Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by Prisoner of Birth, Sep 21, 2012.
I'd say "no."
the Bryan brothers probably could do it.
Isn't Nadal a mediocre net player?
He's gotten better over the years. Anyway, he can cover the baseline with his lightning coverage and Federer takes the net
I think Federer and Nadal could overwhelm them with superior shotmaking. But they'd need some coordination, of course.
Doesn't the old tennis saying go "McEnroe and anyone else"?
I don't think anyone here who's played doubles competitively would say that two singles players, great as they may be, who have never played together and most likely don't have much team synergy going on would be able to beat a seasoned championship winning team.
That's like sticking a bunch of the current All-Stars together in a basketball team and expecting them to beat the 90s Bulls.
Well, Federer and Wawrinka did win the Olympic Gold.
You have a point.
I agree with this guy.
FED actually declined playing with NADAL. He said he likes playing with friends. By friend he singled out Yves Allegro, for one...
Just imagine Federer/Henin competing in mixed
They are both very flexible players. Nadal has the reflexes and Federer has the skill that they can both play at net. Alternatively, Nadal can cover from the back with his speed and passing and Federer can take the net, although that's a dubious strategy at best.
If you had to pair two top 10 players from the last 20 years, you couldn't get much better than them. McEnroe and the like might be stronger at net, though.
McEnroe has said Nadal is the best volley on tour. McEnroe said this in 2011 and 2012.
Thanks, we all know how steadfast Mac is in his opinions
Just noting, McEnroe said it twice. A lot of other things you only hear McEnroe say once.
maybe he was only thinking of singles.
McEnroe and Fleming on grass and hardcourt.
It doesn't necessary mean if Fed and Nadal are best in singles they would be best in doubles. It's a whole different ball game. You get guys who only play doubles and nothing else. There is a lot of tactics, selection of shots and communication going on. You may be surprised.
In soccer for example, it's better to have well synchronised team of average players than having an average team with 2 or 3 brilliant individuals with big egos that struggle to connect with the team.
Federer isn't really a team player (see Davis Cup results) whereas Nadal is much more of a team player, so they wouldn't make a great team. And Nadal has reached the SF of the US Open in 2004 in doubles, so he's got a great doubles slam performance under his belt (when Nadal was only 18).
Like "No comment?"
McEnroe was one of the best doubles players in world history, so I think his opinion that Nadal is the best volleyer in the top 4 is extremely valid. Nadal is very adept as volleying (reached USO 2004 SF in doubles).
Federer/Wawrinka beat the Bryan brothers en route to their Olympics win. Neither of them plays doubles on a regular basis, but beat one of the most successful doubles teams ever, in straight sets.
As someone else said, a doubles team is much greater than the sum of its parts. In the case of these two, the sum is less. Unless you know your partner well and understand how they're going to play, you're more likely to get hit than win.
The OT poster is the definition of clueless 100 teams would own them easily
Isn't Federer a mediocre net player?
Which is the most meaningless statement ever heard
It is like saying that being dumb betters being blind
right now they would probably lose against the bryans if it was one match.
however if they played a couple tournaments together to get accustomed to each other and the spacing right probably no one would beat them.
I'd say Federer and someone like Michaël Llodra would make a pretty good doubles combo.
Although I don't discount the value of experience most specialist doubles players don't see the likes of a Federer serve very often in tournaments. If they do it's often one guy pairing with someone else for only the first or couple of times. If they stuck with it for a while I think many current doubles specialists would start looking rather average pretty quickly.
Note that just because Federer and Wawrinka can win a gold medal playing the Bryans does not then necessarily imply that Federer and Nadal can do the same.
For one, Federer and Wawrinka have grown up together and are friends. A lot of doubles success is team synergy. Conversely, Nadal and Federer have very divergent personalities and would struggle to form the sort of team culture that a championship winning team needs.
Of note also is the fact that Federer/Wawrinka's success in doubles hasn't persisted, which is what you would expect from a more seasoned pair. I suspect that the Bryans were a bit starstruck that day and that compounded with Federer playing very well resulted in a win for them.
I would like to see a Raonic/Isner/Karlovic pairing. Isn't that the easiest way to win? Ace ace ace, and if not, a pop up return gets killed.
Silly premise: two great singles players does not at all guarantee a great doubles team.
They would be beaten by quite a few doubles TEAMS:
Nadal-Djokovic made a poor doubles team (lost to Raonic-Pospisil in 2010 Toronto), so that's probably true. Though one great singles player can bring great attributes to a doubles specialist (Nadal-Lopez), though that could just be because Nadal is a great doubles player.
Yeah, right. The 100 teams that couldn't even beat Federer+Wawrinka.
Being friends has little to do with team synergy. I'm pretty sure Federer knows more about Nadal's game (by that I mean his strengths and weaknesses), and vice versa, than he does about Wawrinka's game. And why on Earth are people assuming Federer+Nadal are gonna just meet on-court and start playing seasoned doubles players? They're gonna work together for atleast a while before their first match (like Federer and Wawrinka did for the Olympics) and they can take their match practice from there. Really, [(Federer+Nadal)/2 X 0.8] > [(Bryan Brothers)/2 X 1.2] if you wanna talk coordination and synergy.
With federer's great overheads, the forehand and the quickness to end points and with nadals topspin which none of the doubles volleyers are really used to, the dip they could make a good team
None of th current teams,son
They would be destroyed by Sedgman/McGregor,Woodbridge/Woodforde,Mac/Flemming
We don't know since they never play with each other in one team.
LOL obviously!! but against the current field I think they could have a good run!
Get rid of the rose-tint, grandpa.
Your excuse is your complete tennis iliteracy.
You even make dummie ABMK look great
If you're gonna call someone illiterate, atleast spell "illiterate" right. Oh, the irony.
I can teach you some Golden Era tennis in compensation
Nadal has much better volleying (according to John McEnroe) and overheads (one of the most important aspect of a doubles pairing) so I don't think Nadal's topspin plays as much of a part as you think it does. Though Nadal's topspin will make it difficult for players like the Bryan brothers to hit volleys.
That's why he has an Olympic gold medal in doubles.
It's an interesting thought...Williams sisters are incredible singles players and very talented, combined they massacre even the best doubles specialists simply cause they are too good....I think if given time to accustom themselves, Fed and Nadal (or any other supremely gifted players) should really be a force to be reckoned with. Fed/Waw already beat Bryans brothers on their way to Olympic doubles title.
We're not just talking the likes of Paes, Bhupathi, Bopanna, Nestor or the Bryans anymore but every single great pair in the history of the sport.
We're in an era where the top singles guys don't play doubles, but even back in the 90s that wasn't necessarily the case. And before that, we had McEnroe winning both singles and doubles majors.
As talented as they are, the Bryan brothers simply aren't the top tier talents that were playing the doubles game in the past.
Part of this is due to the game moving away from the net, where doubles is always played at.
But it's also due to the training growing up and the years of instincts built up in a great doubles player.
These are only the highlights, but notice the difference in movement, shot selection and coordination between the two pairs. Federer/Wawrinka really look like two singles guys. Federer seems to push balls back at the net and is often not aggressive enough on the returns, which is the singles game where first strike tennis isn't a consistently winning strategy anymore.
Separate names with a comma.