Who is better, Tiger Woods or Roger Federer.

[Civickiller80]

it is an impossible question but who is more dominant in their respective sport
interesting article

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/20...ki/07/08/federer.woods/index.html?eref=sihpT1

so what do you think....

 

[bandanoantri]

Colossal stupid question, they're not playing the same sport, you know?

 

[Johan]

Usain Bolt or maybe Valentino Rossi

 

[Jagger69]

Two totally different sports and extremely difficult to make a comparison. Federer may be the best ever in tennis (how would he compare to....Connors, McEnroe, Laver, Borg, Sampras???) but Woods unquestionably (with all due respect to Jack Nicklaus) is head-and-shoulders above anyone who ever hit a golf ball off a tee. Tiger Woods is the most dominant athlete in his given sport who ever lived and he's got a LONG way yet to go. I say it's Tiger.

 

[Johan]

One thing I'lm actually thinking : Federer lmay plays golf in his free-time so he may be not so bad.
But Woods probably never plays tennis so he's probably very bad...

 

[Hot Mega]

I don't think either has the contemporary human competition within their respective sports that existed in the great eras of each. To the extent that it matters...Woods doesn't necessarily need to compete against great contemporaries in his sport to set a course record (for example).

Woods plays against a course, Federer plays against humans...it's difficult to know how Federer would do against the greats...since there are no real "greats" that he's playing against nowadays. The "greats" Tiger plays against are largely the same greats the "greats" before him played against..the courses.:2 cents:

 

[ilovenella]

Who cares? They both suck. Golf and tennis aren't sports at all. They're activities for the uppity people and stupid ones at that.

 

[rwill25]

I think it's harder to win in golf, so I'll say Tiger.

 

[mastagambit]

Lennox Lewis:rofl:

 

[gunslingingbird]

Brett Favre



:rofl:

 

[Skyraider22]

They both are in their sport:dunno:

 

[thebear247]

Tiger Woods

 

[Legzman]

comparing tennis to golf is fuckin ridiculous!

 

[rickwinkle]

Federer is at least out of breath when he's done!

 

[MrZiggles]

Jack Nicklaus in majors: 18 wins, 19 #2 finishes, 9 #3 finishes; 57 top 5 finishes, 73 top 10 finishes. Woods will most likely pass him in wins, but when he doesn't win he's often m.i.a. So let's not assume Woods is the best golfer ever.

That being said, Federer's been feeling some heat from Nadal lately. And if he's not definitively the best of his era, he can't really be the best ever can he?

 

[titsrock]

I play both sports. Tennis is much funner to play and a far superior workout. Golf is harder to play.

I'm not sure Federer is the greatest player ever. I think Borg might be. Sampras, in his prime, might be better than Feds. If Nadal didn't get injured, it's doubtful that Feds would've won the French for sure or Wimby.

Tiger is the greatest golfer ever. But, nobody has been able to step up and be a legit rival to him. Tiger has no Nadal, basically.

I think Jack had to beat better competition using shitter equipment than Tiger. I know players like Ernie Els, Sergio, Mickelson are great, but none of them have been able to make Tiger sweat....

I think it's harder to win a golf tourney than a tennis tourney....although it's very difficult to compare these sports.

 

[STDiva]

Federer has done more in less time. And tennis players generally have a shorter career than golfers.

I voted Federer.

 

[D-rock]

Woods is a better golfer than Federer is a tennis player. Woods can also win anywhere at any time against anybody. Federer is getting old and on the cusp of falling off. His last few major victories almost need an asterisk next the them saying he didn't have to face Nadal.

 

[Galactic]

Tiger. The accomplishments to his credit are staggering, and, to be perfectly frank, I am not entirely convinced he is human. Which may then discredit him. Hmm. I still say Woods.

 

[Lungzyn]

Tiger Woods has never won a major where he wasnt at least tied for the lead after 54 holes, which is interesting. Even so, its obvious he is very mentally strong and its becoming increasing difficult to say he isnt the greatest golfer ever.
On the other hand, Roger Federer has won 14 out of the last 23 grand slam tournaments, and has at least reached the semi-final in 22 of those last 23, which is incredibly consistent. The problem is a healthy Nadal is probably better now.
I cant separate them really, they are both pretty awesome