Tigerer vs. Federer

by PleatsnCleats

So I've been going back and forth all day with some folks about who is the most dominating athlete between Roger Federer and Tiger Woods.  Both are smashing records, both are currently tops in the field. . . and both are in a Nike commercial with Thierry Henry (?) (I know he's a popular "futbol" player but I doubt most Americans get it -- but maybe bravo to Nike for making us care)

I won't tell you which one I think and why just yet, because I'd like to hear from you first.

What does it mean for a player to be dominant? Between Tiger and Federer, who is the most dominant?

(Cross-published at Pleats 'n Cleats)

S4GWaterboy

770 days ago

Score 0

I don't think I can choose between the two. I mean, their sports are fairly different. Both of their accomplishments will not be fully appreciated for years to come (IMO). But both of them (like Michael Jordan before) have made enough of an impact on their respective sports so as to actually draw my intrest enough that I actually tune in and watch on occasion. Well, I've watched tennis for some time... but golf!?! I'm actually watching it from time to time now.

Permalink | Reply

PleatsnCleatsVarsity

769 days ago

Score 1

The sports are different, but I guess I'm talking about dominance of their respective sport. I'll toss out a few ideas: Dominance, to me, means that every single time you enter an event, you are expected to, and almost always do, win. If you don't win, it's not only a shock, but the person who beat you becomes well known for at least 15 minutes, too. Does this change things?

Permalink

PleatsnCleatsVarsity

769 days ago

Score 0

The sports are different, but I guess I'm talking about dominance of their respective sport. I'll toss out a few ideas: Dominance, to me, means that every single time you enter an event, you are expected to, and almost always do, win. If you don't win, it's not only a shock, but the person who beat you becomes well known for at least 15 minutes, too. Does this change things?

Permalink | Reply

S4GWaterboy

769 days ago

Score 0

Well then, I'd have to go with Federer - for now. I know Tiger Woods is an incredibly gifted golfer, and he wins most of the time, but Federer loses far less percentage-wise. I don't watch tennis outside of the "Grandslams" (life choices), but pretty much everytime the guys steps on the court I feel bad for his opponent. Tiger's good, but if he has a bad day the rest of the field feels like they have a shot (as long as that bad day extends into Sunday).

Permalink