, 09:21 AM
trouble is that most top players dont train doubles skills any more coz (a) they never play n (b) singles is all about baseline



^ The key reason most of modern men's tennis is a show of uninspired disasters aka baseline obsessed players utterly ignorant of (truly) playing the entire court.

Jet Rink
07-06-2012, 09:36 AM
Mac/Fleming. Saw them live many times back in the day and their variety and tactics are far superior to anything going down these days.

Wilander Fan
07-06-2012, 12:33 PM
Not many people talk about how much doubles has fallen off the radar. I actually used to follow doubles teams and look forward to matches like Jarryd/Edberg vs Mac/Flemming etc. One reason for this is that there are only 4 stars. The other is that its become a boring power game. Doubles would be much more interesting if you could designate duties such as one guy is always the server and one guy is always the returner.

InspectorRacquet
07-06-2012, 12:38 PM
I would say non-prime McEnroe/Fleming would thrash Peak Bryan Brothers.

Bryan Bros though good are overrated. They win in a era based on guys who can't win in Singles and have to go Doubles to win.

In McEnroe...era the doubles players were good singles players as well. There were tougher teams to play too.

That's mostly got to do with the current era being a baseline game. MacEnroe's time was a serve-and-volley era, and because the singles and doubles players both volleyed, singles players won doubles titles and vice versa.

Would the Bryan brothers do well in the MacEnroe era or vice versa? Who knows. But I think the Bryan Bros would eek out a win if they were to play in their primes.

mtr1
07-06-2012, 01:50 PM
I'd take McEnroe/Fleming. Bryans might stand a chance on clay, but it would be a comfortable win for M/F anywhere else.

TeflonTom
07-06-2012, 05:31 PM
That's mostly got to do with the current era being a baseline game. MacEnroe's time was a serve-and-volley era, and because the singles and doubles players both volleyed, singles players won doubles titles and vice versa.
hmm a little bit. but also has a lot 2 do with the increased amt of money available 2 top players from singles

eg sampras, krajicek were top s&v players in 90s n coulda been good dubs players, but pretty much ignored it because they made plenty of money from singles. dubs just interfered with their singles schedule

hewitt n fed r both v good dubs players who like the game but neither have played it regularly on tour when theyve been top players. just too hard to manage it when u makin it deep into singles draws.

Would the Bryan brothers do well in the MacEnroe era or vice versa? Who knows. But I think the Bryan Bros would eek out a win if they were to play in their primes.
no way brah. how old r u? u obv dont remember how manhandled those guys were during their first 10 yrs on tour.

from 1995 to 2001 they were useless, totally irrelevant. 2001 to 2003 they were second tier, winnin some minor titles, crashin out early in slams. 2003 to 2005 they started to become competitive 4 some of the big titles n 2006-now they have dominated.

they r best doubles combo of this generation no doubt, but when they were in their late 20s they were strugglin to beat ancient n semi-retired woodbridge, bjorkman, ullyett etc. they r just not that great

Wuppy
07-06-2012, 06:18 PM
Only a natural net player like Mac will be any good at doubles. These days most youth are trained at the baseline. Mac couldn't help but come to the net. He loved it, felt natural there, etc.

Ronaldo
07-06-2012, 06:21 PM
Prime Bryan Bros vs Current BB?