Bryan Twins - losing their touch in Doubles?
- Thread starter In D Zone
- Start date
topsltennis
Semi-Pro
I don't know, they may be 'losing" their touch though.
MEAC_ALLAMERICAN
Legend
Last year a lot of people questioned why so many teams were splitting up/forming, Nestor and Zimonjic seems to have gotten the formula right after a very slow start, and rightly so deserves to be at the top right now.
Not necessarily. They're still the secnod-best team out there this year. Case in point, their ATP Race points:
Nestor/Zimonjic have 814
Bryans have 736
They're less than 100 points apart in the race. Third in line is Erlich/Ram at 467. Clearly the Bryans are still leaps and bounds ahead of the race. Not their best year, no, but they still can't be said to be "losing their touch" in my opinion.
Chances are probably zero, but I agree that they should change partners. Their mixed records are very different, which shows different partnerships could spark different results.
MEAC_ALLAMERICAN
Legend
The third set champions tiebreak wasn't much of a factor when they were winning almost everything in sight. The opposition has just gotten better, the 3rd set tiebreak has nothing to do with it.
Eviscerator
Banned
I disagree. While others are, and will always be catching up to the top dog, rule changes do make a difference. They either favor or adversely affect players. So the b astardization of mens doubles with no ad scoring certainly can have an effect, especially in doubles. The 3rd set tiebreak tends to be more of a neutral factor, but it still favors one style over another.
MEAC_ALLAMERICAN
Legend
The rule change as you said will either favor or affect a player. But they had a fantastic run in 2007, and let's face it this year some of the new teams have played them a lot tougher than in the past. A format such as this should favor the Bryans because they are the best attacking duo out there, with the lefty/righty combo. That rule change hasn’t affected them, but the competition has just gotten better. So there, we both disagree.
Eviscerator
Banned
Well just to give you a little more insight to my take on the rule changes in doubles, you can read this thread.
http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=190255
Having the receiving team decide where the non ad serve will go can make a large difference especially if the team has has a lefty vs a righty serving.
superstition
Hall of Fame
I think they should go back to the Wilson racquets they used to use.
Very simply, they're both power players who are utterly predictable in the way they play. If another team can handle the power they're a very good chance of winning. That's the primary reason why they could almost never beat Woodbridge, regardless of who he was playing with, and why they've struggled against Santoro. They're a predictable team who thrive on predictable tennis. Introduce another factor (finesse/touch) and they struggle. Essentially, they're just a lesser quality version of Eltingh and Haarhuis who could only beat Woodbridge-Woodforde if they could hit through them. They also perfectly illustrate what happens when you don't have at least one high calibre singles player in your line-up (the great teams always have two) - you lose the ability to improvise.
daddy
Legend
Andrew where do you rate Nestor and Zimonjic ? I would like to hear your comment on their style ? Ziki is pretty much a power player with good feel at the net. Does the variety on returns and volleys come from nestor in this team ? You know that none of them are also not even decent singles players ?
Only doubles specialist I recall had a decent career as a single player is Leander Paes. And his team with Lukas Dlouhy is doing good also, can be a big threat if they team up for more than a few tourneys.
GrassCourtFan
Legend
It's either that they've gotten a bit worse or the competition's gotten a bit better. It's hard to tell - they were never as dominant as Federer was, they could be beaten by the other top teams even at their best. They're still more consistent than Nestor/Zimonjic, but they haven't managed to win a Slam this year, and N/Z have.
Nestor was actually a reasonable singles player; he stopped playing singles because of injury concerns, doubles was easier on his body. Got as high as #58 (that was ten years ago), perhaps could've made it higher but his shoulder (?) gave out on him and he switched to exclusively doubles. He still played singles for a while in Davis Cup (maybe still does?), he's beaten players like Rios and Kuerten . Beat Rafter at the 2000 Olympics. I mean, it's not like he was that great at singles, but he had some capabilities.
Nestor was actually a reasonable singles player; he stopped playing singles because of injury concerns, doubles was easier on his body. Got as high as #58 (that was ten years ago), perhaps could've made it higher but his shoulder (?) gave out on him and he switched to exclusively doubles. He still played singles for a while in Davis Cup (maybe still does?), he's beaten players like Rios and Kuerten . Beat Rafter at the 2000 Olympics. I mean, it's not like he was that great at singles, but he had some capabilities.
counter_puncher
Banned
Losing their touch... cos their americans.
peter
Professional
Jonas Björkman. Reached the no 4 spot in the singles rankings at his best.
daddy
Legend
I never really considered him, although you are correct. He was always a singles player in my mind, dont know why but when I think about him thats what I think. Anyways thanks !
Eviscerator
Banned
That depends on how you define decent career. To me making the top 20 in the world in singles is decent, and a handful of players have done that. The Woodies come to mind as both having had some success in singles.
35ft6
Legend
You don't think the Bryan Brothers are great? What about Flach and Seguso?
I rate Daniel Nestor very highly and think that Zimonjic is very lucky to be playing with him. He carried Knowles for years and will do the same with his new partner. Only difference is that Zimonjic has a stronger serve than Knowles.
I guess you have to look at your comment to see the answer. No doubles specialist can be a top flight singles player. If they were good at singles they wouldn't be doubles specialists (we'd call them all-round players). However, if you consider those highly successful doubles players who have also been highly successful singles players you'd have a much bigger list. Robert Seguso was better known for doubles but still a talented singles player. Daniel Nestor was ranked up around 58 (at age 19 he had a win over peak Stefan Edberg in Davis Cup), Bjorkman was top 10, Mirni was top 20, Santoro has been up to the top 20 (I think), Woodbridge and Woodforde had successful singles careers, so did Peter Fleming, Mark Edmondson, Kim Warwick, Paul Haarhuis, Jacco Eltingh, Anders Jarryd, John Fitzgerald, etc, etc, etc.
Truth is, the Bryans are probably the only successful team where at least one of the pair hasn't had top 50ish success in singles.
In relation to the great doubles teams, I think they're both better than average but not on a par with the likes of Sedgman-McGregor, Woodbridge-Woodforde, Emerson-Stolle, McEnroe-Fleming, Newcombe-Roche, Smith-Lutz, McMillan-Hewitt, Haarhuis-Eltingh, to name only a few of the all-time greatest doubles teams.
