Federer vs. Tiger…Who is More Dominant?
Roger Federer has dominated the tennis world for the past four years. It is truly amazing to watch him dismantle his opponents. Just a few weeks ago, Federer took home his 10th Grand Slam title by winning the Australian Open. Not only did he not lose a single set the entire tournament, but he convincingly beat opponents who claimed to be playing the best tennis of their lives going into their matches. Andy Roddick, Federer’s semi-finals opponent, looked great the entire tournament until he played Roger. Federer embarrassed Roddick 6-4, 6-0, 6-2. In the final, Federer played a scrappy Fernando Gonzalez who was making his first Grand Slam final. Calm as ever, Federer won the match 7-6, 6-4, 6-4. The 2007 Australian Open was just the most recent display of how much better than everyone else Federer really is.
Tiger Woods needs no introduction. We all know him as the best golfer in the past 20 or more years. He plays fewer tournaments on the PGA tour than most golfers and still leads the tour in earnings every year. When he really tries his hardest, it seems like no one can beat him. Currently, he has won 7 consecutive PGA tournament titles. That is a remarkable statistic considering the overall level of golf that is being played by his opponents. Tiger shines even brighter when it comes to the majors. He has been quoted as saying that the only tournaments that matter to him are the majors. It is scary to think that he can win so many tournaments that really do not matter that much to him.
There really is no right or wrong answer to the question of who is more dominant in their sport. In my eyes, Federer’s accomplishments are more impressive. Woods is right there beside Roger, but the fact that Federer has done all that he has in only four years is pretty amazing. He is still only 25 years old and potentially has another decade to play. Woods wins a lot of tournaments and will shoot a stroke or two better than his nearest competitor. Federer plays the best competition available, and they cannot even take a set off of him.
12 Comments »
Leave a comment
-
Recent Comments
Mitch Geller on A Breakdown of the Physically … Greg on A Breakdown of the Physically … dhieru on Federer vs. Tiger…Who is… dhieru on Federer vs. Tiger…Who is… Bothra on Federer vs. Tiger…Who is…
No doubt Federer is dominant and no one can compete with him.. but if you look at Tiger he’s competing against 150 odd players a week while Federer takes on one opponent at a time. When I think of it in these terms Tiger dominance is second to none.
That is true and a very good point. I think they would be more comparable if there were more match play tournaments in the PGA. I know Tiger won two match play titles as a professional and a bunch as an amateur but has really struggled in the Ryder Cup. So when Tiger has had to only take on 1 person at a time as a professional, he’s won twice out of like 8 or so chances and only has 1 winning record in the Ryder Cup. I’m not saying that proves Federer to be more dominant, but it is something to think about.
This is an excellent questions that you raise and I would really like to discuss publishing it.
Cheers,
Michelle@sportingo.com
Federer is one of my all time favorites in the sports world. Tennis is a sport about endurance, and to win the many tournaments and grand slams that Roger has is more impressive to me than Tiger Woods and his golf career.
I think both are extremely good and by far the best in their respected sports. I don’t think that you can really compare them correctly. Tigers 7 wins in a row on the PGA tour well i doubt we will see that again from anybody. But Federer is also by far the best player in his sport and can beat all of his competitors easily but he only plays them one at a time. Tiger plays 150 players at the same time. Tiger’s ryder cup record is what lets him down but his singles record in the ryder cup is still very good. If i had to choose between the 2 of who is the best sportsman i would say Tiger its probably because i’m a golfer myself but mostly because of the golf he has played since his fathers death and i would imagine that it took great courage and mental toughness.
The one-at-a-time argument really is thin. At least 100 players start a major tournament. Any one of them, playing the best tennis possible, may win. For roger to win the tournament, he has to play better than all of them overall.
In golf, realistically, there are probably a dozen players who may at the start of the final day, are in contention.
This is not unlike being eliminated in rounds as happens in tennis.
They are both great. Who is greater? Who cares … I enjoy them both!
NO CONTEST – ROGER FEDERER
Tiger vs. Roger – Tiger Woods and Pete sampras said that ROGER FEDERER IS THE MOST DOMINANT ATHLETE ON THE PLANET. Who knows more about being dominant in a sport than those two. Why? It took Tiger 10 years to win 13 majors and he is 31 years old. It took Pete 12 years to win 14 majors and he is retired. It took Roger Federer only 4 years to win 12 majors and he is only 26 years old. Those of you are trying to say one sport is harder or easier than the other is pointles and only opinion. Tiger is American, more popular, and gets more publicity. But ROGER FEDERER IS THE MOST DOMINANT ATHLETE ON THE PLANET BY FAR. Those who disagree, it’s O.K. but ask yourself do you have more credibility about the subject than Tiger Woods or Pete Sampras? NO YOU DON’T. You are just a CHEERLEADER trying to hold a pep-rally for your sport. Finally, you don’t know how long Tiger’s or Roger’s career is gonna last, so don’t try to predict the future. We are talking about most dominant right know! NO CONTEST – ROGER FEDERER BY FAR!
I’d have to say Garcia!!!!
Don’t bet against the Spaniard!!!
The fiery Spaniard has played in four Ryder Cups, posting a 14-4-0 record overall, and he is a perfect 8-0-0 in foursomes.
i would say Tsonga is the mosst dominant on earth
federer is better than the best.
clouds can hide the sun only for a very short time span, otherwise the sun is brightest and greatest like federer.