Tiger has to beat 150 to win. Federer has to beat 5-6, with the people in the 1st rounds being cupcakes.
If we are comparing who is more dominant in their own sport then the number of competitors should not be considered. To compare two athletes that don't compete against each other is tough. Comparisons like this basically boil down to the sport people think is harder to win at.
well, when they play their A+ games, they will both win 100% of the time. But in Tiger's sport, if he plays a B+ game, there are 149 other people who are out there to play A+ and win, whereas, Federer only has maybe 1-2 to worry about.
it's harder to win at golf, btw, b/c you have to win at 30 completely different venues a year. 30 completely different "surfaces" whereas, tennis has 4 surfaces.
Would Federer have dominated against Borg, Conners, McEnroe, etc? Would Tiger have dominated against Nicklaus, Palmer, Player, Trevino?
Tiger WOULD dominated Nicklaus, Palmer, Player, Trevino, because if you look at the scoring records at Augusta, St. Andrews, etc... he owns them all by big margins. Those are all courses that EVERYONE in the history of the game has played.
Tiger for sure. Federer is dominating right now but his reign has been a little short. Lets see what he does over the long haul before he is crowned king. Tiger is the king right now, has been for a long time, and done nothing to lose it.
This is like asking who is the better president? George Washington or Jack Welch. The sports are so completely different and the two competitors are so amazingly awesome direct comparison is really hard. With all that said, I say Federer. Federer has to beat his opponents, and he can can influence how they play. Tiger has to beat his opponents, but no matter how far and straight he hits the ball it will not impact the play of his competitors. Tennis is also much more physically taxing, so to stay on top and not show any fall off for as long as Federer has is quite impressive.
But Tiger played them with more modern equipment, and any golpher can tell you what a difference the new equipment makes. I'm not saying Tiger wouldn't beat those folks ceteris paribus, but it wouldn't be a 9 out of 10 thing.
Some would argue that this makes it harder for Tiger. He has no chance at creating a disadvantage for his competition other than his score. That is why I voted too close to call.
