Who's more dominate...Tiger or Federer?

[tkenm356]

Tiger Woods doesn't lose to anybody. Nobody is responsible for him losing other than himself. He doesn't play one on one or one against 35 or whatever. He plays by himself to achieve a score for himself to try and be better than someone else. If Tiger has a higher score than someone else, he got outplayed, not beat.

 

Tennis is one on one, if you don't win a match it's because you got your ass handed to you. Tiger hands his own ass to himself if he can't win. Tiger making a par instead of a birdie has no correlation to how someone like Phil Mickelson is doing two holes over. It's directly related to Tiger beating himself (insert pre-teen joke here)

 

At least thats how i see it

I see your point, but you can beat yourself in tennis as well. If Federer is hitting the ball into the net, or is long on his shots, he's beating himself. The difference in the two sports is that in tennis, someone can force you to make errors. Golf, it's all on you.

 

You summed it up a lot better than me

[biittner77]

I don't care. I only opened this thread because I wanted to see how many people would complain about the dominate/dominant error.

 

I only opened this thread to see your avatar

[Sammy Sofa]

Tiger can be beaten by literally the man on the street on any given day. It doesn't work out like that nearly as often in tennis, if ever.

 

This just isn't true.

 

A single hole? Maybe. Over eighteen holes? Highly unlikely. Over a tournament? Never.

 

I'm saying that as unlikely as it is, it's far more likely for the "cinderella story" to happen in professional golf than it is in professional tennis. And besides, in golf, nobody can make you lose. In my mind, that automatically puts it below any sport where you have a direct opponent, like tennis, in terms of difficulty.

[biittner77]

Tiger can be beaten by literally the man on the street on any given day. It doesn't work out like that nearly as often in tennis, if ever.

 

This just isn't true.

 

A single hole? Maybe. Over eighteen holes? Highly unlikely. Over a tournament? Never.

 

I'm saying that as unlikely as it is, it's far more likely for the "cinderella story" to happen in professional golf than it is in professional tennis. And besides, in golf, nobody can make you lose. In my mind, that automatically puts it below any sport where you have a direct opponent, like tennis, in terms of difficulty.

 

Two questions: What do you mean by "The man on the street"? and Have you ever played golf?

 

If by man on the street you mean a scratch golfer then I'd concede that it was possible.

[cubweiser03]

Tiger has won 7 PGA golf tournaments in a row. Thats like winning 30 tennis tournaments in a row. Winning 7 tennis tournaments in a row is much more commen than a player in golf. The secone best golfer in world would have a heart attack if he won 3 in a row.

 

Federer is freaking good no doubt about that. What he is doing isnt leaps and bounds better than what Sampras did for a period there. Tiger is blowing everyone of his previous counterparts away.

[Sammy Sofa]

Tiger can be beaten by literally the man on the street on any given day. It doesn't work out like that nearly as often in tennis, if ever.

 

This just isn't true.

 

A single hole? Maybe. Over eighteen holes? Highly unlikely. Over a tournament? Never.

 

I'm saying that as unlikely as it is, it's far more likely for the "cinderella story" to happen in professional golf than it is in professional tennis. And besides, in golf, nobody can make you lose. In my mind, that automatically puts it below any sport where you have a direct opponent, like tennis, in terms of difficulty.

 

Two questions: What do you mean by "The man on the street"? and Have you ever played golf?

 

Yes.

 

If by man on the street you mean a scratch golfer then I'd concede that it was possible.

 

Yes.

 

Nobody is denying Tiger is extremely talented. I just place more personal stock in sports where you have at least one opponent whose actions directly and physically effect the result of your play right then and there. But that's just me.

[Careless]

# Longest winning streak on hard courts: 56 (2005-06).

# Longest winning streak on grass courts: 48 (2003-present).

Wow, he's good.

 

And clay isn't real tennis.

[ConstableRabbit]

Federer is untouchable in his sport. Tiger, while he's very close, is not.

[biittner77]

Quote:

If by man on the street you mean a scratch golfer then I'd concede that it was possible.

 

 

Yes.

 

What percentage of golfers have a zero handicap? I'd put that number at maybe 0.0001%

 

Nobody is denying Tiger is extremely talented. I just place more personal stock in sports where you have at least one opponent whose actions directly and physically effect the result of your play right then and there. But that's just me.

 

Tiger Woods can go shoot a 5 under 67 but if someone else goes out and shoots a 66 there isn't anything he can do about it. To me that gives Federer an advantage he only has one opponent to beat while Tiger Woods- or any golfer- has to play against both the course and his peers.

[CuseCubFan69]

Quote:

If by man on the street you mean a scratch golfer then I'd concede that it was possible.

 

 

Yes.

 

What percentage of golfers have a zero handicap? I'd put that number at maybe 0.0001%

 

Nobody is denying Tiger is extremely talented. I just place more personal stock in sports where you have at least one opponent whose actions directly and physically effect the result of your play right then and there. But that's just me.

 

Tiger Woods can go shoot a 5 under 67 but if someone else goes out and shoots a 66 there isn't anything he can do about it. To me that gives Federer an advantage he only has one opponent to beat while Tiger Woods- or any golfer- has to play against both the course and his peers.

 

Isn't a scratch golfer a guy that shoots par for an average?

[Sammy Sofa]

Quote:

If by man on the street you mean a scratch golfer then I'd concede that it was possible.

 

 

Yes.

 

What percentage of golfers have a zero handicap? I'd put that number at maybe 0.0001%

 

Nobody is denying Tiger is extremely talented. I just place more personal stock in sports where you have at least one opponent whose actions directly and physically effect the result of your play right then and there. But that's just me.

 

Tiger Woods can go shoot a 5 under 67 but if someone else goes out and shoots a 66 there isn't anything he can do about it. To me that gives Federer an advantage he only has one opponent to beat while Tiger Woods- or any golfer- has to play against both the course and his peers.

 

That bold part is why I don't rank activites like golf as highly as sports likes tennis on the competitive scale. I think it's just our different opinions, but I'm much more impressed when someone deals with the play-by-play, second-by-second pressure of a sport like tennis than the prolonged startegy of golf. Again, golf is very difficult to master like Tiger has...I simply don't rank it up with there with something like tennis. And I think any player in any major sport has to play against his peers...and unlike golf, those actions impact them right then and there. On the spot adjustment at a moment's notice...I'm impressed more by that.

[biittner77]

Isn't a scratch golfer a guy that shoots par for an average?

 

Yes. A claim that very few amatuers could (or would) claim.

[Guest]

Isn't a scratch golfer a guy that shoots par for an average?

 

Yes. A claim that very few amatuers could (or would) claim.

Hey now! I average 72 when I play golf.

 

 

(on about the first 12 holes)

[littleburr24]

Isn't a scratch golfer a guy that shoots par for an average?

 

Yes. A claim that very few amatuers could (or would) claim.

Hey now! I average 72 when I play golf.

 

 

(on about the first 12 holes)

 

Very nice.

 

 

And with Federer being claimed as more dominant because of lack of competition... I doubt that. My high school soccer team never had competition, but that's not because we were that good but because of the fact that once my brother graduated all of the talent in our conference disappeared. So is Federer really dominant or is tennis currently filled with a bunch of bad players and Federer is actually just mediocre?

[soccer10k]

Isn't a scratch golfer a guy that shoots par for an average?

 

Yes. A claim that very few amatuers could (or would) claim.

Hey now! I average 72 when I play golf.

 

 

(on about the first 12 holes)

 

Very nice.

 

 

And with Federer being claimed as more dominant because of lack of competition... I doubt that. My high school soccer team never had competition, but that's not because we were that good but because of the fact that once my brother graduated all of the talent in our conference disappeared. So is Federer really dominant or is tennis currently filled with a bunch of bad players and Federer is actually just mediocre?

 

You're confusing what being dominant means. Being the most dominant in a given sport is based on how good you are compared to your competition. It doesn't matter if your competition is good or if it sucks. So it doesn't really matter whether Federer's opponents are any better or worse than the opponents of Sampras/Emerson/Borg/etc. What matters is Federer is doing thing that haven't been done before and everybody expects him to win. Arguably, only one guy can touch him right now (Nadal) and that's only on one surface (clay). I'm not going to lie, I don't expect Tiger to lose, but I'm not too surprised when it happens. It's surprising if Federer even loses a set in one of his early round matches in a major now.

[Ding Dong Johnson]

I golfed in high school and would have been the only returning varsity golfer my senior season. We had a 9 hole, par 36 course where my average was around 41, which would have easily made me #1 on the squad. One of my good friends was a 3-year JV performer with an average score of around 61, and I'm pretty sure he was cheating to get there.

 

My dad always purchased family memberships, so I decided that I would bypass the cold weather practices and meets when I was a senior and just go out whenever I wanted to. Just so happens that the first really nice Spring day and my first day golfing my senior year was the first meet they had on our home course. Everything I hit was gold, and my friend was feeding off me. Both of us were on our games. We get done with our 9 and are walking back to the clubhouse when we run into the coach. He asks me what I shot and I say "par". While fighting back the urge to cry, my friend informs coach that he shot a 40 (and he actually did). 2 hours later I see my coach in my mom & dad's bar doing shots and barely hanging onto his seat. He never talked to me again after that day. Good times.

[XZero771679666304]

Not really the subject, but I played both golf (a lot) and tennis (some), and I believe it is far easier to maintain a consistent level of play in tennis than it is with golf. Not that tennis is easy, but if the tiniest thing is off with your golf swing, you're having a bad day. Tennis is just a bit more forgiving, IMO.