Bryan Bros. Doubles Goats or Hoax?

All those titles or no?

  • Yes, They would have been as successful, they would beat Nadal and Fed week in, week out

    Votes: 30 66.7%

  • No the sight of Murray and Djoker on the other side of the net would make them cringe

    Votes: 15 33.3%
  • Total voters
    45
  • Poll closed .
surfvland

surfvland

Semi-Pro
I think the Bryans are an awesome doubles team. Definitely a positive force for American tennis.

My question is:

Would the Bryan Bros. have been as successful if they were playing in an era when more elite singles players contested doubles titles at every tournament? i.e. the 70's and 80's.
 
No, they are great because they work really hard together, have been together as a team a very long time, and have the great right hand left hand combination.

But there's not enough money and prestige in doubles to attract top competition.

They got beat in the '08 olympics by Fed and Wawrinka.. and those guys rarely play with each other.

Fed and Nadal if they put work into it could've been the best doubles team ever.


so good for them, it's a nice story.. i don't know how much money they've made along the way, but i'm happy for their success.... they are probably the only doubles players anyone could actually name.


How much longer are they going to play together?
 
surfvland said:
I think the Bryans are an awesome doubles team. Definitely a positive force for American tennis.

My question is:

Would the Bryan Bros. have been as successful if they were playing in an era when more elite singles players contested doubles titles at every tournament? i.e. the 70's and 80's.
Click to expand...

surfvland, The Bryans are winning much because they don't have tough opposition as the best players don't play doubles.

I believe they would not have succeed against Newcombe/Roche or Emerson/Laver.
 
Bhagi Katbamna said:
They've beaten the best singles players when they have played doubles.
Click to expand...

because they're playing those matches as their number one priority will full intensity while most of the top singles players use the doubles match as a sort of warm-up for their singles. Fed was in his practice gear while playing doubles in Halle
 
It's faulty logic to think that the best singles players always make the best double players. The skillsets, tactics, and movement are different.
 
Wow. Is this thread turning into Bash the Bryans? Good Lord, these guys are the only male American players that are consistently playing, winning and bringing home trophies. They work hard and perfectly dovetail with each other's game.

Maybe they are taking advantage of the lack of quality doubles teams, but so what? Seeing as how they are the only male American players that are representing us as Champions, I will give them the benefit of the doubt. I'm very proud of their success.
 
Doubles is a completely different animal than when McEnroe and Fleming were on tour. Whether or not the top singles players use it as a "warm-up" or not is not only speculation, it's irrelevant. Fed, Nadal, or Djoker couldn't "turn on" a light switch and become doubles champions on a whim. You need to be EXCEPTIONAL at net to be competitive. Today's top singles players fear the net like the plague. Serve-and-volley is conducive to quick hands and reflexes. Baseline bashing, not so much.
 
Last edited:
Disgruntled Worker said:
Doubles is a completely different animal than when McEnroe and Fleming were on tour. Whether or not the top singles players use it as a "warm-up" or not is not only speculation, it's irrelevant. Fed, Nadal, or Djoker couldn't "turn on" a light switch and become doubles champions on a whim. You need to be EXCEPTIONAL at net to be competitive. Today's top singles players fear the net like the plague. Serve-and-volley is conducive to quick hands and reflexes. Baseline bashing, not so much.
Click to expand...

Agree, however doubles is also extremely serve and return dependent, and I believe the top singles players are superior in that area.
 
droliver said:
It's faulty logic to think that the best singles players always make the best double players. The skillsets, tactics, and movement are different.
Click to expand...

Exactly. laughed out loud when I read above that the "best players don't play doubles". Hilarious how it is assumed by some that best singles = best players. :rolleyes:
 
droliver said:
It's faulty logic to think that the best singles players always make the best double players. The skillsets, tactics, and movement are different.
Click to expand...

I totally agree. Doubles is different to singles and you don't necessarily get an ideal doubles pairing by just lumping 2 top singles players together and expecting them to come up with the goods. Nadal and Djokovic and Djokovic and Murray have paired off for doubles in the past and none of them have got anywhere.

In past eras, the great doubles partnerships have been Macmillan and Hewitt (Frew M. and Bob H.), Todd Woodbridge and Mark Woodforde, 'The Woodies', Tim and Tom Gullikson, 'The Gullikson Twins' etc. None of these was a top singles player but played great doubles together and won most of the doubles titles going. The only instance I can think of where a top male singles player established a successful doubles partnership was John McEnroe with Peter Fleming and, even there, McEnroe was the only one of them who was great at singles as well. On the women's side, Billie-Jean King and Martina Navratilova won a few doubles titles together but I can't readily think of another two.

The Bryans are therefore typical of a truly great doubles partnership who dominate at what they are best at, doubles tennis while neither of them are great singles players. IMO they thoroughly deserve their reputation as the current GOATS of men's doubles tennis!
 
The Bryans discussed this on one of the fuzzyyellowballs doubles videos. They have a set pattern of "plays" that they use that wins them points. It works in doubles due to their aggressiveness at the net of the net player.
 
Mainad said:
I totally agree. Doubles is different to singles and you don't necessarily get an ideal doubles pairing by just lumping 2 top singles players together and expecting them to come up with the goods. Nadal and Djokovic and Djokovic and Murray have paired off for doubles in the past and none of them have got anywhere.

In past eras, the great doubles partnerships have been Macmillan and Hewitt (Frew M. and Bob H.), Todd Woodbridge and Mark Woodforde, 'The Woodies', Tim and Tom Gullikson, 'The Gullikson Twins' etc. None of these was a top singles player but played great doubles together and won most of the doubles titles going. The only instance I can think of where a top male singles player established a successful doubles partnership was John McEnroe with Peter Fleming and, even there, McEnroe was the only one of them who was great at singles as well. On the women's side, Billie-Jean King and Martina Navratilova won a few doubles titles together but I can't readily think of another two.

The Bryans are therefore typical of a truly great doubles partnership who dominate at what they are best at, doubles tennis while neither of them are great singles players. IMO they thoroughly deserv their reputation as the current GOATS of men's doubles tennis!
Click to expand...

Yes but you don't understand my premise of 2 top singles players playing together week in week out. So they would be in sync.
 
It doesn't matter if the top players don't play doubles because doubles is a whole different game.

The Bryans deserve the doubles GOAT title.
 
zam88 said:
No, they are great because they work really hard together, have been together as a team a very long time, and have the great right hand left hand combination.

But there's not enough money and prestige in doubles to attract top competition.

They got beat in the '08 olympics by Fed and Wawrinka.. and those guys rarely play with each other...
Click to expand...

Roger and Stan practiced and played doubs quite a few times for Davis Cup. They also played doubs a number of times outside of Davis Cup. I believe that their 2nd best result was runner up for ATP World Tour Masters (Indian Wells).
 
They're a great team but by no means are either of them even close to the best doubles players in history.

I encourage anyone to watch the French Open doubles final vs Llodra and Mahut. Llodra was by far the best player on the court. He had to partner Mahut who struggled for much of the match and was picked on by the Bryans who were sharp enough to notice this. Llodra got the upper hand in the closest encounters more often than not.

Two Llodras would smoke the Bryans 9 times out of 10 imo. So, with some practice I imagine the likes of Federer and Tsonga would make extremely competitive doubles players.
 
Bobby Jr said:
They're a great team but by no means are either of them even close to the best doubles players in history.

I encourage anyone to watch the French Open doubles final vs Llodra and Mahut. Llodra was by far the best player on the court. He had to partner Mahut who struggled for much of the match and was picked on by the Bryans who were sharp enough to notice this. Llodra got the upper hand in the closest encounters more often than not.

Two Llodras would smoke the Bryans 9 times out of 10 imo. So, with some practice I imagine the likes of Federer and Tsonga would make extremely competitive doubles players.
Click to expand...

I see your point. If players paired up in the top ten and played doubles together every week, they would become a major force on the doubles tour.
 
pjonesy said:
Wow. Is this thread turning into Bash the Bryans? Good Lord, these guys are the only male American players that are consistently playing, winning and bringing home trophies. They work hard and perfectly dovetail with each other's game.

Maybe they are taking advantage of the lack of quality doubles teams, but so what? Seeing as how they are the only male American players that are representing us as Champions, I will give them the benefit of the doubt. I'm very proud of their success.
Click to expand...

Is the fact that the Bryans are Americans make the case for doubles any better? Would doubles be less favourable if the #1 team came from another country?

The discussion is not about American tennis.
 
if they wind up with the most trophies, then...they've got the most trophies, you can't take that away from them, they beat who the tour put in front of them. you could call them the GOAT doubles team and have a good argument.

but it's pretty much a given that if the top 20 guys played doubles with regularity, things would be...different. like a few people have mentioned, federer plus...nadal, gasquet, tsonga, whoever, is gonna beat those guys more often than not.
 
surfvland said:
The Bros will probably retire in the next few years... I wonder were doubles will go then.
Click to expand...

doubles will go right down the friggin toilet probably.

as singles got physically tougher doubles has suffered big time..i remember supermac/Steffi graf were in mixed doubles 1999, Steffi withdrew because of her singles run to final, mac wasn't happy..(youcannotbeserious).

if the top folk played doubles now then that would happen all the time.
 
If the best singles players played doubles all the time, then they would eventually become better than the Bryans Bros. There is plenty of evidence to back this up.

However, the best singles players wouldnt necessarily be the best doubles players. A Fed/Nadal team would not necessarily be the best doubles team, maybe its Gasquet-Wawrinka or something.
 
Morj said:
If the best singles players played doubles all the time, then they would eventually become better than the Bryans Bros. There is plenty of evidence to back this up.

However, the best singles players wouldnt necessarily be the best doubles players. A Fed/Nadal team would not necessarily be the best doubles team, maybe its Gasquet-Wawrinka or something.
Click to expand...

very true...although the idea of fed/nadal, specifically, sounds like a pretty brutal combination.
 
They wouldn't cringe at the sight of Murray and Djokovic tomorrow, since it requires a great deal of doubles practice to play top level doubles. Yet, Djokovic and Murray would likely play great doubles if they played it frequently as a team. They's be potentially very tough for the Bryan brothers. The Bryan brothers are the accomplished doubles players in history, though they barely missed out on a Grand Slam recently. Yet, I would take McEnroe and Fleming for example. I've watched both teams live and McEnroe was just out of this world in doubles.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2LyJ6BKKmSE
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

H
Bryan Bros break cardinal doubles axiom, pay dearly
Replies
7
Views
859
Bobby Jr
Bobby Jr
M
Bryan Bros. Clinch Stanford ATP Doubles Race
Replies
6
Views
960
Fedace
Fedace
Aussie Darcy
  • Poll Poll
Marcelo Melo overtakes Bryan Brothers as doubles number 1
Replies
9
Views
1K
mavsman149
mavsman149
C
Are the Bryan Brothers the best doubles team in history?
Replies
21
Views
3K
Sentinel
Sentinel
tennisaddict
NY Times : Doubles Players thank Bryans for Tour Existence
Replies
4
Views
855
PeteD
PeteD
Back
Top