2006-12-09 22:21:13 · 17 answers · asked by Anonymous in Sports ➔ Tennis
Bamma say Tiger Woods is unmatched in any sport. Bamma say Tiger can beat any golfer from any era.
Bamma say Pete Sampres would be quite a challenge for Roger. Bamma say Andre' Agasi would be quite a challenge for Roger.
Bamma say name one golfer who could hold a candle to Tiger. Bamma double dog dares you.
2006-12-09 22:35:21 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 3⤋
Tiger really is better right now because of the records that he has broken thus far and for the fact that he single-handedly raised the golf games of all of his competitors and was able to bounce back and beat them all. Roger has yet to fall under #1 in the world in quite some time; nor has he really been challenged on a regular basis. Tiger implemented a new swing, but I can't see Roger going to a brand new swing, do you? Also, Tiger has the slight edge over Roger in two other categories: 1st - he has a little better focus; 2nd - he has won ALL of the major championships more than once... Roger, win the French a few years in a row, and we can revisit this question later!
2006-12-11 10:51:11 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
i think of tennis demands extra athletic skill. I base that extra or much less on the undeniable fact that people of their 40's can compete with the international's superb on the golf course. Tennis gamers are often out of the blend of their early 30's. i might fee Tiger and Roger as particularly close, quite talking. Woods has a brilliant hazard to be the superb ever, who's possibly Nicklaus on the 2nd. (you're able to make a case for Bobby Jones, even though if this is almost a diverse recreation back then.) Federer has some extra majors to seize Sampras, besides the undeniable fact that i might argue that Rod Laver -- who neglected numerous years of Slam events because of stupid professional/amateur debate -- is the real opposition.
2016-12-11 06:08:33 · answer #3 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
As of right now Tiger is better, because he play in a sport where he has to beat hundred people at the same time to win a tournament. Federer gets to play people one at a time giving him time to adjust. Federer can some of his worst tennis and still move on to the next round, if tiger plays bad he can't win.
2006-12-10 02:20:37 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
First of all tiger woods is better than federer at golf
Federer better than tiger woods at tennis
But if you look at achievement it is federer , he hs won more this year and is probably in the top 3 tennis players of all time
Woods has only won one thing ok its big but one thing federer has won like 5 big things wood slost the rydder cup which sets him miles back theonly set back for federer was loosing to murray but apart from that federer is he beter at achieving, for gods sake tiger woods is loosing to 60 year olds!
2006-12-10 09:13:49 · answer #5 · answered by Bubbles T 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Monsieur Roger Federer. He's the best.
2006-12-10 22:34:12 · answer #6 · answered by Alex 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You cannot compare apples and pears, so why do you want to compare tennis and golf?
However, for Woods I don't believe he can still do better, while 2005 was thought to be Roger Federer's best year, and now 2006 was even better, and who knows what's still going to come?
2006-12-09 22:32:56 · answer #7 · answered by corleone 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Federer's with out a doubt
2006-12-10 10:20:06 · answer #8 · answered by Bo V 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Its unfair to compare the two!!! Both are genuis' in their respective sport....
lol..ok anyway i choose Tiger Woods (he's unbelievable )
2006-12-11 05:00:00 · answer #9 · answered by [V] 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Federer. He's amazing.
2006-12-12 12:18:28 · answer #10 · answered by SAMbo 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋