rallo 132 Posted June 13, 2007 Let me know when field flucking hockey becomes a world wide professional sport moron? And I would be willing to bet my house that a professional tennis player is in 10x better shape than a field hockey player. Good try though yep... so you clearly read none of my prior posts... and clearly are too dumb to pick up on sarcasm... but i'll let that slide... infact... i'll even paraphrase... (and on a side note... can i really win your house???? and 10x better shape??? should we find a way to measure that???) the reason i used field hockey was to poke fun at how few people watch/follow tennis... you tennis enthusiasts make fun of golf... yet no one follows tennis... yet you seem to use the logic that since you follow tennis that there are others aside from you that do... in large quantities infact... the truth is, that in this country there aren't... i used field hockey because it is an obscure sport that no one follows... oh weird... that should ring a bell because we are talking about tennis... the analogy writes itself... same reason i used curling... or let's even talk about bowling... they show that on ESPN probably as much as they do tennis... did i S-P-E-L-L it out for you simpleton??? (on a side note i have no problem with the sport of tennis... or it's greatest player which=federer... only the snobby douches that can't make decent arguments) Wow you are the retard, he was basically kidding, and making a point that no one cares about field hockey or Tennis. get a clue dude. weird... someone who can catch sarcasm... isn't over-promoting a sport that gets zero airtime... although i saw some field hockey highlights the other day and they were riveting AND JUST A LAST OVERALL THING TO SAY... any of you guys... golf or tennis fans or whatever... you tell me honestly... if you want to have free throw shoot for 1 million dollars you tell me what you'd rather do... have 7 head to head matches... or go up against an entire field of 128 and see who does best??? it is easily found in the mathematics... any of you have an unbiased math friend???? ask him what is STATISTICALLY harder to do ... (yep you guessed it retards... this has nothing to do with tennis OR golf talent whatsoever) win 7 matches in a row of increasing difficulty... or win out of 127 other people... oh... and the best part... which is easier to win CONSISTENTLY Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jocstrap 8 Posted June 18, 2007 Man I was routing for Tiger today. Here's the question.... What do you all think about his statistic of NEVER NEVER coming from behind to win a championship in the final round? This was shocking to hear. A guy this great has no chance to win if he is behind on Sunday . Does this make him the greatest of all time with zero chance of winning a major a stroke or two down going into the final day. Thoughts? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BMoney 0 Posted June 18, 2007 Don't discuss tennis if you have no clue please. no kidding, my head hurt reading that nonsense.... just because people dont know tennis players, doesnt mean they arent good... flushing meadow is hopping every day for 2 full weeks when the us open is there for tennis...20k strong... fred funk wins titles when the field is depleted... Man I was routing for Tiger today. Here's the question.... What do you all think about his statistic of NEVER NEVER coming from behind to win a championship in the final round? This was shocking to hear. A guy this great has no chance to win if he is behind on Sunday . Does this make him the greatest of all time with zero chance of winning a major a stroke or two down going into the final day. Thoughts? it may be karma for being such a ###### to people?...he will probably say it was because he misses daddy on this special day try tipping someone, cheap bast@rd... the other guy won and we never saw him...all they showed was tiger..its a love affair with the guy..i dont know why..i knew he wasnt going to finish..like u said, he never does..hes no jack and arnie... stats wise? yes..because he is playing in an era with some really shaky golfers and superior equipment... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jocstrap 8 Posted June 18, 2007 yep... so you clearly read none of my prior posts... and clearly are too dumb to pick up on sarcasm... but i'll let that slide... infact... i'll even paraphrase... (and on a side note... can i really win your house???? and 10x better shape??? should we find a way to measure that???) the reason i used field hockey was to poke fun at how few people watch/follow tennis... you tennis enthusiasts make fun of golf... yet no one follows tennis... yet you seem to use the logic that since you follow tennis that there are others aside from you that do... in large quantities infact... the truth is, that in this country there aren't... i used field hockey because it is an obscure sport that no one follows... oh weird... that should ring a bell because we are talking about tennis... the analogy writes itself... same reason i used curling... or let's even talk about bowling... they show that on ESPN probably as much as they do tennis... did i S-P-E-L-L it out for you simpleton??? oh... and the best part... which is easier to win CONSISTENTLY Yea right, and the 33,000+ people that signed in to play at my public facility last year don't keep up with tennis. And that's why I have a $270,000 budget this year? Oh yea, and the 1000 people I bring in for various tournaments throughout the year that brings in around $500,000 to our economy. But yet this is just a town of 150,000. Now imagine how big tennis is in Atlanta. Obviously you have no idea how big this sport is and what it does for a cities economy. Nice comparison to field hockey. How much money do you think NYC gets for hosting the US OPEN? I would be very curious to hear your uneducated guess on the matter. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BMoney 0 Posted June 18, 2007 you just shot down your own argument, it says a lot when the casual sports fan can probably name guys like tiger, phil, ernie, vijay, furyk, daly, sergio, DLIII...but ask them to name men's tennis players...uhhh roddick, federsomething...that other guy. Once upon a time, the public here did know the top guys. I submit that men's tennis is at it's weakest point ever. i speak for myself..i know golf guys as well as tennis... you are assuming that people dont know who the top guys in tennis are...just because people here have no clue, doesnt mean worldwide, they dont know... i know enough about golf to know that the top 5 that was listed failed to come from behind at a major yet again was +14 +21 cut cut...in no specific order.... sad...ben hogan is rolling in his grave..he didnt get rediculous equipment and courses tailor made to his ability like tiger has... hits in a ton? no prob..we'll keep making holes longer..giving him MORE of an edge... how many focking trees did they cut from this historic course? and the parity that is todays golfers STILL hacked it up... ill take federer nadal davydenko djokovic and roddick/gonzales anyday.... wimbledon starts june 30th let me guess..NO ONE will be watching? and a correction to my earlier post.. when i said the us open is hopping with 20k..thats simply for arthur ashe stadium... there are around 20 other courts and people outside the stadiums...everywhere..its a mass of national pride..flag waving...skimpy top wearing...drink having people... but i guess THAT wouldnt be as mcuh fun as hanging around a snobby rich group of guys at the country club and having tiger sneer at you because u coughed... espn shows enough tennis..they have tourneys on...just because people choose to block it out doesnt mean it doesnt exist... what next? are people here going to say that soccer isnt popular because u dont know any players? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
edjr 5,566 Posted June 18, 2007 Man I was routing for Tiger today. Here's the question.... What do you all think about his statistic of NEVER NEVER coming from behind to win a championship in the final round? This was shocking to hear. A guy this great has no chance to win if he is behind on Sunday . Does this make him the greatest of all time with zero chance of winning a major a stroke or two down going into the final day. Thoughts? lets not forget he rarely wins a major if it's not a Par 72. I think he has 2 wins out of his 12 not on a par 72 He really struggles if he can't capitalize on the par 5's. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
listen2me 23 1,542 Posted June 18, 2007 lets not forget he rarely wins a major if it's not a Par 72. I think he has 2 wins out of his 12 not on a par 72 He really struggles if he can't capitalize on the par 5's. He just finished 2nd? Isn't that what Federer just did?.....struggled?....yea struggled to putt, or make putts. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jocstrap 8 Posted June 18, 2007 He just finished 2nd? Isn't that what Federer just did?.....struggled?....yea struggled to putt, or make putts. Federer 1st in the Austrailian open and 2nd in the French Woods not sure what placed he finished in the masters 2nd in the US Open Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mayhem39 3 Posted June 18, 2007 Hey guys, i follow both sports. I don't follow tennis as closely as I used to beacuse the players are just not as good or as fun to watch as they used to be. Now comparing Roger Federer to Tiger Woods is absolutely ridiculous IMO. Roger is not even close to Tiger.....what Tiger is doing and has done is phenomenal. He is dominating a sport that should not be able to be dominated by one man in this day and age. There are so many good golfers now and for him to dominate against the caliber of competition that is out there is remarkable. Federer does not have any competition IMO. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Wyatt Earp 0 Posted June 18, 2007 Federer 1st in the Austrailian open and 2nd in the French Woods not sure what placed he finished in the masters 2nd in the US Open Woods was 2nd in the Masters as well. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
edjr 5,566 Posted June 18, 2007 Hey guys, i follow both sports. I don't follow tennis as closely as I used to beacuse the players are just not as good or as fun to watch as they used to be. Now comparing Roger Federer to Tiger Woods is absolutely ridiculous IMO. Roger is not even close to Tiger.....what Tiger is doing and has done is phenomenal. He is dominating a sport that should not be able to be dominated by one man in this day and age. There are so many good golfers now and for him to dominate against the caliber of competition that is out there is remarkable. Federer does not have any competition IMO. Is that why he lost to Nadal at the French 2 years in a row? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rybo5 0 Posted June 18, 2007 Federer does not have any competition IMO. There's no way of comparing today's competition to any other era. Federer may very well be facing off against weaker competition in relation to any previous era, but he may not. Maybe his competition is actually deeper than yesteryear, and a big number of today's stars could beat the supposed legends of the game. It's an impossible question to answer, unless you could somehow take every great player, put them in their prime, and have them all play each other on every surface. Let me know how that goes. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
edjr 5,566 Posted June 18, 2007 There's no way of comparing today's competition to any other era. Federer may very well be facing off against weaker competition in relation to any previous era, but he may not. Maybe his competition is actually deeper than yesteryear, and a big number of today's stars could beat the supposed legends of the game. It's an impossible question to answer, unless you could somehow take every great player, put them in their prime, and have them all play each other on every surface. Let me know how that goes. That is why sports are so great... everyone has their opinion and that's why talk radio is so popular. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BMoney 0 Posted June 18, 2007 I'm talking quantity of good players moreso than quality. Besides Nadal, who does Federer really have to worry about? And that's only on one surface...clay. Tiger has many more players to worry about every week. This argument is not even close....it shouldnt even be an argument. considering how awful woods is in match play..i can see why u think this way... i already listed 4 above that roger has to worry about..and others include canas etc... what we've learned... after 2 weeks of grueling tennis in a Major...if roger trails 2 sets to 1 in the finals..get close to the tv...this one could be a classic... after 4 days of grueling golf in a Major...if tiger is trailing after 3 days, shut that TV and go outside with your kids...Tiger and his homotastic red shirt is not making a dramatic comeback... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mayhem39 3 Posted June 18, 2007 Is that why he lost to Nadal at the French 2 years in a row? I'm talking quantity of good players moreso than quality. Besides Nadal, who does Federer really have to worry about? And that's only on one surface...clay. Tiger has many more players to worry about every week. This argument is not even close....it shouldnt even be an argument. There's no way of comparing today's competition to any other era. Federer may very well be facing off against weaker competition in relation to any previous era, but he may not. Maybe his competition is actually deeper than yesteryear, and a big number of today's stars could beat the supposed legends of the game. It's an impossible question to answer, unless you could somehow take every great player, put them in their prime, and have them all play each other on every surface. Let me know how that goes. I disagree. It would be nice to be able to have them all play each other in their primes but it isn't necessary. Remember, it's just my opinion. Could i be wrong? sure. But I don't believe I am wrong. In golf there are certianly more good players now than there ever has been. Even Jack nicklaus would agree with that. In tennis, I think you are really seeing a lull in quality players. I think that's a big part of the reason Federer has dominated. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JT 137 Posted June 18, 2007 One more thought on Woods vs Federer. The tennis court always remains the same. The organizers of each tournament can't arbitrarily make the baseline deeper to negate power, or narrow the alleys to reward precision. Woods faces that on a weekly basis. Tennis doesn't do anything to try and make competitions 'Roger-proof'. Sure, Federer plays different surfaces (though not as successfully on one as others), but watch the British Open. Theoretically it's the same 'surface' as Oakmont, but it might as well be the moon in comparison. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BMoney 0 Posted June 18, 2007 One more thought on Woods vs Federer. The tennis court always remains the same. The organizers of each tournament can't arbitrarily make the baseline deeper to negate power, or narrow the alleys to reward precision. Woods faces that on a weekly basis. Tennis doesn't do anything to try and make competitions 'Roger-proof'. Sure, Federer plays different surfaces (though not as successfully on one as others), but watch the British Open. Theoretically it's the same 'surface' as Oakmont, but it might as well be the moon in comparison. so the extra long fairways dont play into tigers hands?.... and dont forget about the weather..the aussie open is always very hot and the us open is quite windy...its more than just the courts.... i agree that golf has many different courses and conditions...my stance has been that golf isnt that stacked with talent as people think...just because they all can all whip on people here doesnt mean they are great.... if it wasnt for tiger..golf would be at one of its low points.... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JT 137 Posted June 18, 2007 i already listed 4 above that roger has to worry about..and others include canas etc... what we've learned... after 2 weeks of grueling tennis in a Major...if roger trails 2 sets to 1 in the finals..get close to the tv...this one could be a classic... Unless it's on clay. In which case, his 'classics' are basically reduced to losing close. Kind of like finishing 2nd in a couple golf majors. I don't follow tennis that closely, but isn't Canas a cheater that got caught? Clay court specialist who ranks, what, 20-25 in the world? so the extra long fairways dont play into tigers hands?.... and dont forget about the weather..the aussie open is always very hot and the us open is quite windy...its more than just the courts.... i agree that golf has many different courses and conditions...my stance has been that golf isnt that stacked with talent as people think...just because they all can all whip on people here doesnt mean they are great.... if it wasnt for tiger..golf would be at one of its low points.... So the extra narrow fairways don't play into the hands of shorter, more precise players? Weather doesn't impact a golf course? You can argue all you want about the players of bygone eras, but there's no argument that the courses that are laid out on a weekly basis are the most difficult ever. Even the old-timers won't dispute that. And those changes were made in response to other-worldly equipment. Tennis has made no such adjustments. As for low points without Tiger: tennis isn't at one, despite the presence of Federer and Nadal? Though never an avid player or expert, I watched tennis through McEnroe, Conners, Borg, Nastase, Lendl, Everett, Nanvratilova, Graf, Sampras, etc. I rarely watch now, and I'm not alone. interest (not only tv, but based on young people playing the game) has dropped like a lead balloon. Golf is in just the opposite phase. Hard to argue that. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BMoney 0 Posted June 18, 2007 Unless it's on clay. In which case, his 'classics' are basically reduced to losing close. Kind of like finishing 2nd in a couple golf majors. I don't follow tennis that closely, but isn't Canas a cheater that got caught? Clay court specialist who ranks, what, 20-25 in the world? thats an odd story....he was given medication Oked by the ATP and later failed a test..and he served his suspension..but is still trying to get that prize money back..claiming it was the ATPs fault... but yeah..hes 20-25th in the world only because he has missed 15 months or so.... golf is very popular because people can relate to it..any old fart can grab a $150 driver and golf... there are too many people in this fat country who cant chase a ball along a baseline.... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JT 137 Posted June 18, 2007 thats an odd story....he was given medication Oked by the ATP and later failed a test..and he served his suspension..but is still trying to get that prize money back..claiming it was the ATPs fault... but yeah..hes 20-25th in the world only because he has missed 15 months or so.... golf is very popular because people can relate to it..any old fart can grab a $150 driver and golf... there are too many people in this fat country who cant chase a ball along a baseline.... I don't know. I remember seeing some fat little guys running around thinking they were tennis players in 1972-80. I was hanging around, then working at a swim/tennis club in those days . MILF city. Ah, those were the days... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BMoney 0 Posted June 18, 2007 I don't know. I remember seeing some fat little guys running around thinking they were tennis players in 1972-80. I was hanging around, then working at a swim/tennis club in those days . MILF city. Ah, those were the days... ive worked at a driving range for the past 5 years as 1 of my 4 jobs...so it isnt as if i hate golf...in fact, im going there in a bit Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jocstrap 8 Posted June 19, 2007 Did I catch the US OPEN golf champ smoking a ciggy approaching a green yesterday. Man that must be a physically challenging sport Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Angry White Male 0 Posted June 19, 2007 I'm sure Tiger is really sweating this. Yeah, when he's home with his mountains of cash and his Norse goddess of a wife, I'm sure he spends his time worried about how he compares to some girly-looking Eurotrash that plays a completely different sport. Great thread. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
donhaas 18 Posted June 19, 2007 Did I catch the US OPEN golf champ smoking a ciggy approaching a green yesterday. Man that must be a physically challenging sport Golf = hobby Tennis = sport I plan on taking up golf seriously when I am no longer able to play real sports like football, volleyball, basketball, tennis, baseball, etc. Federer and Woods are both pretty darn good Let's just call it a tie. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
edjr 5,566 Posted June 19, 2007 Golf = hobby Tennis = sport I plan on taking up golf seriously when I am no longer able to play real sports like football, volleyball, basketball, tennis, baseball, etc. Federer and Woods are both pretty darn good Let's just call it a tie. That's an excellent point. When was the last time you saw someone that looked like Cabrera win a tennis tournament? Tennis > golf Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
t.j 35 Posted June 19, 2007 I'm sure Tiger is really sweating this. Yeah, when he's home with his mountains of cash and his Norse goddess of a wife, I'm sure he spends his time worried about how he compares to some girly-looking Eurotrash that plays a completely different sport. Great thread. Federer and Woods are good friends. They've sought out each other as peers because they know that they both are special in their greatness and can that aspect of each other better than anyone else can. This thread is not about making Tiger Woods believe he's better than Roger Federer or vice versa. This thread is about fan opinion, dumbass. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
edjr 5,566 Posted June 19, 2007 Federer and Woods are good friends. They've sought out each other as peers because they know that they both are special in their greatness and can that aspect of each other better than anyone else can. This thread is not about making Tiger Woods believe he's better than Roger Federer or vice versa. This thread is about fan opinion, dumbass. great post Teej. Also, AWM is good for nothing but ignore. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rallo 132 Posted June 19, 2007 Golf = hobby Tennis = sport I plan on taking up golf seriously when I am no longer able to play real sports like football, volleyball, basketball, tennis, baseball, etc. Federer and Woods are both pretty darn good Let's just call it a tie. i could smoke a ciggy while playing baseball... granted... if the ball were hit to me i'd probably burn myself while tryin to spit it out... doesn't matter who is better anyway, because chad johnson will challenge both in a severely handicapped event and be crowned "best of everything evah" Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
edjr 5,566 Posted July 9, 2007 Federer makes his 10th grand slam final in a row the previous record being 4 in the last 40 years and wins ANOTHER Grand Slam. Tiger who? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sho Nuff 719 Posted July 9, 2007 Federer makes his 10th grand slam final in a row the previous record being 4 in the last 40 years and wins ANOTHER Grand Slam. Tiger who? Did he win the French? Oops.... And for all of you who are on the Federer thing and talk about who he faces...until he faced Nadal...he did not face anyone in the top 10 (in the Wimbeldon rankings...) highest was Gasquet who was 14th in the world going into Wimbeldon (just moved up 7 spots)...would have been Hass who was 10th (now 11th)...but never had to actually face him. That tough 86th ranked first opponent...and 56th ranked Del Potro in the 2nd round.... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
edjr 5,566 Posted July 9, 2007 Did he win the French? Did Sampras ever make the French Finals? oops Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sho Nuff 719 Posted July 9, 2007 Did Sampras ever make the French Finals? oops Did I ever compare Sampras to Tiger or Jack N even? oops Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Strike 3,978 Posted July 9, 2007 Did he win the French? Oops.... And for all of you who are on the Federer thing and talk about who he faces...until he faced Nadal...he did not face anyone in the top 10 (in the Wimbeldon rankings...) highest was Gasquet who was 14th in the world going into Wimbeldon (just moved up 7 spots)...would have been Hass who was 10th (now 11th)...but never had to actually face him. That tough 86th ranked first opponent...and 56th ranked Del Potro in the 2nd round.... It's not Federer's fault that Andy Roddick choked, AGAIN. Don't hold it against him. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
edjr 5,566 Posted July 9, 2007 Did I ever compare Sampras to Tiger or Jack N even? oops Sampras is perceived to be the best Tennis player of all time. You're smart enough to figure it out... or are you? HTH Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sho Nuff 719 Posted July 9, 2007 It's not Federer's fault that Andy Roddick choked, AGAIN. Don't hold it against him. I actually don't...but with some of the comments earlier on who Federer has to go through vs. who Tiger plays makes me laugh. Sampras is perceived to be the best Tennis player of all time. You're smart enough to figure it out... or are you? HTH So the fock what? This thread is about Federer vs. Woods. Im not comparing Sampras to either of them. If/when Federer passes Sampras...it still has no bearing on comparing him to Tiger Woods. It only means he passed up a great player of a minor sport that most people in this country really don't give a damn about. HTH Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
edjr 5,566 Posted July 9, 2007 I actually don't...but with some of the comments earlier on who Federer has to go through vs. who Tiger plays makes me laugh. So the fock what? This thread is about Federer vs. Woods. Im not comparing Sampras to either of them. If/when Federer passes Sampras...it still has no bearing on comparing him to Tiger Woods. It only means he passed up a great player of a minor sport that most people in this country really don't give a damn about. HTH Federer is more dominant than Woods. hth Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sho Nuff 719 Posted July 9, 2007 Federer is more dominant than Woods. hth And that has what to do with Sampras? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JScott 20 Posted July 9, 2007 i don't wanna say dumb.... but DUMB!!!! federer doesn't play vs the 7 guys... he plays vs the court... i'll agree with one aspect... tennis is head to head, so what your opponent does DIRECTLY effects what you do, but to say tiger doesn't play against the field is retarded... not only is he competing because they tally their scores and he's attempting to be the lowest out of like 200 guys... he is also affected by the field. are you gonna tell me that other guy's scores have no effect on what tiger does whatsoever???? do you think they just guess what other guys are shooting??? they can see the leaderboard!!!! so you're telling me if he is 2 stokes back with 4 holes to go that he wouldn't play it any differently than if he were up 2???? that's naive... of course he would play more aggressively if losing by 2... therefore he is also affected by the field... i'm not trying to down federer in any way, but some arguments made here by tennis fans are crazy You might want to go back and read your own post. You made an arguement FOR a tennis player being tougher A tennis player's opponent effects his play with EVERY return. A golfer is only effected by an opponent on the last day on the last few holes if the match is on the line (like your example). But besides that a golfer plays the course on day 1, 2 and 3. And if a golfer has a bad round, he still has other rounds to recover with. If tennis player has a bad match, he's out; no second chance. IMO Federer and Woods are pretty much at an equal point in their respective careers. Right now both are talked about as "one of the best" along other greats in their sports. IMO Federer will win at least another 5 Grand Slam championships (one of which being the French) over the next 2 - 3 seasons, which will solidify him as the greatest with the most GS titles ever. After that he'll be on the down side of his career and will maybe win 1 or 2 more Grand Slams. As for Tiger, he'll be playing golf for a very long time and I do think he'll break the record for Major wins. And then, he too will be considered the greatest golfer. One thing of note that I haven't seen mentioned in this thread is the window of opportunity for Woods v. Federer. They each play the same number of Major/GS championships (4) each year. And Federer has won his championships at a faster pace (11 in 5 years) than Woods, but Federer realistically only has a few more years in his prime when he'll be considered a top contender. Obviously there's more longevity in golf so Woods probably has another 10 years of dominance, and would still have a very good shot to win after that. So for those making the arguement that there are more players in the field for Woods to contend with I would say that's offset by the fact that he has more time/years to face those contenders and collect his wins than Federer, who you say has less contenders, but I say wins at a faster rate. Did he win the French? Oops.... And for all of you who are on the Federer thing and talk about who he faces...until he faced Nadal...he did not face anyone in the top 10 (in the Wimbeldon rankings...) highest was Gasquet who was 14th in the world going into Wimbeldon (just moved up 7 spots)...would have been Hass who was 10th (now 11th)...but never had to actually face him. That tough 86th ranked first opponent...and 56th ranked Del Potro in the 2nd round.... Well for all you who say Tiger faces the entire field, doesn't that mean Tiger faces the 200th ranked opponent on day 1 and day 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
edjr 5,566 Posted July 9, 2007 Did anyone catch the Nike commercial with Tiger Woods saying what a great champion Roger Federer was, but that he had more grand slams? Another brilliant commercial by Nike. http://youtube.com/watch?v=ZmKUm07OdZU Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
