Why Did Nadal Really Lose to Soderling at the FO 2009?

[Jonas78]

He lost bcoz he had a S.H.I.T.ty day.

Sick

Hindered

Injured

or

Tired

Yup, you can't just lose right? Nobody just lose

 

[stringertom]

Yup, you can't just lose right? Nobody just lose

Never outplayed.

 

[Mustard]

In the previous round, Nadal beat Hewitt 6-1, 6-3, 6-1. If anything, Nadal's great performance against Hewitt made his loss to Soderling all the greater. People have mentioned Nadal beating Soderling 6-1, 6-0 in Rome a month earlier too.

 

[stringertom]

In the previous round, Nadal beat Hewitt 6-1, 6-3, 6-1. If anything, Nadal's great performance against Hewitt made his loss to Soderling all the greater. People have mentioned Nadal beating Soderling 6-1, 6-0 in Rome a month earlier too.

Yes, if he had substituted a bagel for that last breadstick, he would have been invincible and gone on to a second Channel Slam.

 

[abmk]

In the previous round, Nadal beat Hewitt 6-1, 6-3, 6-1. If anything, Nadal's great performance against Hewitt made his loss to Soderling all the greater. People have mentioned Nadal beating Soderling 6-1, 6-0 in Rome a month earlier too.

yes, it was looking like it could be a repeat of 2008 after that Hewitt demolition.

 

[sdont]

It would be really interesting to see Stanimal against Rafa in the final this year.

Stan has the game to play like Söderling and would not be afraid of Nadal even in a slam final.

 

[BGod]

Soderling, like Del Potro, was a Top player no less than Novak, Federer and Nadal on a good day on his favoured surface. It's a shame we were robbed of these two guys allowing for the domination of 3 players for such a stretch of time.

To answer the OP, Soderling was just better than day and Nadal was nursing tendonitis and likely mental issues. He had lost to Federer at Madrid and I believe suffering from Wilander syndrome after winning the Aussie Open.

 

[ibbi]

He did it so that Novak Djokovic would not be the first to do it.

 

[ibbi]

Soderling, like Del Potro, was a Top player no less than Novak, Federer and Nadal on a good day on his favoured surface.

Hmm, I don't know that he's Del Potro level. Pony proved he could do it in a final, Soderling may have the dual plaudits of defeating Rafa at Roland Garros, and ending Fed's semi final streak, but the two times he made it to the actual final he totally wet the bed.

 

[BGod]

Hmm, I don't know that he's Del Potro level. Pony proved he could do it in a final, Soderling may have the dual plaudits of defeating Rafa at Roland Garros, and ending Fed's semi final streak, but the two times he made it to the actual final he totally wet the bed.

Soderling was consistently improving. His two USO quarter losses to Federer should be reviewed as well. Especially the 2009 match where he could have come back down 0-2. He was a guy trying to find his way and be the next generation. He even took a set off Nadal and forced tiebreak in their 2010 Wimbledon match. Guy could have competed everywhere.

 

[Steve0904]

He didn't lose really. He was the moral victor, remember?

 

[metsman]

Not embarrassed of course but more like a shock to the system. If Wimbledon wasn't so close after FO I think Nadal would have played, I think he was injured but not to a degree that he couldn't play at all (most players are always playing through some injury or other). 1st week of Wimbledon is usually tough for Nadal (even in those years he made the finals), he needs to be mentally zoned in to get through it.

Think about how Fed was distraught after Wimbledon 2008, lost in the 1st round to Simon in Canada, then in the 2nd round to Karlovic then to his pigeon Blake at Olympics. However USO was far enough that he could recuperate.

Nadal's a fighter but he's not a machine, everyone draws their confidence from something.

I think this is the best explanation. Combo of shock from losing at Paris+some injury+family situation probably contributed to him not playing Wimby.

I don't think Fed lost those matches because he was overly distraught, he was just a hot mess in 2008 aside from like 5-10 matches the whole year. His footwork was bad the whole year because he hadn't gotten to train to his usual amount. His confidence was shook as well, not only against Nadal. He did have a training block I think in the summer, and in the USO he got his mojo back and then he played good tournaments in Basel and Madrid. Rest of his year was hampered by the back but he then played amazing tennis at the AO. What happened after that was because of some mental issues.

 

[metsman]

Yes, if he had substituted a bagel for that last breadstick, he would have been invincible and gone on to a second Channel Slam.

Federer's PIGEON Hewitt comes through AGAIN ROFLMAO...seriously Federer should dedicate HALF of his slams to that MUG.

 

[Meles]

I voted Nadal's injury as the primary reason.

Soderling was in awesome form that tournament. I was worried that he might mow down Fed in the final (let's not forget that he did mow down Fed the year after!).

However, the 2010 final for me is powerful evidence that the primary reason was Nadal's drop in form. Nadal took care of Soderling in routine fashion the next year, despite the fact that Soderling's level in 2010 was as good as 2009.

Nadal was hitting so short in the match that this was the dominant factor. Over and over again short. Injury is the obvious answer.

 

[stringertom]

Federer's PIGEON Hewitt comes through AGAIN ROFLMAO...seriously Federer should dedicate HALF of his slams to that MUG.

And three to the current #1 MUG who can cry like fedr but it's a shame he can't play like him.

 

[every7]

Even as a Nadal fan there is absolutely no mystery here. Soderling played like a lunatic pegging winners from everywhere and deserves all the credit for the win.

He may have felt slightly emboldened if he had an inkling that Nadal wasn't at 100% and it may have helped him but that point is moot because he still had to do all the work in executing and playing at that insane level for an extended period of time.

It's a time capsule match, because Soderling played idiosyncratic, but very effective claycourt tennis. The style will never catch on because it takes a rare player to be able to do that.

It became historic because it was Nadal's first loss at F.O. but I wish more was made of Soderling winning and less of Nadal losing. Really, that day should have been a celebration for Soderling.

 

[RF-18]

Look, Soderling deserves enormous credit for that 2009 match. It was a career-defining win for him. He achieved something that Fed and Novak at their very best never could.

But my point is that as good as Soderling's level was, it wasn't good enough to beat the very best version of Nadal.

Was Fed's level at 2013 Wimbledon just as high as always? Clearly Stakhovsky played an excellent match, but let's get serious here.

Also, Rosol is an interesting case. People often put Soderling and Rosol into the same sentence. But let's be honest--beating Nadal on grass is NOT the same as beating him on clay at the French. Hats off to Rosol (and Darcis, and Kyrgios, and Brown) for fine grass court tennis, but Soderling achieved the impossible in 2009.

Nadal not playing to his best level was Soderlings credit, but also Nadals fault. A little bit if both.

He beat him and that is that, he was the better player on the day.

 

[Jackuar]

Lmao those pink checkered shorts or w/e though seemed to work wonders for Stan though

The stars are different for different people, do you not know?! Pink is all about God mode for Stan but completely opposite for Nadal.

 

[stringertom]

Even as a Nadal fan there is absolutely no mystery here. Soderling played like a lunatic pegging winners from everywhere and deserves all the credit for the win.

He may have felt slightly emboldened if he had an inkling that Nadal wasn't at 100% and it may have helped him but that point is moot because he still had to do all the work in executing and playing at that insane level for an extended period of time.

It's a time capsule match, because Soderling played idiosyncratic, but very effective claycourt tennis. The style will never catch on because it takes a rare player to be able to do that.

It became historic because it was Nadal's first loss at F.O. but I wish more was made of Soderling winning and less of Nadal losing. Really, that day should have been a celebration for Soderling.

It would be pointed to in the history books and lauded if Sod had one more miracle that week and could have backed it up in the following year's final.

 

[every7]

It would be pointed to in the history books and lauded if Sod had one more miracle that week and could have backed it up in the following year's final.

No one was beating Fed in 2009 F.O. - despite this idiot's efforts to ruin the day:

Agree. Particularly frustrating for Soderling in that he handled Federer the following year only to come a cropper this time against Nadal in the F.

 

[stringertom]

No one was beating Fed in 2009 F.O. - despite this idiot's efforts to ruin the day:

Agree. Particularly frustrating for Soderling in that he handled Federer the following year only to come a cropper this time against Nadal in the F.

Sign that man in black to a tryout contract for my New York Jets!

 

[tennis_crazy]

It could've been a three way agreement between Fed, Bull & Sod?? with Sod playing the spoiler role getting hefty checks in return.

 

[Dedans Penthouse]

This is becoming one of the great mysteries in recent years.

How did a guy as dominant as Nadal, playing near his absolute peak, lose to a guy that he had destroyed 6-1, 6-0 just weeks before in Rome?


But what was the single most plausible reason among these various factors?

Simple, look at what led up to it in 2009: Fed's Aussie Open sobfest and who wanted to see "tennis" get another black eye credibility-wise in the sportsworld by having yet another losing finalist breaking down in tears like he/she lost a beauty pageant. Nadal being the compassionate team player took one for "the team" (i.e. the tennis fraternity).

*Rafa through his teeth* calling out Fed:

"Roger, again with the tears?.....pleeezzee amigo, this is getting embarrassing...."



* ..."hmmm, aw what the hell...there will be others.." *



"Look, I'll tell you what....if I tank the French, will you knock it off and smile?"

 

[D.Nalby12]

Soderling's peak was just better than Nadal's peak and Nadal was lucky that he developed a severe health problem and had to retire.

Best answer. 100% A.

 

[D.Nalby12]

He lost because he wanted to lose, no?

 

[chatt_town]

This is becoming one of the great mysteries in recent years.

How did a guy as dominant as Nadal, playing near his absolute peak, lose to a guy that he had destroyed 6-1, 6-0 just weeks before in Rome?

Most of us would agree that no single factor could explain an anomaly of this magnitude. A confluence of things had to come together, including a drop in Rafa's form (due to some injury that also kept him out of Wimbledon), Nadal's potential overconfidence going into the match, Nadal's mental state (recent divorce of parents), weather conditions (Nadal play's better in the bright sun and it was very overcast that day), and Soderling achieving God mode and achieving genuine self-belief after the first set.

But what was the single most plausible reason among these various factors?

Was talking to someone about this a few days ago. I say the number reason is Soderling had nothing to lose and didn't give a fck. he was hitting everything like a 2-0 fastball c*ck high over the middle of the plate in baseball...lights out swinging for the fences. You said he had just lost like 1 and 0...what do you have to lose at that point?

 

[Semidios]

Nadal was a demigod during those years at the FO and an injury from the spaniard had to happen to spell a defeat.

 

[Fiero425]

Simple, look at what led up to it in 2009: Fed's Aussie Open sobfest and who wanted to see "tennis" get another black eye credibility-wise in the sportsworld by having yet another losing finalist breaking down in tears like he/she lost a beauty pageant. Nadal being the compassionate team player took one for "the team" (i.e. the tennis fraternity).

*Rafa through his teeth* calling out Fed:

"Roger, again with the tears?.....pleeezzee amigo, this is getting embarrassing...."



* ..."hmmm, aw what the hell...there will be others.." *



"Look, I'll tell you what....if I tank the French, will you knock it off and smile?"

Must have been one of those matches where Roger felt robbed! Nadal's gamesmanship goes back to when he was punk kid!