Has Soderling proved his win over Nadal was not a fluke? [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Has Soderling proved his win over Nadal was not a fluke?

raahaat7
06-02-2010, 09:34 AM
2009 F.O: Soderling def. Nadal
Reason given: injury.
2010 F.O: Soderling def. Federer
A new clay GOAT born?

tennishero
06-02-2010, 09:43 AM
no, he has to do it again now :)

Allegretto
06-02-2010, 09:46 AM
Certainly he has. The clay titles are really starting to build up for him now.

Orka_n
06-02-2010, 09:52 AM
He proved that a long time ago. Last year, in the USO and WTF. :)

ApproachShot
06-02-2010, 09:53 AM
Saying he is a clay GOAT is a severe over-reaction especially as outside Roland Garros his clay results have been somewhat mediocre given his rankings. He is more like a giant killer at the French Open - an Adriano Panatta if you like.

But he has proved his win over Nadal last year was not a fluke. He evidenced that not just by beating Federer at the quarter finals but also through the level of play he achieved. Not to mention beating Nadal in straight sets at last year's world tour finals. The only reason why he didn't do better in 3 of the Slams last year was because he ran into a certain Roger Federer.

By no means is Soderling even in the same league as Federer or Nadal but when he is playing his best tennis, he is a match for either of them.

ShotmaKer
06-02-2010, 10:04 AM
all these threads...

Certinfy
06-02-2010, 10:08 AM
He proved it a long time ago.

zcess81
06-02-2010, 10:15 AM
On HC it's not a fluke, on clay...I believe last year it was. Nadal was clearly not in best shape with his knees. He pulled out of Wimbledon as well and that says a lot. If he beats Nadal this year than I'll be the first to say it was NOT a fluke, but he has to do it this year, should he face him in the final. Nadal may not be playing his best tennis but he looks physically fit, his knees look ok, so if Soderling beats him in the final it's no fluke.

But there was nothing fluke about Soderling beating Fed yesterday...that much is clear.

PS - I wouldn't look to much into Soderling's win over Nadal at WTF...EVERYONE beat him there. Nadal was just dead mentally, physically. I mean he looked like a ghost.

Nekromanta
06-02-2010, 10:18 AM
Lol people wanting confirmation from a funny poll. Let's see whether they can both get to the final and who can win it.

The Final will decide everything.

ossie
06-02-2010, 10:20 AM
i love how you ask this before the sodal final:haha:

bokehlicious
06-02-2010, 10:21 AM
I believe last year it was. Nadal was clearly not in best shape with his knees.

Where is the Rafatard's book of excuses thread when you need it? :(

zcess81
06-02-2010, 10:23 AM
Lol people wanting confirmation from a funny poll. Let's see whether they can both get to the final and win it.

The Final will decide everything.

This is true. Berdych is playing AWESOME tennis...he could beat Soderling in semis. Same with Nadal. Even though he beat all his opponents in straight sets, he hasn't faced anyone decent yet...and he didn't look very impressive to be honest. He was very impressive in Monte Carlo. Since then he's been less and less impressive. I don't expect Almagro to win today, but he could cause Nadal a lot of trouble.

Nekromanta
06-02-2010, 10:24 AM
i love how you ask this before the sodal final:haha:

He's asking before the final because they all think Nadal will win and they want to get something positive out of it before the Final spoils the fun for them. How desperate some people can get.

zcess81
06-02-2010, 10:24 AM
Where is the Rafatard's book of excuses thread when you need it? :(


Are you saying that last year Nadal was ok? I mean I know Rafatards and Fedtards love to make excuses all the time, but come on...why the hell would he pull out of Wimbledon if he was ok? He lost 2000 points and his no.1 ranking. Nobody does that unless there is something wrong with them.

Nekromanta
06-02-2010, 10:26 AM
I don't expect Almagro to win today, but he could cause Nadal a lot of trouble.


I think only Djoko has realistic chance to take him out

zcess81
06-02-2010, 10:26 AM
We will see it if both reach the final, Nadal looks healthy this year so there will be no excuses.

No, this year WHOEVER beats Nadal (if someone beats him that is), there will be no excuses.

zcess81
06-02-2010, 10:29 AM
I think only Djoko has realistic chance to take him out

For that to be even remotely possible 2 things have to happen -

1. Nadal's level has to drop significantly.

2. Novak has to start serving really well (above 65%)

Then I would give him a chance...but really, I don't see that happening.

Plus, Novak's gonna have a very tough match today imo.

bokehlicious
06-02-2010, 10:30 AM
Are you saying that last year Nadal was ok? I mean I know Rafatards and Fedtards love to make excuses all the time, but come on...why the hell would he pull out of Wimbledon if he was ok? He lost 2000 points and his no.1 ranking. Nobody does that unless there is something wrong with them.

If he was injured why didn't he pull out of the French too? :shrug: Again, you are amongst those that didn't trust Fed's mono back in 2008 (or would you admit that Nole's win at AO was kind of "tainted"? :o) but surely you trust Rafa anytime he loses and bitches about some sore knee/ass/whatever... I see your bias hasn't changed over the years :o ;)

zcess81
06-02-2010, 10:39 AM
If he was injured why didn't he pull out of the French too? :shrug: Again, you are amongst those that didn't trust Fed's mono back in 2008 (or would you admit that Nole's win at AO was kind of "tainted"? :o) but surely you trust Rafa anytime he loses and bitches about some sore knee/ass/whatever... I see your bias hasn't changed over the years :o ;)

I'm sorry but saying you have mono/bad knees or whatever will ALWAYS have doubters. However, when a DEFENDING CHAMPION, with no.1 ranking at stake, pulls out of the most prestigious grand slam, there is not DOUBT in my mind that something is wrong with that player.

Had Nadal said after his loss to Soderling that his knees were bad/he had physical problems I would have SERIOUSLY doubted him...I'm not sure if he made any excuses after his loss last year, I didn't read his interviews, but after he pulled out of Wimbledon there was no doubt in my mind that something was seriously wrong with him (even if he didn't say it in his interviews).

If Fed was to pull out of Wimbledon this year, even his BIGGEST haters would agree that something must be wrong with him.

A lot of players make injury excuses after loses (Nadal, Federer, Djokovic etc etc they all do it) but not a single one pulls out of a grand slam for no reason.

andy neyer
06-02-2010, 10:59 AM
Only stupid Rafatards thought it was a fluke in the first place.

Erica86
06-02-2010, 11:04 AM
I'm sorry but saying you have mono/bad knees or whatever will ALWAYS have doubters. However, when a DEFENDING CHAMPION, with no.1 ranking at stake, pulls out of the most prestigious grand slam, there is not DOUBT in my mind that something is wrong with that player.

Had Nadal said after his loss to Soderling that his knees were bad/he had physical problems I would have SERIOUSLY doubted him...I'm not sure if he made any excuses after his loss last year, I didn't read his interviews, but after he pulled out of Wimbledon there was no doubt in my mind that something was seriously wrong with him (even if he didn't say it in his interviews).

If Fed was to pull out of Wimbledon this year, even his BIGGEST haters would agree that something must be wrong with him.

A lot of players make injury excuses after loses (Nadal, Federer, Djokovic etc etc they all do it) but not a single one pulls out of a grand slam for no reason.

I fully agree.

Andi-M
06-02-2010, 11:12 AM
He proved it at RG by reaching the final after beating Nadal, at Wimbledon he had decent run, US open made QFs, WTF played very well. Soderling has been very consistant since RG 09. He has had results of solid top ten player and has victories over most of the top guys.

What he proved yesterday is that he is a great player and has game, and mentality to beat anyone. What he did yesterday was much harder than what he did last year, so Kudos to him!

Aaric
06-02-2010, 11:16 AM
Of course

JanKowalski
06-02-2010, 11:17 AM
I think only Djoko has realistic chance to take him out

According to Wikipedia, he will :D

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Novak_Djokovic_career_statistics

ShotmaKer
06-02-2010, 11:18 AM
What he proved yesterday is that he is a great player and has game, and mentality to beat anyone. What he did yesterday was much harder than what he did last year, so Kudos to him!

could not agree more.

Filo V.
06-02-2010, 07:52 PM
Yes, in that he's shown he is a great player. No, in that he didn't beat a healthy Nadal. He has proven he is a legit player, but he still hasn't proven he can truly beat Rafa at 100% on clay.

Chair Umpire
06-02-2010, 08:03 PM
Only stupid Rafatards thought it was a fluke in the first place.

Yes indeed. Rafa's pulling out Wimbledon '09 was just a mind game carefully planned by evil Uncle Toni and Rafa's doctors in order to discredit Fed and Sod's accomplishments in RG '09 and disappoint Fedtards and Robintards. :D

The Magician
06-02-2010, 08:10 PM
Yes indeed. Rafa's pulling out Wimbledon '09 was just a mind game carefully planned by evil Uncle Toni and Rafa's doctors in order to discredit Fed and Sod's accomplishments in RG '09 and disappoint Fedtards and Robintards. :D

Nadal's false modesty is a cover for is extreme arrogance and self-belief. This is obvious based on his interactions with Soderling, who managed to get under his skin and beneath the "humble" Rafa. It's clear that losing to Soderling destroyed his confidence and he couldn't recover in time for Wimbledon. Arguably, he didn't recover until the clay court season this year. Having injuries as an excuse for not being confidant is not new for Nadal, see USO 2009 and AO 2010.

heya
06-02-2010, 08:10 PM
Federer says rain was bothering him so much.
This accidental loss video must be proof. (http://www.ziddu.com/download/10114294/Soderling.flv.html)

peribsen
06-02-2010, 08:16 PM
The answer to the thread is of course he has proved it, but I doubt his win last year can be described as a fluke. He won cleanly and playing great. The issue was whether Rafa was downhill at that moment (certainly seems to be the case) and couldn´t raise his game, but that is not the same as saying it was only a fluke.

Can he do it again? I think he has the tools to beat Rafa, but maybe on Sunday we'll find out. Whatever happens won't be the last word, though, for example if Rafa wins it doesn´t mean Soderling can´t beat him nextime around. Look what happened to Fed: 12-0 was followed by 12-1´. Tennis is a never ending story, that is what I enjoy the most!

brent-o
06-02-2010, 08:20 PM
The wording of the question is weird. Soderling has improved, rather impressively, that he's not a fluke in general. But he'll prove that his win over Nadal was not a fluke when he beats Nadal again.

peribsen
06-02-2010, 08:23 PM
Nadal's false modesty is a cover for is extreme arrogance and self-belief. This is obvious based on his interactions with Soderling, who managed to get under his skin and beneath the "humble" Rafa. It's clear that losing to Soderling destroyed his confidence and he couldn't recover in time for Wimbledon. Arguably, he didn't recover until the clay court season this year. Having injuries as an excuse for not being confidant is not new for Nadal, see USO 2009 and AO 2010.

You really need to see some one about this! How do you cope with truly serious problems if you fret and waste so much hate in something as irrelevant as a ball game?

Problems between Rafa and Robin started well before RG09, when Robin (a player I like more the more I get to see of him) tried to ridicule Rafa in public. Now you don´t often get to see a behaviour quite as ugly as that one from the part of a pro, and yet you try to turn it around and call the perpetrator victim, and the victim perpetrator.

Go find some new glasses!

Chloe le Bopper
06-02-2010, 08:26 PM
I honestly can't comprehend how there were even thoughts which somehow wound up forming this question.

andylovesaustin
06-02-2010, 08:59 PM
Yeah, he proved it by making it to the finals last year!

He may have had some lulls since, but that takes nothing away from his accomplishment at the French last year.

MIMIC
06-02-2010, 09:00 PM
IMO, he did it when he beat Nadal and proved it furthermore when he made it to the finals.

Billups85
06-02-2010, 09:08 PM
2009 F.O: Soderling def. Nadal
Reason given: injury.
2010 F.O: Soderling def. Federer
A new clay GOAT born?

1 clay title in his career (ATP 250). But yes, clay GOAT. :haha:

Matt01
06-03-2010, 12:20 AM
I think the word is "proven". And yes, I think he has proven it. And I never believed that his win over Nadal was a fluke anyway.


You really need to see some one about this! How do you cope with truly serious problems if you fret and waste so much hate in something as irrelevant as a ball game?

Problems between Rafa and Robin started well before RG09, when Robin (a player I like more the more I get to see of him) tried to ridicule Rafa in public. Now you don´t often get to see a behaviour quite as ugly as that one from the part of a pro, and yet you try to turn it around and call the perpetrator victim, and the victim perpetrator.

Go find some new glasses!


+1

paseo
06-03-2010, 12:35 AM
It was never a fluke.

Mjau!
06-03-2010, 12:57 AM
1 clay title in his career (ATP 250). But yes, clay GOAT. :haha:

This is exactly why Rafafans should be very afraid of Nadal losing to Söderling back to back at Roland Garros. His legacy will be in tatters!

Hottest threads of next week:

"Can Nadal be the clay GOAT despite being owned by an indoor specialist at RG?"

"Was 05-08 just an exceptionally weak clay era?"

Federer's legacy is in grave danger as well. If Nadal really isn't a clay GOAT candidate but merely a lefty Bruguera tearing up a weak field, then Roger's H2H against him will be an even bigger blemish on Fed's resumé! A lot is on stake in this tournament... Perhaps too much, which is why I don't think the ATP will allow anything but the "right" outcome (a Nadal victory) on sunday!

ShotmaKer
06-03-2010, 01:17 AM
This is exactly why Rafafans should be very afraid of Nadal losing to Söderling back to back at Roland Garros. His legacy will be in tatters!

Hottest threads of next week:

"Can Nadal be the clay GOAT despite being owned by an indoor specialist at RG?"

"Was 05-08 just an exceptionally weak clay era?"

Federer's legacy is in grave danger as well. If Nadal really isn't a clay GOAT candidate but merely a lefty Bruguera tearing up a weak field, then Roger's H2H against him will be an even bigger blemish on Fed's resumé! A lot is on stake in this tournament... Perhaps too much, which is why I don't think the ATP will allow anything but the "right" outcome (a Nadal victory) on sunday!


laughters, how do you stop them. thanks for that post, you really made my night.

Har-Tru
06-03-2010, 01:18 AM
I think the word is "proven". And yes, I think he has proven it.

"Proved" is also correct.

Sunset of Age
06-03-2010, 02:39 AM
"Proved" is also correct.

Yep, UK English versus US English, both are correct. ;)

raahaat7
06-03-2010, 05:37 AM
i love how you ask this before the sodal final:haha:

It was deliberate. I Just wanted to capture the moods either side of the final.

Billups85
06-03-2010, 09:50 AM
This is exactly why Rafafans should be very afraid of Nadal losing to Söderling back to back at Roland Garros. His legacy will be in tatters!

Hottest threads of next week:

"Can Nadal be the clay GOAT despite being owned by an indoor specialist at RG?"

"Was 05-08 just an exceptionally weak clay era?"

Federer's legacy is in grave danger as well. If Nadal really isn't a clay GOAT candidate but merely a lefty Bruguera tearing up a weak field, then Roger's H2H against him will be an even bigger blemish on Fed's resumé! A lot is on stake in this tournament... Perhaps too much, which is why I don't think the ATP will allow anything but the "right" outcome (a Nadal victory) on sunday!

The clay GOAT thing goes beyond Roland Garros. Plus Nadal beat Soderling at RG in 2006 (and has another victory on clay in Roma last year). Even if Nadal loses the final against Robin, their H2H would be 2-2 on clay and 3-3 overall, so the "Nadal being owned" argument is :bs:.

Nekromanta
06-03-2010, 10:04 AM
The clay GOAT thing goes beyond Roland Garros. Plus Nadal beat Soderling at RG in 2006 (and has another victory on clay in Roma last year). Even if Nadal loses the final against Robin, their H2H would be 2-2 on clay and 3-3 overall, so the "Nadal being owned" argument is :bs:.

Nadal owned? When rested Nadal owns both Roger and Söder even on hards. He owns Roger even on the Über-fast Dubai court.

Söder has absolutely no chance unless Nadal gets emotional or defeatist or whatever the other top 5 infected him with.

peribsen
06-03-2010, 10:27 AM
This is exactly why Rafafans should be very afraid of Nadal losing to Söderling back to back at Roland Garros. His legacy will be in tatters!

Hottest threads of next week:

"Can Nadal be the clay GOAT despite being owned by an indoor specialist at RG?"

"Was 05-08 just an exceptionally weak clay era?"

Federer's legacy is in grave danger as well. If Nadal really isn't a clay GOAT candidate but merely a lefty Bruguera tearing up a weak field, then Roger's H2H against him will be an even bigger blemish on Fed's resumé! A lot is on stake in this tournament... Perhaps too much, which is why I don't think the ATP will allow anything but the "right" outcome (a Nadal victory) on sunday!

I honestly fail to see any logic in your assumptions. Just why the fact Soderling has found his A-game on clay proves 05-08 was a weak era? Nadal wasn´t all that good outside clay in his early years, yet he managed to improve to the point of taking majors on grass and hard (WB and AO). Did those victories prove Fed's era on both surfaces were 'weak'? Or did they just prove Nadal's capacity for adapting to new surfaces?

Please stop being nonsensical!

Bazooka
06-03-2010, 10:30 AM
he still hasn't proven he can truly beat Rafa at 100% on clay.

Who can prove that? :shrug:

JCF at Rome 08? no way. Fed? in Madrid 09 Nadal was not playing well already, just watch his semi with Novak or QF with Verdasco. And in Hamburg 07 he wasn't 100% either, but that's the closest you can get to defeating a fit Nadal on clay.

So to answer the poll, yes, he has proven himself. By reaching one final and one semi (at least) and defeating the two guys that have been in the last 4 finals, he has proven to be a real good player in this tournament even if he loses tomorrow to Tomas. Why here and not in Rome or Madrid I don't know, but he knows how to play at RG for sure, even if his game takes no advantage from clay at all.

NADALbULLS
06-03-2010, 10:43 AM
I've said before and I'll say it again, even Nadal with knee troubles took Soderling to a tie-break in the 4th set. If thats the best Soderling can do then I don't think Nadal will have any trouble with him in the final. Nadal moving well this year and more importantly he's playing a lot more aggressive than past years, more than 2008 even.

ShotmaKer
06-03-2010, 10:52 AM
I've said before and I'll say it again, even Nadal with knee troubles took Soderling to a tie-break in the 4th set. If thats the best Soderling can do then I don't think Nadal will have any trouble with him in the final. Nadal moving well this year and more importantly he's playing a lot more aggressive than past years, more than 2008 even.

can you actually read the OP let alone the thread title ?

Hingisova
06-03-2010, 11:47 AM
If the two meet and he plays the same high level of tennis he played against Fed, Soderling will take Rafa in straights!

Hingisova:wavey:

Matt01
06-03-2010, 11:48 AM
I've said before and I'll say it again, even Nadal with knee troubles took Soderling to a tie-break in the 4th set. If thats the best Soderling can do then I don't think Nadal will have any trouble with him in the final.


Despite your irritating username, you are not Einstein so you better be quiet about things you know nothing about :)

peribsen
06-03-2010, 12:06 PM
Allow me to turn the original question on its head: WILL A NADAL VICTORY AGAINST SODERLING ON SUNDAY (if they both make it, that is) PROVE THAT LAST YEAR'S RESULT WAS A FLUKE?

NO

Will a future Soderling win over Rafa on clay prove it wasn´t? NO.
Will a further win by any of them over the other 'prove' or 'disprove' it was a fluke? NO.

Why can't people simply take each match in their stride and accept that tennis (luckily for all of us as that is where the fun lies) is a never ending story?

Last year, Soderling proved beyond any doubt that he can beat Rafa on clay. A legitimate doubt may arise on whether Rafa was at his best on that match, but the word fluke should play no role here.

Why don't we just relax and enjoy the tennis?

Start da Game
06-03-2010, 12:27 PM
his beatdown of fed has no impact whatsoever on the belief of genuine tennis fans that nadal lost only due to an injury last year.......

those who believe that it was not a fluke are only those who find immense pleasure in a nadal defeat at the french as they were ridiculously bored of the onesided contests or that they are just plain haters.......

if soderling gets to the final, nadal will demonstrate to soderling on the art 'clay court tennis'.......

Orka_n
06-03-2010, 03:37 PM
his beatdown of fed has no impact whatsoever on the belief of genuine tennis fans that nadal lost only due to an injury last year.......

those who believe that it was not a fluke are only those who find immense pleasure in a nadal defeat at the french as they were ridiculously bored of the onesided contests or that they are just plain haters.......

if soderling gets to the final, nadal will demonstrate to soderling on the art 'clay court tennis'.......Now THAT I look forward to. :rocker2:

River
06-03-2010, 03:40 PM
Just cause he beat Fed has no bearing on the circumstaces in the manner he beat Rafa in.

Unless Fed suddenly drops out of Wimby with an injury, I have no reason to think it's the same.

delpiero7
06-03-2010, 04:47 PM
This is a tricky question IMO.

No doubt that Soderling has played lights out tennis from RG '09 to this point (barring a few dodgy results, notably at the Aussie Open) and he fully deserves to be where he is right now.

However, the only way to prove the something isn't/wasn't a fluke is to repeat the same thing again. So in this instance, the only way to prove it (which I'm not entirely sure it was a fluke anyways) is to beat Nadal on clay again.

Beating Federer on clay has been done by 'average' players such as Montanes, Gulbis and Wawrinka over the past couple of seasons. Whereas Nadal has only lost to Federer and Soderling in the same time span.

So basically by beating Federer, Soderling hasn't proved or disproved anything regarding his victory over Nadal (which most likely wasn't a fluke in the first place). Hopefully they meet in the final so this argument can be put to bed. But then I suppose we'd have endless gloating from one set of fans which is even worse.

peribsen
06-03-2010, 04:53 PM
Hopefully they meet in the final so this argument can be put to bed. But then I suppose we'd have endless gloating from one set of fans which is even worse.

Too true. It will be dreadful either way, sad.

Matt01
06-03-2010, 06:21 PM
Beating Federer on clay has been done by 'average' players such as Montanes, Gulbis and Wawrinka over the past couple of seasons. Whereas Nadal has only lost to Federer and Soderling in the same time span.


Beating Federer on clay in Estoril or Monte Carlo is one thing. Beating him at a Slam on clay is a completely different thing.

heya
06-03-2010, 07:18 PM
It's no fluke that Fed gloats over "so many Slams' he won. In fact, he did again after he lost to Soderling.
Soderling knows. Other players are too stupid to do the right things on court.
Federer didn't prove that some of his Slams & Masters Series "wins" weren't flukes either.
The real players and fair umpiring stopped Federer's fluke wins in Indian Wells, Toronto, Miami, Hamburg, Cincinnati, Madrid, Masters Cup, & Slams, especially French Open, Wimbledon & US Open.
There're fewer cowards handing Federer gifts.
Blake, Gasquet, Baghdatis, Safin, Hewitt & Roddick to eliminate the real opponents in Federer's draws.

raahaat7
06-04-2010, 02:45 AM
It's no fluke that Fed gloats over "so many Slams' he won. In fact, he did again after he lost to Soderling.
Soderling knows. Other players are too stupid to do the right things on court.
Federer didn't prove that some of his Slams & Masters Series "wins" weren't flukes either.
The real players and fair umpiring stopped Federer's fluke wins in Indian Wells, Toronto, Miami, Hamburg, Cincinnati, Madrid, Masters Cup, & Slams, especially French Open, Wimbledon & US Open.
There're fewer cowards handing Federer gifts.
Blake, Gasquet, Baghdatis, Safin, Hewitt & Roddick to eliminate the real opponents in Federer's draws.

Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.

Sunset of Age
06-04-2010, 02:54 AM
Fantastic Troll (baiting and replying)-thread.

Keep it going, VAMOS! :worship:

tennishero
06-06-2010, 02:52 PM
*cough*

Agassi'sMullet
06-06-2010, 03:35 PM
Hey guys

tennishero
06-06-2010, 03:36 PM
Hey guys

hai :D

Mjau!
06-06-2010, 03:48 PM
He'll beat Rafa @ Wimbledon instead. :yeah:

Surcouf
06-06-2010, 03:50 PM
Nadal just proved it was a complete and total fluke.

federernadalfan
06-06-2010, 03:52 PM
fluke indeed

spanish_army
06-06-2010, 03:54 PM
Absolutely fluke

ossie
06-06-2010, 03:55 PM
Now THAT I look forward to. :rocker2:hope you enjoyed it :wavey:

spriwi
06-06-2010, 04:02 PM
fluke ;)

Gladiator
06-06-2010, 04:06 PM
fluke fluke fluke
6-4 6-2 6-4 what an easy win

Bad Religion
06-06-2010, 04:07 PM
Biggest fluke ever in the game

peribsen
06-06-2010, 04:09 PM
Hello from Majorca, we are as pleased as punch!

No, I don´t think last years result was a fluke. Soderling got a clean win over Nadal; Rafa was certainly not at his best, but that doesn´t diminish Robin's merit.

So last year was not a fluke, but this year the order of things was restored.

Pirata.
06-06-2010, 04:14 PM
Nadaltards :rolleyes:

It wasn't a fluke.

Stefwhit
06-06-2010, 04:14 PM
Fluke, indeed! Your honor, we'd like to rest our case!

born_on_clay
06-06-2010, 04:14 PM
you have all seen today
2009 was a fluke

Filo V.
06-06-2010, 04:45 PM
His run in itself isn't a fluke. His win last year to Rafa..............I won't say it's a fluke, but it's a one in a million type match for him.

superslam77
06-06-2010, 04:46 PM
rafatards bad losers in 2009 and bad winners in 2010. Instead of celebrating Nadal look at this....

Certinfy
06-06-2010, 04:47 PM
Epic response from Rafatards :haha:

Guy Haines
06-06-2010, 04:53 PM
Yes, he's proven it wasn't a fluke.

Without a doubt he's been the second best player at Roland Garros these past two years.*

(*Though Del Potro came closer to beating the 2009 champion.)

Persimmon
06-06-2010, 05:01 PM
Yes, he's proven it wasn't a fluke.

Without a doubt he's been the second best player at Roland Garros these past two years.*


Good point.

Sod was the second best player at RG in 2009 and 2010.

Surcouf
06-06-2010, 05:07 PM
rafatards bad losers in 2009 and bad winners in 2010. Instead of celebrating Nadal look at this....

It just proved the point that every intelligent man had.

Nadal was injured last year, he could not play his game against Soderling and was out for 2 months after that match, missing Wimbledon and letting his number one spot to Federer.

The haters who had crowned Soderling has the "Nadal killer" can now hide forever. You went as far as saying that Nadal faked an injury. Now, you are whining because we have the proof that it was a complete fluke.

Chair Umpire
06-06-2010, 05:10 PM
rafatards bad losers in 2009 and bad winners in 2010. Instead of celebrating Nadal look at this....

After all the shit they've been reading for 1 year from Fedtards like you I think they're taking this victory pretty well.

Sorry if you feel roasted, Fedtard. :wavey:

It just proved the point that every intelligent man had.

Nadal was injured last year, he could not play his game against Soderling and was out for 2 months after that match, missing Wimbledon and letting his number one spot to Federer.

The haters who had crowned Soderling has the "Nadal killer" can now hide forever. You went as far as saying that Nadal faked an injury. Now, you are whining because we have the proof that it was a complete fluke.


This. :)

superslam77
06-06-2010, 05:11 PM
It just proved the point that every intelligent man had.

Nadal was injured last year, he could not play his game against Soderling and was out for 2 months after that match, missing Wimbledon and letting his number one spot to Federer.

The haters who had crowned Soderling has the "Nadal killer" can now hide forever. You went as far as saying that Nadal faked an injury. Now, you are whining because we have the proof that it was a complete fluke.

:rolleyes:

in that case who's fault is it?

so you deny Nadal's AO and WB are flukes.

You didn't reply about what i said...you are putting Soderking down instead of celebrating in the rafa forum.

malisha
06-06-2010, 05:11 PM
:haha:

what a bunch of mugs in here

superslam77
06-06-2010, 05:12 PM
After all the shit they've been reading for 1 year from Fedtards like you I think they're taking this victory pretty well.

Sorry if you feel roasted, Fedtard. :wavey:




This. :)

good one :lol: :wavey:

i don't deny rafa bores me to tears.

Bazooka
06-06-2010, 05:14 PM
Not a fluke. He is very good and has reached twice the final of the same slam. This just proves he can't beat a 100% fit Nadal on clay, but who can? He has the game to defeat him if he has the slightlest mobility problem.

thrust
06-06-2010, 05:28 PM
Soderling's win over Nadal at the 09 FO was a fluke.

Ariel
06-06-2010, 05:29 PM
His run in itself isn't a fluke. His win last year to Rafa..............I won't say it's a fluke, but it's a one in a million type match for him.

This is about the fairest thing being said in here. Yes, it was an unusual match played under unusual circumstances. ;) I'm not a Sod fan but I do acknowledge that he has two major weapons that justify his being in the top 5. It remains to be seen what transpires when Davydenko and Del Potro return. And that goes for Rafa and Fed as well.

star
06-06-2010, 05:35 PM
I don't know what is meant really. I'd say Fish beating Federer was more of a "fluke" win. Söderling has really improved his game and his mentality, so that gives him the opportunity to be in a position to beat the top players. If one thing is certain in tennis, it's that on a given day anyone can be defeated. The top 50 players are so close and only a few degrees separates them. Of course, the big weapon makes a difference, but for me, it's the mentality. Söderling has proven these last 12 months that he is an improved player, a dangerous player, and an entertaining player. One can't really ask for more. -- well, except that he lose to Rafa, and he did that today, so :yeah:

Ilovetheblues_86
06-06-2010, 05:43 PM
Had Soderling opened 2-0 in the second set he would win the match, so no.

Surcouf
06-06-2010, 05:51 PM
Had Soderling opened 2-0 in the second set he would win the match, so no.

LOL, fail. Soderling was completely outplayed.

Ilovetheblues_86
06-06-2010, 05:54 PM
LOL, fail. Soderling was completely outplayed.

Expected, and I say, lol fail, you don´t know what to expect if that had happened. I think you undesrtimate the confidence Rafa gained in the match, and you are too naive to believe I really could say Robin would win the match. So yeah, big fail for both of us, we go together down like that crazy coyote.

Filo V.
06-06-2010, 05:56 PM
Had Soderling opened 2-0 in the second set he would win the match, so no.
Had he? Well, he didn't, so that's what matters, and "he would win the match" is a personal opinion only.

Chair Umpire
06-06-2010, 05:56 PM
Had Soderling opened 2-0 in the second set he would win the match, so no.

And if my grandma had wheels...

Ilovetheblues_86
06-06-2010, 05:57 PM
Had he? Well, he didn't, so that's what matters, and "he would win the match" is a personal opinion only.

:rolleyes: So we conclude this thread is shit because we cant say if the victory last year was a fluke or not, by Wittgenstein-logical approach, the same we cant say nothing about todays match, it just happened. MTF must stop with this logical-rational approach of tennis game. :smash:

I appreciate for the class students, you really make me proud with those expected conclusions. :worship: :rolleyes:

River
06-06-2010, 05:58 PM
Soderling beating Nadal never was a fluke. He won fair and square, and so did Nadal today.

It's even on RG, now. Rafa has his vindication while Soderling still has the notion of snapping one of the greatest records in tennis history.

Surcouf
06-06-2010, 06:35 PM
Soderling beating Nadal never was a fluke. He won fair and square, and so did Nadal today.

It's even on RG, now. Rafa has his vindication while Soderling still has the notion of snapping one of the greatest records in tennis history.

It's not even. Nadal slapped Soderling in 3 sets at RG the two times he was not injured.

laurie-1
06-06-2010, 07:04 PM
Robin showed today that his win last year was no fluke. Robin played very well today, he really took the game to Rafa and created opportunities.

The fact he wasn't able to take them and lost in straight sets really shows that Rafael Nadal has to be one of the best players we have ever seen.

BodyServe
06-06-2010, 07:08 PM
It's not even. Nadal slapped Soderling in 3 sets at RG the two times he was not injured.

But we all know Soderling never really show up in final, as illustrated by his poor record.

Filo V.
06-06-2010, 07:12 PM
:rolleyes: So we conclude this thread is shit because we cant say if the victory last year was a fluke or not, by Wittgenstein-logical approach, the same we cant say nothing about todays match, it just happened. MTF must stop with this logical-rational approach of tennis game. :smash:

I appreciate for the class students, you really make me proud with those expected conclusions. :worship: :rolleyes:

I never said last year was a fluke, BUT last year Nadal was injured. He was healthy this year and Robin got smashed, which would lead to these questions. However, saying something like "Robin would have won the match had he broken", that's a hypothetical question based on nothing, because that didn't even happen. You are making baseless assumptions. He didn't break and he didn't win, and he was not injured going into the match as was Rafa last year, which is what it comes down to.

BodyServe
06-06-2010, 07:18 PM
I never said last year was a fluke, BUT last year Nadal was injured. He was healthy this year and Robin got smashed, which would lead to these questions. However, saying something like "Robin would have won the match had he broken", that's a hypothetical question based on nothing, because that didn't even happen. You are making baseless assumptions. He didn't break and he didn't win, and he was not injured going into the match as was Rafa last year, which is what it comes down to.

Nadal didn't complain about the injury last year right after the loss so you are the one making baseless assumptions.

Surcouf
06-06-2010, 07:20 PM
Nadal didn't complain about the injury last year right after the loss so you are the one making baseless assumptions.

Nadal said that his knees were injured and that playing Madrid finished the job.

Nadal did not play one match before two months, giving up his crown at Wimbledon and his number one ranking to Federer.

Nadal was injured, that's a fact. And today match is just another proof.

BodyServe
06-06-2010, 07:22 PM
Nadal said that his knees were injured and that playing Madrid finished the job.

Nadal did not play one match before two months, giving up his crown at Wimbledon and his number one ranking to Federer.

Nadal was injured, that's a fact. And today match is just another proof.

He was under pain killer, never was affected during the match.

And by the way tendonitis isn't really an injury.

Bad Religion
06-06-2010, 08:44 PM
Only a fool can say it was not a fluke

Surcouf
06-07-2010, 01:52 PM
He was under pain killer, never was affected during the match.

And by the way tendonitis isn't really an injury.

You are deluded. Nadal anhilated Soderling in all their other clays match and could not play tennis during more than two months after this match, looking like shit after his injury.

Biggest fluke in tennis history.

raahaat7
06-07-2010, 07:54 PM
wud another match between them on clay settle the question?

Jills
06-07-2010, 08:07 PM
The beating Rafa on clay part is likely a fluke, but no one can beat Rafa on clay when he's in form. Fluke or not, Robin did something Fed or anyone else couldn't do at RG. So suck it up, haters.

Anyway, who cares about clay? It's over and we'll see during grass and hard courts what happens.

Everko
06-09-2010, 04:39 PM
It sure was. Rafa proved it this year by whipping Soderling. This is what happens when he is fully fit.

Orka_n
06-09-2010, 05:14 PM
It sure was. Rafa proved it this year by whipping Soderling. This is what happens when he is fully fit.You're a living parody, do you know that? You made this genius prediction:

http://i45.tinypic.com/2jcbqt1.jpg

And you still puke out the bullshit, instead of admitting you failed yet again.
That loss to Nadull hit hard though, I won't deny it. I hope they're in the same half at Wimbledon, where Moonballer's annoying grinding isn't nearly as effective.

Topspin Forehand
06-09-2010, 05:18 PM
No one has yet been able to beat Nadal at RG when he was healthy. You'll most likely have to wait a few years before Nadal gets beaten when fit.

Persimmon
06-09-2010, 05:20 PM
Healthy Rafa wasn't losing to Sod on clay. Remember Rome 2009? Unfortunately Rafa was not healthy during the most important part of the season for him last year: FO/Wimbledon.

rocketassist
06-09-2010, 05:21 PM
Who the fuck let him back out? And to think they gave Pablin 6 months?

Mods- :retard: :retard: :retard: :retard: :retard: :retard: :retard: :retard: :retard: :retard:

Everko
06-09-2010, 05:41 PM
You're a living parody, do you know that? You made this genius prediction:

http://i45.tinypic.com/2jcbqt1.jpg

And you still puke out the bullshit, instead of admitting you failed yet again.
That loss to Nadull hit hard though, I won't deny it. I hope they're in the same half at Wimbledon, where Moonballer's annoying grinding isn't nearly as effective.

6-4 6-2 6-4. You might have had your memory modified but that happened. I remember all those brave words about Nadal losing to Soderling again.

what happened?

Orka_n
06-09-2010, 06:00 PM
6-4 6-2 6-4. You might have had your memory modified but that happened. I remember all those brave words about Nadal losing to Soderling again.

what happened?What happened is that Soderling threw 8 BPs out the window, served like shit and played an otherwise avarage match at best. If he played like he did last year, or this year against Federer (which I hoped for, obviously) he would have won.
There you have it. Now leave MTF like you promised. Seriously, how did you get unbanned? This is just messed up.

Chiakifug
06-09-2010, 06:01 PM
The mods mustve promised to unban him if he apologized to me.

BodyServe
06-10-2010, 10:30 AM
What happened is that Soderling threw 8 BPs out the window, served like shit and played an otherwise avarage match at best. If he played like he did last year, or this year against Federer (which I hoped for, obviously) he would have won.


This.

Don't know why but Soderling never bring his best in finals, maybe that's a mental block, come on he went 5/6 on bp last year and 0/8 this year, he had a +2 W/UE differential compared to a -13, coincidence? don't think so.

Elena.
06-10-2010, 10:42 AM
Not a fluke at all,he made the finals back to back,Soderling simply sucks in finals ,he really has a bad record of wins in finals .He must be too emotional :shrug:

Billups85
06-10-2010, 11:09 AM
What happened is that Soderling threw 8 BPs out the window, served like shit and played an otherwise avarage match at best. If he played like he did last year, or this year against Federer (which I hoped for, obviously) he would have won.

:drink:

At his normal level on clay, Robin loses against Verdasco, Almagro or Ferrer. He needs to play perfect to beat an erratic Federer or a dying in pain Nadal. When both play well, Robin has nothing to do against them.

BodyServe
06-10-2010, 11:12 AM
Not a fluke at all,he made the finals back to back,Soderling simply sucks in finals ,he really has a bad record of wins in finals .He must be too emotional :shrug:

Yes, or maybe it's the thought that it's the last step? and that's too much for him. Both his finals were mis-match to be honest.

bandabou
06-11-2010, 07:13 AM
His RUN to the final was no fluke..but is he consistently beating Rafa and Rog? Nope.

Mimi
06-11-2010, 07:16 AM
His RUN to the final was no fluke..but is he consistently beating Rafa and Rog? Nope.

thats true:angel:

FlameOn
06-11-2010, 07:24 AM
He did prove it wasn't a fluke, but he still needs to learn how to get it done in the final. :rolleyes:

andy neyer
06-11-2010, 07:37 AM
:drink:

At his normal level on clay, Robin loses against Verdasco, Almagro or Ferrer. He needs to play perfect to beat an erratic Federer or a dying in pain Nadal. When both play well, Robin has nothing to do against them.

That's just not true.

Anyway, Robin never had to prove anything. He beat Nadal fair and square and Nadal fans should just deal with it.

Mjau!
06-11-2010, 10:57 AM
:drink:

At his normal level on clay, Robin loses against Verdasco, Almagro or Ferrer. He needs to play perfect to beat an erratic Federer or a dying in pain Nadal. When both play well, Robin has nothing to do against them.

*gasps* A HATER! :eek::scared: Be gone spawn of darkness! :mad:

Surcouf
06-30-2010, 06:20 PM
Fluke, fluke , fluke.

M4RC
06-30-2010, 06:23 PM
It was not a fluke, it was THE FLUKE.

Chair Umpire
06-30-2010, 06:27 PM
Nadal's false modesty is a cover for is extreme arrogance and self-belief. This is obvious based on his interactions with Soderling, who managed to get under his skin and beneath the "humble" Rafa. It's clear that losing to Soderling destroyed his confidence and he couldn't recover in time for Wimbledon. Arguably, he didn't recover until the clay court season this year. Having injuries as an excuse for not being confidant is not new for Nadal, see USO 2009 and AO 2010.

I didn't get to read this before. Thanks for the deep psycho-analysis, Dr. Phill. :D

peribsen
06-30-2010, 06:55 PM
Soderling won in 2009, period, kudos to him. He is a good player and can be a threat for anyone on a given day. Quite another thing is if he is master class. He isn´t. Understandably, a country with the tennis history of Sweden is eager to see a new Wilander/Edberg in Soderling. Sad, but they'll be frustrated. Soderling is Soderling, respect him for what he is and don't keep asking him to give you the moon, because he won't.

allpro
06-30-2010, 07:20 PM
the beatdown at rg along with today's thrashing just reaffirm the fact that rg '09 upset was a total fluke :)

Everko
06-30-2010, 07:42 PM
*gasps* A HATER! :eek::scared: Be gone spawn of darkness! :mad:

your guy had his time in the sun.

laurie-1
06-30-2010, 08:23 PM
Looking at it from an objective point of view - you have to say from today's performance that Nadal is the better player of the two. Not only did Nadal outlast Soderling in terms of stamina, Nadal also played a smart match. He tried to make Robin move a lot - remember Robin is a big man. But as I pointed out after the French final, Robin does not get down low to get to slices, and Nadal again teased him with a lot of slices today, forcing Robin to hit up often - Robin will make mistakes if he's not used to having to do that often.

Rafa showed today he's an intelligent player.

I also would like to mention that yet again, the Umpire might look good, but his decision making is all over the place, its not the first time he's made bad decisions in big matches. Is his name Pascal Maria?

Bazooka
06-30-2010, 08:28 PM
Are we crazy or what, this guy comes from making F in RG, then QF in Wimbledon, that's an excellent run. He is making good results everywhere and deserves being ranked #5. No fluke. Nadal was not fit at RG'09, true, but that's just part of the game. Obviously Nadal has proved he's unbeatable on clay when fit, and nearly unbeatable on Wimbledon as well, as only Federer has been able to defeat him there in the last 5 years.

scoobs
06-30-2010, 08:28 PM
I think Soderling has proved it was not a fluke at the French this year but I also think he's shown that you can't automatically expect him to win each and every one of these encounters against the likes of Federer, Nadal, etc - some days he will and others he won't.

ShotmaKer
06-30-2010, 08:31 PM
I also would like to mention that yet again, the Umpire might look good, but his decision making is all over the place, its not the first time he's made bad decisions in big matches. Is his name Pascal Maria?

yup, he's also French, like Cedric Mourrier, with whom Rafa had a bit of a controversy a few days ago.

Filo V.
06-30-2010, 08:31 PM
What Soderling has proven is that the win last year wasn't a fluke but that his playing out of his skin level vs. Rafa last year and Roger this year are flukes, flukes in the fact that isn't his true consistent level, and are just hot streaks more than an accurate reflection of his overall ability.

laurie-1
06-30-2010, 08:34 PM
yup, he's also French, like Cedric Mourrier, with whom Rafa had a bit of a controversy a few days ago.

Thanks for that.

Two dodgy French Umpires.....:banana:

JolánGagó
06-30-2010, 08:36 PM
So far a fluke for what his tards were expecting from him. he's now at his career's highest point, is it the peak or a ladder? we'll see but the overblown expectations don't seem to have a high chance of materializing.

MacTheKnife
06-30-2010, 08:37 PM
He's proven that when he's playing his best tennis he can compete with & beat anybody. When he's not, things don't go so well..

Clay Death
06-30-2010, 08:43 PM
So far a fluke for what his tards were expecting from him. he's now at his career's highest point, is it the peak or a ladder? we'll see but the overblown expectations don't seem to have a high chance of materializing.



affirmative old sport. truer words were never spoken.

one other thing: he is not and never was in the same class of players as the clay warrior. but i see it doesnt stop some hapless and relatively clueless rodents from pinning all their hope on him.

Nidhogg
06-30-2010, 10:48 PM
There was never any fluke to speak of in the first place, but if I play along on the intended note I think he sagaciously proved that against Davydenko. I personally found his win over Ferrer more impressive than that against Nadal, though.

RG last year worked as a big catalyst, but it's laughable to think that the overall improvement which we've seen from Robin over the last two or three years happened solely due to that.

star
06-30-2010, 11:00 PM
I think "fluke" is meant to mean "Has Robin proven he can beat Nadal with any kind of regularity." All players can be beaten by nearly any player. Soderling can even beat Federer despite a long record of not doing so. The question is whether Soderling is able to do that with any consistency or is it an odd happenstance. Soderling is a dangerous player and has proven that over the last two years. I'm glad he has improved and is making the most of his talent. It's been a long time coming. However, I do not think he will beat Nadal consistently. He does not "have Nadal's number" as some had hoped.

Priam
09-09-2010, 05:44 AM
Was Robin's RG win over Federer a fluke?

anticaria
09-09-2010, 01:06 PM
Certainly he has. The clay titles are really starting to build up for him now.

:haha: priceless!

ossie
09-09-2010, 01:18 PM
flukerlings whole career is one big fluke

Speed of Light
09-09-2010, 03:19 PM
flukerlings whole career is one big fluke

Typical hater response.

straitup
09-09-2010, 03:22 PM
The win wasn't a fluke, definitely a hot streak. But the win also catapulted him to be a perennial top 10 player it seems, so it certainly did mean something and was a big boost

Matt01
09-09-2010, 03:41 PM
flukerlings whole career is one big fluke


Delpo in the avatar :o :o

peribsen
09-09-2010, 03:42 PM
Define "fluke".

If it means undeserved win, then Soderling has no need to prove anything, because his win was clean and very much deserved.

If by fluke you mean a result that is not easy to reproduce, the I guess Soderling's win does more or less fall into that category, but I would argue against using a word such as fluke, which has a clear derrogatory feeling to it. With that definition, most upsets could be considered flukes, since they involve lesser players defeating one of the top guys. We would run the risk of making fun of most of the results that make tennis such an atractive, fun sport.

Sapeod
09-09-2010, 03:49 PM
Whoever says it was a fluke obviously has no idea what the word means.
He beat a pretty good Nadal at RG, on clay, quite easily.
No fluke there, as he has played very well since.

Sapeod
09-09-2010, 03:51 PM
52 of the voters are very, very stupid.

CCBH
09-09-2010, 05:10 PM
Of course he has. He was hovering somewhere in the 20-30 range, never really threatening to win anything previous to that. After that match, he has been a solid top-10er, making 3 more Slam QFs, another final, and going deep in MS events. Plus, he has beaten Federer as well, and everyone regards him a legitimate contender at the big events.

Whether he can repeat that win or not is debatable, but he has backed it up outstandingly well (played some great matches after it to make the final too).

gbmkc
09-09-2010, 06:43 PM
Soderling's exit in this UO was as revealing as Roddick's, in its own way. I know he can beat Nadal and he can beat Federer, but somehow, he can't seem to do it where it really counts. I'm convinced...and unconvinced.

Dougie
09-09-2010, 06:49 PM
Soderling's exit in this UO was as revealing as Roddick's, in its own way. I know he can beat Nadal and he can beat Federer, but somehow, he can't seem to do it where it really counts. I'm convinced...and unconvinced.

You mean RG doesn´t really count? Söderling doesn´t really need to prove anything anymore, it would be unfair to expect him to beat Nadal and Federer every time they play in a GS.

swebright
09-09-2010, 06:55 PM
He's a giant killer but not gonna be a slam winner. He's not even TMS evet winner, right?? But his win over Nadal at FO is real. Nadal injured or not. That's what he will be remembered for of his entire career. He made into solid top 10 from yo-yo 20-30 seeded player is his biggest achievement. He may not have realized he could be this good before meeting Magnus.

anticaria
09-09-2010, 06:59 PM
Nadal's false modesty is a cover for is extreme arrogance and self-belief. This is obvious based on his interactions with Soderling, who managed to get under his skin and beneath the "humble" Rafa. It's clear that losing to Soderling destroyed his confidence and he couldn't recover in time for Wimbledon. Arguably, he didn't recover until the clay court season this year. Having injuries as an excuse for not being confidant is not new for Nadal, see USO 2009 and AO 2010.


riiiight.. rafa made up the tendinitis 'injury' as a mere smoke screen, and michael jackson and elvis are still alive, and the world will end in 2012, and the twin towers attack was an inside job, and the reptilian race will soon take over the world.. zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz :cuckoo: :wavey:

Ben.
09-09-2010, 07:37 PM
Lol Magician I have to wonder if you even believe the things you say. Obviously Rafa didn't miss the chance to defend Wimbledon because he was trying to prove he was injured during RG. He was not fit to compete there, simple as that. No doubt though his confidence was was not very high and yes he did not recover it until Monte Carlo this year.

philosophicalarf
09-09-2010, 08:27 PM
This is one truly special thread, even by MTF standards. Of course it wasn't a fluke, Soderling beat Nadal comfortably. He also beat Federer the following year at RG. That he didn't quite play to the same standard vs Nadal in the following year's final doesn't negate the original achievement - he was also pretty average against Fed in the 09 final.

Jomp1
09-09-2010, 09:28 PM
Soderling's exit in this UO was as revealing as Roddick's, in its own way. I know he can beat Nadal and he can beat Federer, but somehow, he can't seem to do it where it really counts. I'm convinced...and unconvinced.

I don't get it, he beat them both in Slams i.e. tournaments they were targeting to win. Since when does one quarter matter more than another, or a final? Roger had 23 consecutive semis.. If people expect him to beat them over and over they are fooling themselves, but he has most certainly showed it was not a fluke result..One of the steadiest Slam players out there atm.. In slams Robin is underdog against Fedal, about equal to slight slight underdog(depending on surface) with Novak and Andy, and favorite to anybody else except an injury free Del Potro.. Get a grip.

Surcouf
06-01-2011, 04:56 PM
FLUUUUUUUUUUUUUKE


3 times in Roland Garros Nadal dismiss Soderling in 3 sets quite easily. The only time Soderling win it's the time Nadal is out of Wimbledon right after.

Fluke.

MaxPower
06-01-2011, 05:05 PM
Pathetic thread necromancy. He has 2 wins over Nadal anyway. And clay isn't his best surface. He will see Nadal in the grass/hardcourt season. It's a shame there isn't an Indoor Slam as well. Soderling plays a precision game. He is champion in Paris indoor Master 1000 and back to back champion in Rotterdam 500 indoors. No wind and no distractions and he doesn't hit nearly as many errors.

He grew up playing indoors. 7 of his 10 titles or so are indoors. Rafa grew up on Clay.

anticaria
06-01-2011, 05:08 PM
sodo will never be able to prove such a thing against a healthy rafa.. i.e., on clay, when rafa's healthy, sodo doesn't stand a chance.. case in point: he has yet to even take a set against the spaniard on clay whenever rafa's been anywhere near healthy.. which of course further cements the fact that his lonely victory against rafa at r garros in '09 was and still is the fluke of flukes..
__________________

oranges
06-01-2011, 05:12 PM
Nadaltards still crying over that loss makes me all fuzzy inside.

Surcouf
06-01-2011, 05:14 PM
Pathetic thread necromancy. He has 2 wins over Nadal anyway. And clay isn't his best surface. He will see Nadal in the grass/hardcourt season. It's a shame there isn't an Indoor Slam as well. Soderling plays a precision game. He is champion in Paris indoor Master 1000 and back to back champion in Rotterdam 500 indoors. No wind and no distractions and he doesn't hit nearly as many errors.

He grew up playing indoors. 7 of his 10 titles or so are indoors. Rafa grew up on Clay.

Stop excuses.

I know you are swedish like him but you have to admit that his victory over Nadal was a fluke. It was just proven again.

peribsen
06-01-2011, 05:14 PM
What Soderling has proved by now is that he is one of the best players on tour, especially on clay. He has the game to hurt Rafa and even to beat him. Out of 5 matches, Rafa will probably take 4, but Sod has a chance on at least one of them. 2009 proved that. The fact that Rafa was spiralling into a serious injury is absolutely true, and yet doesn't deny the fact that the Swede can be a very difficult opponent.

Said in other words, that in 2009 Sod defeated a very subpar Nadal doesn't mean that he can't trouble Nadal at his best, on a given day.

Jomp1
06-01-2011, 05:17 PM
This thread is :stupid:. It would make any upset in the history of tennis a fluke, looking at how long he's been a top10(5) player now.

FerrerAndNadal
06-01-2011, 05:27 PM
Pathetic thread necromancy. He has 2 wins over Nadal anyway. And clay isn't his best surface. He will see Nadal in the grass/hardcourt season. It's a shame there isn't an Indoor Slam as well. Soderling plays a precision game. He is champion in Paris indoor Master 1000 and back to back champion in Rotterdam 500 indoors. No wind and no distractions and he doesn't hit nearly as many errors.

He grew up playing indoors. 7 of his 10 titles or so are indoors. Rafa grew up on Clay.

def Monfils

rocketassist
06-01-2011, 05:52 PM
He made the final next year so no it wasn't.

peribsen
06-01-2011, 05:58 PM
He made the final next year so no it wasn't.

A very fair point. Sod is very good on clay. That he in fact beat a subpar Rafa doesn't at all mean he can't beat a good Nadal sometime.

oranges
06-01-2011, 06:01 PM
Stop excuses.



Oh, the irony :haha:

rocketassist
06-01-2011, 06:12 PM
Poor Surcouf, supporting Nadal all alone in his native France in defiance against the rest of the oeufs.

Everko
06-01-2011, 07:31 PM
Of course it was a fluke. Nadal was bull whipped him 3 times since then in slams. Robbing Soderfraud could not back anything up.

bright
06-01-2011, 07:34 PM
Unless Nole confirms Nadal is beatable here, of course, it was a fluke.

In case Nole does confirm, you should call it a tendency that started by Soda and kept up by Nole;)

2003
01-26-2012, 12:55 AM
It wasnt a fluke, he just played the match of his life thats all.

Was it a fluke when Nadal won AO 09?

Mountaindewslave
01-26-2012, 01:01 AM
a bit of a fluke that match I mean let's be honest- Soderling played great but it's Nadal on CLAY! Nadal was not at his best and unfortunately for Soderling he's so extremely streaky. he played a few really great matches on clay in his career, it is a bit flukish. overall he's a good player but the famous Soderling d. Nadal match obviously was not exactly legitimate as Nadal followed Roland Garros by not participating in Wimbledon and being out for months..... :o

HKz
01-26-2012, 01:06 AM
It is certainly not a fluke. He has always been an issue for Nadal, despite the advantage Nadal has gotten over Robin in their H2H. Recall their Wimbledon 5 setter in 2007 and remember that Soderling had the advantage over Nadal in their Wimbledon 2010 match. Only issue is that Soderling still hasn't mastered his mental game to be that effective against the best players of the world over and over again. At the same time, I think some of his success has caused him to blow out mentally. He has become a bit too nice on court IMO. In the past, especially in 2009, he still had that look on his face like he doesn't give a shit about others, and I think it helped him.

MaxPower
01-26-2012, 01:26 AM
Why was this bumped? :) not that I mind. After his "fluke win" over Nadal he worked his way upwards into the top10. Then in 2010 he made #4. He was a player on the rise. Nadal was unlucky to draw him. After all Nadal straight-seted everyone else in 2009 RG (also coming from an awesome clay season) and was heading for a sweet tournament until he ran into the spartan hero. A truly injured player would have struggled in previous rounds too

It is certainly not a fluke. He has always been an issue for Nadal, despite the advantage Nadal has gotten over Robin in their H2H. Recall their Wimbledon 5 setter in 2007 and remember that Soderling had the advantage over Nadal in their Wimbledon 2010 match. Only issue is that Soderling still hasn't mastered his mental game to be that effective against the best players of the world over and over again. At the same time, I think some of his success has caused him to blow out mentally. He has become a bit too nice on court IMO. In the past, especially in 2009, he still had that look on his face like he doesn't give a shit about others, and I think it helped him.

Dunno about that. Soderling has been mentally rock solid last year for example. 4/4 in finals. 10/0 or something in deciding sets.

Problem last season was the injuries starting with the foot and knee injury that destroyed his preparations for the indian wells/miami combo and the clay season. Then the stomach illness in wimbledon. Then he hurt his wrist in the gym forcing him to cancel Montreal/Cincy the start and also got the mono outbreak later costing USO and the rest of the season.

He's been cursed with injury and sickness lately. Otherwise he'd still be in the top5 most likely. But I guess you could make a case that his very aggressive and violent style takes a big toll on the body maybe leading to some of the problems.

HKz
01-26-2012, 01:55 AM
Why was this bumped? :) not that I mind. After his "fluke win" over Nadal he worked his way upwards into the top10. Then in 2010 he made #4. He was a player on the rise. Nadal was unlucky to draw him. After all Nadal straight-seted everyone else in 2009 RG (also coming from an awesome clay season) and was heading for a sweet tournament until he ran into the spartan hero. A truly injured player would have struggled in previous rounds too



Dunno about that. Soderling has been mentally rock solid last year for example. 4/4 in finals. 10/0 or something in deciding sets.

Problem last season was the injuries starting with the foot and knee injury that destroyed his preparations for the indian wells/miami combo and the clay season. Then the stomach illness in wimbledon. Then he hurt his wrist in the gym forcing him to cancel Montreal/Cincy the start and also got the mono outbreak later costing USO and the rest of the season.

He's been cursed with injury and sickness lately. Otherwise he'd still be in the top5 most likely. But I guess you could make a case that his very aggressive and violent style takes a big toll on the body maybe leading to some of the problems.

Yes but we are talking about against the top players/GS events here. Who cares about the smaller tournaments. Sure beating Roddick is great, but I mean Djokovic/Nadal/Federer are a different class and you certainly have to pass at least one of them to win a slam.

Black Adam
05-30-2012, 05:15 PM
This thread is :stupid:. It would make any upset in the history of tennis a fluke, looking at how long he's been a top10(5) player now.Most upsets are flukes.

MTwEeZi
05-30-2012, 05:29 PM
Of course it was a fluke. Nadal was bull whipped him 3 times since then in slams. Robbing Soderfraud could not back anything up.

Affirmative.

Naudio Spanlatine
05-30-2012, 05:31 PM
Its not a fluke he deserve that win over Rafa, it took me a long time to get over that loss that Rafa had. I really didnt like him at all at that time. I actually warmed up to him in 2010, because i really like his game. He proved that he was a great top 5 player. Im not a fan of him but i prefer his game more that Janko anyday. Its sad that hes not playing right now, it really is. And dont say its because he is going through this sickness that i started to warm up to the guy because that is not true at all.

MTwEeZi
05-30-2012, 05:34 PM
Soldering will never win a slam