[bears9]

The two most dominant male athletes in the world. Tiger vs. Roger Federer. Here is there resumes.
Tiger Woods - 12 major titles
- 80 careers titles
- 9 PGA tour player of the year
- has been the number one player in world for 5 straight years
- AP Male athlete of the year 4times
- highest endorsed athlete in the world ($100 million)
- Is married to former Swedish Super Model Elin Nordgren
- Just had first child named Sam Alexis Woods
Roger Federer - 11 career major titles
- 49 career titles
- has been the number one player in the world for 3 straight years
- tied Pete Sampheres for most straight Wimbledon titles.
- Is the face of Nike in Europe

[bears9]

This one so easy Tiger he can beat anyone anywhere Federer can not beat Nadal on clay. Federer makes Tim Duncan look like Mr. Personality. Tiger has great commercials and a hot wife. Tiger easy

[Lefty Noob]

Wow, toughie. I'm going to have to think about this one for a little bit.

[bears9]

Originally Posted by Lefty Noob

Wow, toughie. I'm going to have to think about this one for a little bit.

I still think Tiger they both got game but only one has got buzz

[Lefty Noob]

Okay, I went with Federer. Both are dominant and both are immensely popular, so it was a tough call, but in the edge I think the tennis star is just a fraction better of an athlete than good ol' Eldrick.

[bears9]

Originally Posted by Lefty Noob

Okay, I went with Federer. Both are dominant and both are immensely popular, so it was a tough call, but in the edge I think the tennis star is just a fraction better of an athlete than good ol' Eldrick.

Federer is big Europe Tiger is big world wide

[Lefty Noob]

Originally Posted by bears9

Federer is big Europe Tiger is big world wide

Well, it wouldn't break my heart to see either one of them win it. Odds are whoever does gets my vote in the next round.

[bears9]

Originally Posted by Lefty Noob

Well, it wouldn't break my heart to see either one of them win it. Odds are whoever does gets my vote in the next round.

I would vote Tom Brady or Shaq over Federer
And for that matter i might vote Brady over Tiger

[simple simon]

Originally Posted by bears9

This one so easy Tiger he can beat anyone anywhere Federer can not beat Nadal on clay.

that's why i picked Tiger .... Tiger dominates his sport, Federer doesnt exactly

[vincesanity82]

Originally Posted by simple simon

that's why i picked Tiger .... Tiger dominates his sport, Federer doesnt exactly

you gotta be kidding me simon, federer has completely dominated the tennis world, Tiger has been good in the past but has been lacking in the what have you done for me lately category, federer all the way..

[simple simon]

Originally Posted by vincesanity82

you gotta be kidding me simon, federer has completely dominated the tennis world

i beg to differ with you

Federer beat Nadal 2-6, 6-2, 6-0 in the final of the Hamburg Masters on Sunday to win his first clay-court title in two years and snap out of a slump during which he failed to win a title in four events. It was his worst run since he became No. 1 in February 2004.
ESPN - Federer's Hamburg win ends Nadal's clay streak - Tennis

[vincesanity82]

Originally Posted by simple simon

i beg to differ with you

that was for playing only on clay..

[bears9]

Either way they are about the same on the field but Tiger is so far ahead Tiger

[bears9]

Tiger advances to the Finals

[RAMSFAN96]

I dissagree.

First off, Pete Sampras never won 5 straight Wimbeldons, he won 4 straight.

Federer tied Borg's record of 5 straight.

Also, Federer has won 3 of 4 slams in a single year, 3 times, nobody had done it twice in the open era, he has thrice.

Nobody in the open era had ever won 4 straight U.S. Open titles.

Also, Federer is the only player in history, of tennis to have won 3 slams at least 3 times.

Also, his #1 ranking, uh, the LONGEST for men and women, 189+ weeks consecutively. Yeah, and he'll have that #1 ranking for a while, for if he sat out the Aussie Open and the French, it wouldn't matter who would win he'd still be #1.

Are you kidding me, first off, Tennis is a much more demanding sport than golf, you can't play tennis in your 50s and win titles, in golf you can.

This is ridiculous, Federer is the God of Tennis, indeed the perfect athlete, he hasn't won the French because he's lost to perhaps the greatest clay court player of all time, Nadal, and he pushed him to 4 sets in both finals.

Also, he's made it to 10, count em, 10 straight slam finals.

Tiger has nothing on Federer, this is a joke.

Golf is in another world in comparison to Tennis to begin with, how can you compare the two? You can be overweight and 50 and be champ, Tennis has a decade of an opening, you have to be in great physical shape, and if you can win a single slam in your 30s that's rare.

Please, Federer is God.