Federer > Woods

[Boz/BoFan 0]

Federer has to beat what, 4 people to win a championship? Tiger had to beat a field of over 160 this week and near that number every tournament.

 

If all he had to do was play Match Play vs 4 people for every major he'd have 30-40 majors by now. Federer is not even close to tiger.

[Rybo5 0]

Federer has to beat what, 4 people to win a championship? Tiger had to beat a field of over 160 this week and near that number every tournament.

 

If all he had to do was play Match Play vs 4 people for every major he'd have 30-40 majors by now. Federer is not even close to tiger.

 

Apples to oranges. It's more like Tiger along with 160 others had to play the same course. Tiger competed against this course better than anyone else.

[Sho Nuff 719]

Apples to oranges. It's more like Tiger along with 160 others had to play the same course. Tiger competed against this course better than anyone else.

 

Yeah...the other players don't play against each other.

Sorry, Tiger was a huge reason Ames fell apart today.

And if you don't think Els and Austin making a charge did not change the way Tiger played, you have absolutely no clue.

[mayhem39 3]

we get it already..you know NOTHING about tennis....fine..move on....

 

just because u top your shots and cant stay out of the rough..doesnt mean that the golfers using $500 clubs are better than the competition in tennis....

 

 

I've forgot more about tennis than you will ever know.....

[Rybo5 0]

Yeah...the other players don't play against each other.

 

Directly? No they indeed don't. I'm not denying that the thought of playing in a group with someone or knowing what score you have to beat can have an effect on your game, but that doesn't change the fact that the main competition here is between the course and each individual player. Golfers don't hit balls at each other or try to tackle each other before a shot. Golf isn't that kind of a game.

[Sho Nuff 719]

Directly? No they indeed don't. I'm not denying that the thought of playing in a group with someone or knowing what score you have to beat can have an effect on your game, but that doesn't change the fact that the main competition here is between the course and each individual player. Golfers don't hit balls at each other or try to tackle each other before a shot. Golf isn't that kind of a game.

 

Directly, no they don't play against each other in that manner...but there is direct competition among every player...and they are doing it all at once.

 

I think winning in golf is much more difficult than winning in Tennis. Just from the numbers of competitors each week...as well as the overall talent level playing on the PGA tour vs that in Tennis.

 

I brought it up not long ago looking at who was ranked 100 in both tours. I don't recall the tennis #100 at that time, but at that point it was Fred Funk in Golf....and looking at the resumes of the two, Funk was far more accomplished and better than the tennis #100 was.

[Boz/BoFan 0]

Tiger competed against this course better than anyone else.

 

Which IS competing against everyone else. Why even keep score if they arent competing against each other?

[birdbrain3X 0]

This is ghey. What happened today to both of them should settle this. Woods is superior, period. Federer cannot dominate as Tiger can. Not now or ever.

[jocstrap 8]

Federer has to beat what, 4 people to win a championship? Tiger had to beat a field of over 160 this week and near that number every tournament.

 

 

Good Gawd are you serious? do the math

 

128 draw

then 64

then 32

then 16

then quarterfinals

then semifinals

then finals

 

Thats winning 7 rounds without a flaw. None of this over par one day only to charge the next day. One fluck up and you are history. And BTW the life span for being at the top for a tennis pro is minimal compared to Austin's age of 42 getting second place today. Heaven forbid the temperature was 101 degrees. Try a hard court at 130 and actually having to run for 3 hours.

[jocstrap 8]

This is ghey. What happened today to both of them should settle this. Woods is superior, period. Federer cannot dominate as Tiger can. Not now or ever.

 

 

Let me know when Tiger wins a grand slam 5 years IN A ROW

 

FEDERER 5 TIME WIMBLEDON CHAMP.

[Boz/BoFan 0]

Good Gawd are you serious? do the math

 

128 draw

then 64

then 32

then 16

then quarterfinals

then semifinals

then finals

 

Thats winning 7 rounds without a flaw. None of this over par one day only to charge the next day. One fluck up and you are history. And BTW the life span for being at the top for a tennis pro is minimal compared to Austin's age of 42 getting second place today. Heaven forbid the temperature was 101 degrees. Try a hard court at 130 and actually having to run for 3 hours.

 

Lame. He can lose 2 sets per match and still win. He can even lose more games per match and still win. Now THATS ghey. In golf, if you screw up on 2 putts per round, let alone shots....you're toast. That would take you from a respectable 8 under victory to even par which is nowhere in the hunt for golf. Let Federer deal with the pressure of having to make less than 2 mistakes per match to stay in the hunt.

 

Federer plays punks until the semis, Tigers plays a field who can win at anytime.

[Boz/BoFan 0]

Let me know when Tiger wins a grand slam 5 years IN A ROW

 

FEDERER 5 TIME WIMBLEDON CHAMP.

 

At one time Tiger had all 4 Major trophies on his mantle at home, in the span of 12 months. Pete Sampras won Wimbledon 4 years in a row and was a 7 time champ, by the way, Roger has yet to catch Petey and even Petey is no Tiger.

[edjr 5,562]

This is ghey. What happened today to both of them should settle this. Woods is superior, period. Federer cannot dominate as Tiger can. Not now or ever.

 

 

 

 

for the 1st time in 2 years Tiger wins a major when Federe loses in the finals of a meaningless tournament.

 

Also, this thread was made a 7 months ago. Ownt

[edjr 5,562]

Directly? No they indeed don't. I'm not denying that the thought of playing in a group with someone or knowing what score you have to beat can have an effect on your game, but that doesn't change the fact that the main competition here is between the course and each individual player. Golfers don't hit balls at each other or try to tackle each other before a shot. Golf isn't that kind of a game.

 

 

Lets not forget everyone that plays with Tiger in the 3rd or forth round wilts under the pressure and is pretty much out of the tournament. Bunch of chumps, why do they even show up when paired with Tiger? Friggin joke.

[Sho Nuff 719]

Good Gawd are you serious? do the math

 

128 draw

then 64

then 32

then 16

then quarterfinals

then semifinals

then finals

 

Thats winning 7 rounds without a flaw. None of this over par one day only to charge the next day. One fluck up and you are history. And BTW the life span for being at the top for a tennis pro is minimal compared to Austin's age of 42 getting second place today. Heaven forbid the temperature was 101 degrees. Try a hard court at 130 and actually having to run for 3 hours.

 

 

Ummm...but he played 7 people.

 

And this over par one day and charge the next is crap. Unless you think Federer needs his best to beat some of the chumps he plays in the first few rounds...or that you think the guy never drops a set. Yes, it happens....he can play poorly and still advance.

 

What does the life span have to do with the competition involved? Oh wait, another poster trying to foolishly compare the physical nature of each sport.

How many times do people have to say that nobody is trying to say that golf is more physically demanding.

[Sho Nuff 719]

Let me know when Tiger wins a grand slam 5 years IN A ROW

 

FEDERER 5 TIME WIMBLEDON CHAMP.

 

Let me know when Roger has near the amount of competition that Tiger does on the PGA tour.

Let me know when winning a grand slam event in tennis is as hard as it is to win a major on the PGA tour.

[Sho Nuff 719]

Lets not forget everyone that plays with Tiger in the 3rd or forth round wilts under the pressure and is pretty much out of the tournament. Bunch of chumps, why do they even show up when paired with Tiger? Friggin joke.

 

Because he is intimidating...because he simply is that good and that is why they wilt...because some of you continue to ignore the mental aspects of golf.

[KSB2424 3,083]

I think this has been stated a few times in this thread, but I'll reiterate for clarity: Apples to Oranges.

 

Let it go.......

 

HTH

[edjr 5,562]

I think this has been stated a few times in this thread, but I'll reiterate for clarity: Apples to Oranges.

 

Let it go.......

 

HTH

 

It was just a matter of time before the Tiger suck ups finally had a time when Tiger won and Federer lost. Even if it happend in 4 years, they would have referenced this thread to say they were right.

[peenie 1,690]

i posed this question to my ex-fiance (when will i stop calling him that?) and he said (and he's a golfer) that federer without a doubt is a better athlete just based on the tennis game alone which requires much more physical strength and endurance.

 

imo, tiger will probably be the better champion or a more winning professional athlete as he is more skilled.

[Sho Nuff 719]

i posed this question to my ex-fiance (when will i stop calling him that?) and he said (and he's a golfer) that federer without a doubt is a better athlete just based on the tennis game alone which requires much more physical strength and endurance.

 

imo, tiger will probably be the better champion or a more winning professional athlete as he is more skilled.

 

If only the question was about physical endurance...you would have a point...but I see, yet another is not understanding the conversation here.

 

And if someone does not think Tiger is athletic or it took no endurance to play these past 4 days in Tulsa...ugh, there is no hope for some people.

[parrot 789]

None of this over par one day only to charge the next day. One fluck up and you are history.

Please. A bad shot in tennis costs you a point. You lose a game, you start the next with a clean slate. Same with sets. One bad shot in golf can cost you the whole tournament.

[edjr 5,562]

Please. A bad shot in tennis costs you a point. You lose a game, you start the next with a clean slate. Same with sets. One bad shot in golf can cost you the whole tournament.

 

 

What if it's match point against you? What does a bad shot cost you then?

[listen2me 23 1,541]

Federer plays punks until the semis, Tigers plays a field who can win at anytime.

 

Can't think of a better way to put it.

 

Federer plays push-overs for the 1st 3 or so rounds. While Tiger plays the WHole field of 120-150 players. Ill take Federers odds.

 

only 1 guy out of 150 pro golfers has to get hot for a weekend and beat Tiger.

 

This argument is dumb because there is no real math to determine who is better. But the golf backers have made the point of how many players Tiger has to beat vs the players federer has to beat. And there is no arguing Tiger has to beat WAY i mean WAY more.

 

Tennis Backers have given no real reason or point to why Tennis is harder to win.

 

 

That is why the Golf backers have won this argument as much I you can. Again there is no 1 way of determining who is right. But at least we gave several points that cannot be denied. While Tennis backers have given a few ...well meaningless ones.

[edjr 5,562]

Can't think of a better way to put it.

 

Federer plays push-overs for the 1st 3 or so rounds. While Tiger plays the WHole field of 120-150 players. Ill take Federers odds.

 

only 1 guy out of 150 pro golfers has to get hot for a weekend and beat Tiger.

 

This argument is dumb because there is no real math to determine who is better. But the golf backers have made the point of how many players Tiger has to beat vs the players federer has to beat. And there is no arguing Tiger has to beat WAY i mean WAY more.

 

Tennis Backers have given no real reason or point to why Tennis is harder to win.

That is why the Golf backers have won this argument as much I you can. Again there is no 1 way of determining who is right. But at least we gave several points that cannot be denied. While Tennis backers have given a few ...well meaningless ones.

 

How has Tiger done in match play events?

[Rybo5 0]

Tennis Backers have given no real reason or point to why Tennis is harder to win.

 

I guess you were asleep, when it was expressed countless times how physically difficult it is to play pro level tennis.

[mayhem39 3]

How has Tiger done in match play events?

 

 

As an amateur he won three consecutive US Amateur titles which involves stroke play and then match play for several rounds. Go ahead and look up how many other golfers have done that. He also won three consecutive junior amateurs. As a professional he has not fared as well in match play. I think he's done ok for himself as a professional though.

[mayhem39 3]

What if it's match point against you? What does a bad shot cost you then?

 

 

It costs you the match. In golf one bad shot on the first day of the tournament could essentially cost you the tournament. If Roger loses the first point of the match on a bad shot, I don't think he will analyze that at the end of the match.

[edjr 5,562]

It costs you the match. In golf one bad shot on the first day of the tournament could essentially cost you the tournament. If Roger loses the first point of the match on a bad shot, I don't think he will analyze that at the end of the match.

 

Tiger hit a bevy of bad shots over the 4 days, did he lose the tournament?

[mayhem39 3]

I guess you were asleep, when it was expressed countless times how physically difficult it is to play pro level tennis.

 

 

I'm guessing you are asleep since that is not what the argument is about. Go back to the beginning of the thread and do some catch-up.

[mayhem39 3]

Tiger hit a bevy of bad shots over the 4 days, did he lose the tournament?

 

 

I didn't say it WOULD cost you the tournament...I said it COULD cost you the tournament. You are basically making my argument easier. Tiger must be pretty damn good if he hit a BEVY of bad shots and still won. I didn't see all of these so-called bad shots but whatever...you really are a complete idiot.....

[edjr 5,562]

I didn't say it WOULD cost you the tournament...I said it COULD cost you the tournament. You are basically making my argument easier. Tiger must be pretty damn good if he hit a BEVY of bad shots and still won. I didn't see all of these so-called bad shots but whatever...you really are a complete idiot.....

 

I'm making your argument?

 

My point being, you said one bad shot could cost him the tournie, I'm saying he hit a sh1tload of bad shots, just ask him. No different than Federer, cept Federer has to hit a lot more shots in each tournament.

 

HTH

[Patriotsfatboy1 1,432]

I'm making your argument?

 

My point being, you said one bad shot could cost him the tournie, I'm saying he hit a sh1tload of bad shots, just ask him. No different than Federer, cept Federer has to hit a lot more shots in each tournament.

 

HTH

Well if Federer were better, then he would not need to hit more shots.

 

Argument over!

[parrot 789]

What if it's match point against you? What does a bad shot cost you then?

See, this kind of response right here is why so many people think you're a doosh. HTH.

[Patriotsfatboy1 1,432]

See, this kind of response right here is why so many people think you're a doosh. HTH.

 

Ed isn't a doosh. He is dumb or dense, but not a doosh.

 

 

 

He is a retard, but he is our retard.

[edjr 5,562]

See, this kind of response right here is why so many people think you're a doosh. HTH.

 

Why? Am I wrong?

 

Saying one shot can cost you a golf tournament, but one shot can't cost you a golf tournament? :oldconfused:

[Rybo5 0]

I'm guessing you are asleep since that is not what the argument is about. Go back to the beginning of the thread and do some catch-up.

 

I guess you were asleep, when I was responding to a specific quote.

 

 

 

 

Tennis Backers have given no real reason or point to why Tennis is harder to win.

[mayhem39 3]

I guess you were asleep, when I was responding to a specific quote.

 

 

So what...that still isn't part of the argument. We all understand that tennis is more physically demanding.

[Rybo5 0]

So what...that still isn't part of the argument. We all understand that tennis is more physically demanding.

 

Apparently that guy doesn't.

[mayhem39 3]

Apparently that guy doesn't.

 

 

Fair enough...everybody but one then.