Tiger or Roger, Golf or Tennis? Which Performance Is More Dominant?

While playing tennis requires more athleticism for sure, playing golf at a high level is much more difficult. I mean tennis isn't exactly mentally challenging. It's more reaction than thinking.

Reply

For taking on an argument that's impossible to win (because there IS no right answer), you broke it down about as well as I've seen it done. In the end, it all comes down to opinions, the same reason why it's unwise to state absolutes in religion or politics--one person's truth is another person's foolishness. For myself, BOTH players are so good that people will still be talking about their performances 100 years after they're dead, so why bother choosing one over the other; instead, just sit back and enjoy seeing true greatness unfold before your eyes, within your lifetime.

Reply

In golf, you play against the entire field EVERY WEEK. You aren't in a bracket where you only have to beat...4-6 people.

Reply

Tennis is definitely the hardest, not to mention dangerous because of the high risk of injury. Where as golf is less physical, I'm sorry but walking, swinging and riding a golf cart is just gay.

Reply

so let me get this straight....in tennis, you lose one day and you're out, in golf, you can have a bad day and still be in...in tennis, you have a very short window to accomplish a lot, in golf you can play for 30 years and still compete at a high level because it's not as wearing on your body... in tennis Roger Federer has won 15 majors and a bucket load of others as well as having a record 21 straight semi finals in the majors (the equivalent of coming in either 3rd or 4th) and been in the final for 20 of the last 21 majors (the equivalent of coming in first for 15 of them, second for 5 of them and not there for only 1 of them... And so Tiger is more accomplished than Roger??? I don't get it...if you want to compare, compare proportionately to the window of opportunity... if you did so, Tiger would have to have many more majors at this point given the potential of opportunity to play for decades more...ergo...Federer is MORE accomplished in his sport, proportionately than Tiger is in HIS...albeit, both are extraordinary and the best of all time...( I don't give much credence to the Sampras case as he routinely dodged the French, hasn't won as much, and NEVER faced a 143 mph serve, let alone a bucket of them...)

Reply

Michael Gifford is spot on with all that he says!

It's ludicrous to compare two such different sports... For one thing, golfers are NOT strong and they are not athletes! (John Daly anyone?) Tennis players are pure athletes with pure strength, and they also have to be extremely skilled thinkers -- while going at top speeds on the court, they have to think, calculate, be precise, prepare and execute, all in a nano-second! So to Ed Fielding, the #1 poster, to say that tennis is not a mental challenge, you clearly have no clue about tennis, so I think it's wise to say nothing more, or you'll be exposed for being the fool that you really are!

Golfers are extremely skilled sportsman, but they could take hours to take a swing at anything. They have no real physical strength, they most certainly are not athletes, they do not have to think quickly or move quickly while thinking & strategizing the way a tennis pro has to... They have a leisurely all-day-long pace to calculate and attempt precision... That doesn't mean that golfers aren't skilled and precise, they most certainly are! But tennis players are skilled and precise, too, while being real athletes, with real strength, and doing it all at the speed of light!

I appreciate Tiger, but I adore Phil Mickelson... I love & appreciate golf and watch all the majors, but to compare 40 years of being able to leisurely play at being precise at something, which is what golfers get to do, to the limited window of 10-12 years of raw athleticism, having to think & strategize on your feet, be precise (ever hear about lines on a tennis court?), be accurate, use speed and brute strength, all at high speeds, is not comparing even apples to oranges... It's more like fruit to vegetables! They're simply not even in the same category!!

Tiger is 6 years older than Roger, and still doesn't have 15 majors... He will eventually, but it's not a valid comparison & I don't know why anyone ever tries... Roger is the man...

Reply

Ashleigh, I normally avoid replying to such remarks, as too many times in this format it just ends up with strangers throwing insults back and forth, but I strongly disagree with your assessment of golfers.

You seem to have a very narrow view of what makes an athlete. Sometimes it's about strength, sometimes it's about precision, sometimes it's about endurance--usually, being an athlete involves all of these things, plus the extremely important mental aspect of being able to perform at a high level over a period of time without cracking.

Golf involves a great deal of muscle control and timing to be able to hit a tiny ball precisely with an odd shaped club, right in the sweet spot, so that the ball goes in the direction you want, and the distance you want, and land the way you want it to. There are a thousand things that can go wrong, making the ball end up anywhere but where it was intended. Athletics is about achieving an unusually high level of control over your body, so that you can repeat a difficult set of movements many times, and golfers do that in spades.

No, they're not lifting heavy objects, or jumping great distances, or running really fast, but they are most definitely athletes, in the truest sense of the term. To belittle what they do as being anything but athletic is, as you put it, to show yourself to be foolish. Give them the respect they deserve, just as you demand respect for tennis players' abilities.

Reply

Bob, I appreciate your comments, but I think you have misunderstood me! I do not belittle or insult golfers at all!! I totally love golf, and have deep respect and admiration for how truly difficult it is, and for the tremendous skill and talent it requires to be a successful golf pro!! For sure!!

I simply hold to the fact that John Daly is NOT an athlete... Purely observational, not intended as an insult or to belittle a profession that requires such skill and tenancity... Rafa has the body of an athlete, Daly does not... And I see far more of the latter on golf courses, and far more of the former on tennis courts... I believe the Daly types would die doing what tennis pros do--Why? Because you need to be an athlete to play tennis, John Daly doesn't need to be an athlete to play golf... And again, a golfer can take HOURS to make one putt, tennis pros don't have the luxury of leisure time... And that's why there's only a 12 year window to be a tennis pro, while most golfers can play most of their adult lives... But an athlete's body could not sustain being a pro at anything for 40 years!

So no, I do not consider golfers to be athletes, but that doesn't mean I am disrespecting or belittling them! This does not mean that what they do is anything less than amazing... I adore and appreciate golf, and how difficult it is to do it well, and I have nothing but respect and admiration for sheer joy pro golfers have given me when I watch them during matches, especially the Majors. There have been some amazing matches, and some incredible shots that we've talked about for weeks afterwards! That takes true skill and talent to pull off those shots!! I am not belittling them or disrespecting them at all!

I couldn't watch or play golf if I didn't admire, respect and appreciate the amazing skill and talent it requires to do something that has such a high degree of difficulty... And you can't admire and appreciate something if you're belittling it... So no, Bob, I do NOT belittle, and yes, I DO, very much, respect pro golfers!!! FOR SURE!!

I just don't think they're athletes, as I see far more John Daly's on a golf course, but never on a tennis court, and far more Rafa Nadal's on the tennis court, with very few counterparts on a golf course... That's just an observational truth, not meant as any sort of belittling or disrespecting... I just love golf way too much to ever do that!! I'm sorry I offended you...

Reply

In golf, ball not hit back.

Why is this even debate? Discussion over.

Reply

Roger has played in the weakest era of professional tennis ever. When faced(finally) against some real comp, he repeatedly got trounced by Nadal, the best clay player since Bjorg. His Wimbledon victory is a joke. Soderling didnt own Nadal either, some schlub plays out of his mind against a one legged man?

Tiger...Tiger, Tiger, Tiger. I swear the guy did roids(noone gains 25 pounds of muscle over a winter, that is unless you play baseball), uses space age equipment, its no wonder the guy is doing alright. Yes, both are talented, but lets face it, if playing against the true talents of their respective sports with similar equipment and at said colleagues peak levels, both would be so so, one maybe even nothing at all.

Please spare the Sampras dodging the French thing, because Rog did it as well, its his worst event.

Roger could win 20 majors before he retires and i wouldnt place him in the top 10 greatest, and the three gentlemen who were forced to watch him plod along against a virtual fail Roddick to witness "history" in a tournament Nadal couldnt participate in are aware of it too, they just cant bring themselves to say it.

I have a better question...why in the hell are we trumping up any of these so called greatest ever types when we all know they play with equipment that could qualify as a ped in their own right, play in advantageous surroundings, and against sub par talent???

Reply

Ashleigh, I greatly appreciate your measured response and thoughtful remarks--far too often a disagreement on these posts ends up in a verbal bloodbath.

Let me ask you a question--would you say that Babe Ruth was not an athlete? The man was in terrible shape, overweight, and often drunk or hung over--and yet could do things that well-conditioned men could only dream of. Is that not being an athlete? John Daly put on an exhibition where he was hitting balls across the river near Pittsburgh (I do not remember which one), over three football fields in the air--is that not an athletic achievement?

To me, being an athlete is not about having the best-conditioned body, or just being able to run faster, jump farther, or throw harder--it's about mastery over the muscles of the body, coordination, mental toughness--things that aren't reliant on whether you're in peak physical condition or not. The finer points are just as important, and athletic, as the more obvious ones.

While I certainly agree that what top tennis players can do is amazing and obviously athletic, I simply contend that, even when a player is not the epitome of physical prowess, if what they do takes supreme physical and mental control to accomplish, then they are indeed athletes. Again, thanks for your kind reply.

Reply

Reading all this rubbish about who is the "Greater" winner in two completely different sporting events is too ridiculous to contemplate. What is patently obvious to me is that those who are dissing Roger never played a decent game of tennis in their life and those who diss Tiger never hit a decent tee, chip or putt in their life, let alone exercised the mental, physical and emotional discipline needed to win profession contests under intense public pressure. Ya'll are just couch potato losers trying to get some vicarious glory by shooting off your mouths about things you can't possibly have any knowledge of, and it is just plain pathetic.

As Bob noted earlier, ya'll should just shut up and watch great performances unfold before your eyes and be grateful you are alive to see them. Roger and Tiger are both simply the greatest at their respective sport right at the moment. And this too shall pass.......

For me, seeing Roger play tennis or Tiger play golf is every bit the same thrill as I used to get when I watched Jack Nicolas and Arnold Palmer golf, or Roger Staubuch pass a football into deep coverage, or Walter Payton and Emmitt Smith run the football through, over and around the line of scrimmage, or Sandy Koufax and Randy Johnson pitch a World Series no-hitter or Nolan Ryan pitch any game, or Michael Jordan's or Magic Johnson's ball handling/airborne miracle baskets, or Nadia Comaneci's gymnastics, or....I can think of dozens of thrilling feats of athleticism I have seen in dozens of sporting events over the years where athletes have done what seemed impossible for mere mortals. It is the same thrill I have always gotten over the years whenever I saw someone perform an athletic action with complete, transcendant mastery of skill, power and grace in motion. It did not matter whether it happened while watching Mikhial Baryshnikov or Rudolf Nureyev dance Don Quixote or Giselle or Swan Lake, or when watching Jean-Claude Killy blast down a ski slalom in 1964 introducing the world to the outrageous open stance form that was uniquely a result of his superior athleticism.

All of them, in their own way were gloriously amazing performances. And the common thread that connects all of these winning performances is that, clearly, one performer had worked harder than everyone else, was clearly more physically and mentally fit than anyone else and gave themselves completely to their performance. They left nothing on the table. That is what it takes to be so amazing at what you do that you clearly exceed everything the competition can muster.

You look at Tiger or Roger or Nadal or Venus or even a 52 year old Martina Navratilova and you can see they are in better physical shape for their age than anyone they beat up on in their sport. You notice I did not put Serena Williams in the same breath as Venus. That's because Serena has a tendency to let herself go, to get lazy. Right now she is in the best shape she has been in in the last three years and she is winning because of it. She knows the secret is conditioning. My hope is she stays hungry enough to keep in shape and continue to win.

The John Daly's of the world do not win. They play hind teat ball and waste whatever talent they have by being lazy about their physical and mental conditioning. Talent takes you only part of the way in this world. The key to success is always working harder and smarter at what you do than EVERYONE else.

And that is precisely whey Tiger Woods and Roger and Nadal and the Williams sisters are stand-out perfromers today....they are all in better shape physically and mentally than everyone else. Jean-Claude Killy's conditioning changed the sport of skiing forever, putting it on the front page, made it exciting, pushed the limits to near breaking. All this he did through his dedication to superior physical fitness. Lance Armstrong wins bicycle races with the same approach to conditioning and training. Relentless is a good word for their style. All these athletes are winners because they relentlessly sacrifice their bodies to their sport with physical conditioning that would kill the rest of us couch potatoes.

So, I say, until you are willing to pay those kinds of dues, keep your opinions on who is the greatest sports WINNER to yourself, because to even bring up that topic shows you have not the slightest understanding of what you are talking about.

Reply

Golfers rarely break a sweat. I don't care if Tiger plays until he is 80 years old and wins more tournaments, you just can't compare tennis to golf. But to be fair, I would say golf is more physical than chess.

Reply

Both athletes literally rule their respective game's .... While I would put them at a dead heat given that RF is six years younger than TW my vote goes for the record holding tennis star! Of course this debate will continue and only after both have retired will a true final answer be possible in the meantime wow what great stuff to watch .... thanks !!!

Reply

The guys that Tiger is beating are not nearly as good or tough as those Nicklaus beat! He beat Palmer(7 majors), Player (8 majors), Watson (8 majors), Trevino (6 majors), Floyd (4 majors) and a lot of other good players, including a young Norman (2 majors) and Ballesteros (5 majors). Not only that, but he finished 2nd in 19 majors! Who has Woods beaten? Mickelson, Singh, Els, Harrington? They all have only three majors. Does anyone else notice that many of the torunaments that Tiger wins is because the players ahead of him "back up" and actually "lose" the tournament instead of Tiger "winning" them? His greatness is unquestionable, as is Federer's, but the number of majors does not make you the greatest, except of your generation. Do you honestly think Federer would have 15 majors if he had to play Sampras, Borg, Connors, McEnroe and Agassi in their primes? No he wouldn't! If Tiger had to play Nicklaus and the other greats he played against, would he have 14 majors? Of course not! Nicklaus wouldn't have 18 either. They were all the best of their generation, so lets' stop this "greatest of all time" crap and recoginize then all for their greatness alone!

Reply