ATP rankings sucks!!!

[Front242]

He won the Paris masters and destroyed Berdych 6-1 6-0 and Ferrer 6-2 6-2 in the semis and final respectively en route to winning Bastad 2011. Those scorelines are pretty indicative of a guy who was pretty damn good!

 

[Moxie]

He won the Paris masters and destroyed Berdych 6-1 6-0 and Ferrer 6-2 6-2 in the semis and final respectively en route to winning Bastad 2011. Those scorelines are pretty indicative of a guy who was pretty damn good!

I'm not saying he wasn't extremely good. I'm saying he wasn't reliable. Most everyone around here agrees that Paris MS is where, as the last, or when it was the penultimate, the top guys run out of gas, and otherwise talented players can prevail. (Safin won three of his 5. Ferrer won his only to date. Nalbandian won his only two, at a trot, Paris and Madrid, when Madrid was indoors and on HCs, and still the last one after Paris. Tsonga had his only in Paris until he won in Toronto.) As to Bastad, he was playing in Sweden. Yes, he was very talented. But there's no reason to think that he was ever going to have a career different from Nalbandian's. Surely even Safin's was a stretch.

 

[mrzz]

About Soderling:

By the numbers, it is (at least for me) impossible to disagree with Moxie's argument above. However, I remember watching the Brisbane final, I guess it was 2011, Soderling x Roddick. Halfway through the match I tought, "this guy is for real". Not only that he was playing out of his mind, I know that a lot of players can do that once in a while, specially in smaller tournament, but he was playing out of his mind with that calm that only the big guys (I mean big four, and to be honest, maybe big three) have, as it is just another day at the office. Unfortunately, he did not last long after that. "Would", in the end, is just "would". But I am pretty sure he would have really changed the landscape.

 

[Moxie]

About Soderling:

By the numbers, it is (at least for me) impossible to disagree with Moxie's argument above. However, I remember watching the Brisbane final, I guess it was 2011, Soderling x Roddick. Halfway through the match I tought, "this guy is for real". Not only that he was playing out of his mind, I know that a lot of players can do that once in a while, specially in smaller tournament, but he was playing out of his mind with that calm that only the big guys (I mean big four, and to be honest, maybe big three) have, as it is just another day at the office. Unfortunately, he did not last long after that. "Would", in the end, is just "would". But I am pretty sure he would have really changed the landscape.

I believe what you were seeing in that match. But it doesn't prove a "what if" about Soderling. He was pegged young by Borg to be a future #1, and his short-coming may have been not capitalizing on his talent, earlier. Cali can tell you all the reasons that Nalbandian should have done better than he did. And I can natter on about Safin, if you like. It's a bit like bemoaning the years we've lost from Del Potro. They might have featured more, but they didn't. I hope Soderling can mount a comeback, and have a late-career resurgence like Haas.

 

[tented]

I agree that he won't be inducted into hall of fame. What you fail to recognize is that
there are intermediate categories between "answer to a trivia question" and
"hall of fame material".

You said Soderling is just an "answer to a trivia question". When confronted, you
say he is not "hall o fame material". I don't see the logic.

Steve Darcis and Stakhovsky would be "answer to trivia questions" as they have
done nothing other than taking out a big name on a good day (and on top of it
flaming out in the very next round).

Not Soderling.

OK, let me put it this way:

Every year during RG, inevitably discussions arise comparing Rafa and Borg. One factoid is always mentioned: each guy has only ever been beaten by one person -- Rafa by Soderling, Borg by Panatta.

Now, be honest (at least with yourself): Off the top of your head, what else do you know about Panatta, other than he's the answer to this trivia question? In 20 years, what else do you think people will remember about Soderling, other than he's the answer to Rafa's version of the same trivia question?

 

[Federberg]

^ A bit harsh on Soderling don't you think? Runner up in consecutive years, is worthy. I'm not saying Hall of Fame worthy, but I don't recall Panatta having those sorts of career highlights. I could be wrong...

 

[tented]

^ A bit harsh on Soderling don't you think? Runner up in consecutive years, is worthy. I'm not saying Hall of Fame worthy, but I don't recall Panatta having those sorts of career highlights. I could be wrong...

Thank you for proving me right: you remember nothing else about Panatta.

 

[Federberg]

^ A bit harsh on Soderling don't you think? Runner up in consecutive years, is worthy. I'm not saying Hall of Fame worthy, but I don't recall Panatta having those sorts of career highlights. I could be wrong...

Thank you for proving me right: you remember nothing else about Panatta.

:lolz: I guess I better not insert myself into this discussion. Was just sticking up for Soderling. It's funny how we all like him more than when he was actually playing!

But out of curiosity.. (and as you know I'm not a fan of woulda coulda shoulda)... what if Rafa's career gets stalled here from injury? Are any of you folks going to insist on his GOAT-hood? I'm just trying to ascertain how far your disdain for potential goes?

 

[tented]

^ A bit harsh on Soderling don't you think? Runner up in consecutive years, is worthy. I'm not saying Hall of Fame worthy, but I don't recall Panatta having those sorts of career highlights. I could be wrong...

Thank you for proving me right: you remember nothing else about Panatta.

:lolz: I guess I better not insert myself into this discussion. Was just sticking up for Soderling. It's funny how we all like him more than when he was actually playing!

But out of curiosity.. (and as you know I'm not a fan of woulda coulda shoulda)... what if Rafa's career gets stalled here from injury? Are any of you folks going to insist on his GOAT-hood? I'm just trying to ascertain how far your disdain for potential goes?

Nadal is not the GOAT. Any Rafa fan who claims otherwise is just being a fanboy/fangirl. Does that answer your questions?

 

[Federberg]

^ A bit harsh on Soderling don't you think? Runner up in consecutive years, is worthy. I'm not saying Hall of Fame worthy, but I don't recall Panatta having those sorts of career highlights. I could be wrong...

Thank you for proving me right: you remember nothing else about Panatta.

:lolz: I guess I better not insert myself into this discussion. Was just sticking up for Soderling. It's funny how we all like him more than when he was actually playing!

But out of curiosity.. (and as you know I'm not a fan of woulda coulda shoulda)... what if Rafa's career gets stalled here from injury? Are any of you folks going to insist on his GOAT-hood? I'm just trying to ascertain how far your disdain for potential goes?

Nadal is not the GOAT. Any Rafa fan who claims otherwise is just being a fanboy/fangirl. Does that answer your questions?

Mostly

 

[Moxie]

^ A bit harsh on Soderling don't you think? Runner up in consecutive years, is worthy. I'm not saying Hall of Fame worthy, but I don't recall Panatta having those sorts of career highlights. I could be wrong...

Thank you for proving me right: you remember nothing else about Panatta.

:lolz: I guess I better not insert myself into this discussion. Was just sticking up for Soderling. It's funny how we all like him more than when he was actually playing!

But out of curiosity.. (and as you know I'm not a fan of woulda coulda shoulda)... what if Rafa's career gets stalled here from injury? Are any of you folks going to insist on his GOAT-hood? I'm just trying to ascertain how far your disdain for potential goes?

Nadal is not the GOAT. Any Rafa fan who claims otherwise is just being a fanboy/fangirl. Does that answer your questions?

Mostly

I'm not a great believer in a one-and-only-GOAT. I've said before Roger and Rafa will be spoken of in the same breath, and argued over, for years to come, because of their same-era rivalry. But if you're asking if people would start playing the 'he would have won more Majors if only'-game…I wouldn't be interested in that. It's arguing a parallel universe that, in your example, wouldn't exist. Here's the easiest example of why that's useless: this year's AO final. Before that match was played, nearly everyone, fans and detractors alike, were pretty much handing that match to Rafa. But that's why they play them.

I can't speak for other Rafa fans, but since I was one who commented about making too much of Soderling's potential, had he not fallen ill, then I'll respond to your question, too. I hope that's helpful, and consistent.

 

[Federberg]

My exact thinking too Moxie Thanks

 

[Kieran]

^ A bit harsh on Soderling don't you think? Runner up in consecutive years, is worthy. I'm not saying Hall of Fame worthy, but I don't recall Panatta having those sorts of career highlights. I could be wrong...

Adriano Panatta won the French Open in 1976.

There's a huge difference in speculating between how many slams Rafa might have won had he been fully fit through his career, and how many slams Soderling might have won had he stayed fit. The answer in Sod's case is more than likely to have been zero.

With Rafa, we can't tell because it's fiction, but it's a more valid question, as it would be if it was asked about del Potro.

In all cases, however, it's futile to argue, or even to guess, since it didn't happen. As for coulda woulda shoulda - this is the template on which all goat arguments are built, and it's equally futile to go there...