Mens Tennis Forums banner

Why hasnt Robin Soderking won a major yet?

5K views 81 replies 59 participants last post by  Pirata. 
#1 ·
He has all the shots and the physical tools but he seems unwilling to finish things at the net :confused:
 
#2 ·
Top 4 is too consistent and Soderling has the tennis to beat one top 4 but you you need to beat 2 to win a grand slam in this era. Del Potro did it in 2009 but I dont expect it too happen very often.
 
#7 ·
Good question. It's something all of his fans are asking. Point is people don't realize how insanely talented he was even early in his career. Can take some video evidence



He was always close to beating the very best even at young age. Then in early 2007 he had a devastating injury of his wrist that cost an entire season. Could have costed his career. That set him back big time.

What turned him on the right track again was Magnus Norman. When they ended their collaboration he pointed at these factors turning Robin into the player of today:

- Robin has become stronger mentally and turned his negative body language. That has led to more consistency

- Finally being able to deliver in major tournaments. That was a problem in his early career.

- Plays with more margin and more variation. On clay this has been his success factor.

- Developed his volley. Dares to follow up his heavy groundstrokes on important points.

- Forehand returns are better on fast surfaces.


You got to think that IF HE HAD DONE THIS EARLIER maybe he would have won a slam. Now to be perfectly honest he has only been the awesome player of today since 2009. Imagine if he had been like this since 2005-2006. Then I think we would have seen a slam and more SF/F too
 
#35 ·
You got to think that IF HE HAD DONE THIS EARLIER maybe he would have won a slam. Now to be perfectly honest he has only been the awesome player of today since 2009. Imagine if he had been like this since 2005-2006. Then I think we would have seen a slam and more SF/F too
You are joking. Right now it is waaaay easier to win a Slam (or go deep in one) than five years ago.
 
#44 ·
Haha that's the best joke I've read all day. He doesn't hold a candle to either of them.
 
#11 ·
This is really the problem with modern tennis. It's not necessarily that we have a lack of depth in the modern game, but more that the homogenised surfaces let the same players be dominant on all surfaces.

If you had 4 truly, markedly different Slam surfaces (or even only 3) then players would have to pick one to hone their style for, and on the others they'd be more susceptible. It makes opportunities for other players. Therefore in any 12 months most of the top 10 might have a real shot at the final Saturday at a Slam - just they'd be mostly specialising in different ones. Would make for far more interesting and fresh matchups in the second week.

Unfortunately everyone just wants to see the top couple of players play each other over and over and over again - in Slams, in Masters, wherever. Ideally on a completely boring court which gives both of them a roughly equal chance playing roughly the same unchanged style every single time.
 
#15 ·
From what I've seen of Soderling at net, this is not a bad thing.

More so than any of the four players above him (yes, even Murray), Soderling seems susceptible to the early round upset. When he gets going, he has the chance to beat Federer or Nadal. But when he doesn't, he can blow a two-sets-to-none lead to Granollers or look pathetic toward the end against Dolgopolov (both occured after that Nadal win). I'll give the Tomic loss a pass due to the circumstances but the other two were really bad.
 
#16 ·
The obvious answer is that though he is talented and can hit the ball extremely well when in form, his game is limited and he doesn't move as well as the current top 4. Add to that, his GS draws have mostly been ridiculous these last couple of years.

That said, if he once again can nail his form for one of these slams and is a bit lucky with the draw for once, then he might just snatch a slam one day.
 
#17 ·
Because he isn't good enough? He's the best in the world at winning 250 and 500 events but a combined record of 6-31 against the top 4 players in the world means you're going to have ZERO grand slams . . .

He's definitely more deserving than DelPo but if you look at the rest of the top 4 they all beat up on each other. No one guy with the exception of Nole this year dominates all the other 3. The same can't be said for Soderling, thats why he's nowhere close to winning a slam let alone ever making a final again
 
#23 ·
Because he isn't good enough? He's the best in the world at winning 250 and 500 events but a combined record of 6-31 against the top 4 players in the world means you're going to have ZERO grand slams . . .

He's definitely more deserving than DelPo but if you look at the rest of the top 4 they all beat up on each other. No one guy with the exception of Nole this year dominates all the other 3. The same can't be said for Soderling, thats why he's nowhere close to winning a slam let alone ever making a final again
If only..

Short Answer? Hasn't been good & lucky enough.

Long Answer:
Robin wasn't a match player(period.) until 2009 whether it was MM events or Slams. Only tournament he's been consistently good in through his career has been Davis Cup. He went 3-6 in finals up to 2008. 2009 and onwards he's 7-4 in finals. Bringing up career stats for Robin in any regard against the top is meaningless anyway since there is such a distinct difference between young Robin and prime Robin, unlike the current top4 who's been top since their teen years.

Many probably didn't follow him that much before 2009, he was just dime a dozen on the tour and a non-factor in big tournaments. However those who did knew he always had the game to make an impact. His mental state just didn't allow him, he was still a little boy in a big man's body. And of course the constant flow of injuries, the late 2007 injury being the worst.

Considering it took him to 24-25 years of age to figure out his mental obstacles, he's creating himself a pretty decent career. A MS1000 title, 10 in total, two slam finals, Masters finals semi, top rank no.4. Pretty much all of this accomplished in the last 2½ years. Probably 2-3 good years still to come aswell. He might never have the chance in a slam when all players are on top of their game, but then again that's not how the process usually works. He'll need to be opportunistic to win a slam, and that hasn't happened for him yet. At the end of the day, constant exits against Roger & Rafa in the Slams where he has a legit chance(RG, USO) is nothing to be too surprised about. People seem to forget that he other than Rafa also beat much more experienced and accomplished players in RG 09 like Ferrer, Davydenko and Gonza. Normally when you consecutively beat four such strong players, you win the title. He just needs a similar run and that extra luck going for him, and he may one day win. But nothing will ever be for granted in Robin's case.
 
#18 ·
RG 2009 was his first slam final, it's understandable that he would play poorly. Fed also played extremely well (he hit like 4 aces in the 2nd set tiebreak) and Fed at his best is a horrible matchup for Soda.

RG 2010 on the other hand was horrible. He showed that at his best Nadull has no chance against him, he was more experienced at the top level of tennis and in slam finals, and Nadull was not playing especially well all year. Soderclown showed up for the final though and it looks like he won't ever show up for a slam final like Murray.

Since that choke he's regressed, he really needs to get back to his previous level and figure out how to get over that last hump of playing well in finals. Other than that he's shown he can go far at every slam and can beat anyone, so there's no other reason he can't pull out a slam or two especially when Fed retires.
 
#21 ·
:superlol::superlol::superlol:

So when Olderer is winning it's because he plays well. But when Nadal is winning his opponent choked.

Classic delusional Fedtard, Olderer's clay tennis was the worst in his career in 2009.
 
#22 ·
and chances are even smaller nowadays. he faced federer too many times; his win over nadal at FO came when nadal wasn't at his best.
 
#24 ·
Because he doesn't deserve to. Next?
 
#26 · (Edited)
Soderling would win slams in the 90s or early 2000s, just not an easy thing to do in this era. Consistency of the top 3 is unbelivable, I think even Djokovic got a better consistency at showing up at slam semifinals since 2007 than prime Sampras:

12/18 slam SFs since 2007 RG and 16/18 slam QFs

Prime Sampras from Wimbledon 93 to Usopen 97 is: 11/18 slam SFs and 13/18 slam QFs

Federer is ofcourse 29/29 slam QFs and 26/29 slam SFs since Wimbledon 2004 and Nadal is 15/22 slam SFs and 19/22 slam QFs since RG 2006

So we basically have 3 guys more consistant than the most consistant player of the 90s playing at the same time.

Even Murray got good stats 7/12 SFs since the Usopen 2008 final. Definetly the most consistant top 4 of all time, counting master series aswell.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ouragan
#27 ·
First of all he is top player only since RG 09- so it isn´t like we are talking about guy who is in top 5 for few years.. he is in top 5 what a year? - now even Ferrer surpassed him - but overall when we compare him to best players - players above him in ranking - far worse movement, deffense and he is very vulnerable to weather changes- and all slams are played outdoor. Then when his 1st serves % drops he is in big trouble, when his FH didn´t work he is in big trouble, but when guys like Federer, Nadal, Djokovic, Murray didn´t have something good in match, they always can change something, but Soderling is too far predictable - i don´t want to use word one-dimensional but he doesn´t have plan B. He is just hitting hard, big serve, playing agressive, he has no drop shots, volleys in his arsenal and actually volleys are maybe his weakness- with his powerfull groundstrokes and serve he can be succesfull with volleys and net game i think. But his major weakness is when he play someone above him in ranking - his big hitting game and agressive style isn´t enough, because he can´t go past their supreme deffense, and they can move him around the court and than he is out. He can play great once in 1 year that he can outhit anyone yes, but such high-tennis level isn´t possible to be played whole slam- 7 matches.
 
#29 ·
Easy: Because Novak, Rafa, Roger, Andy and Delpo are much better than him.
 
#30 ·
He doesn`t have the variety to beat the top guys on a regular basis.He is not the greatest mover and if he has to move from side to side beeing in a defensive position he usually looses.That`s what Federer is good at against him.Also in Slams u have to deal with different conditions and Soderling has struggled a lot to adapt to windy conditions compared to the others
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top