Federer vs Tiger article in the Miami Herald [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Federer vs Tiger article in the Miami Herald

Maxpowers
03-19-2007, 02:17 PM
http://www.miamiherald.com/457/story/44685.html

I thought the writer was pretty impartial until he starts quoting these people that know nothing about tennis. I particularly thought it was pretty bad to quote people that have never watched or know anything, just saying that Tiger is better.

What they fail to mention is that golf is a skill that you can play without any athleticism, and tennis is a sport that requires movement and conditioning. You don't get to ride in a cart to each shot, and you use the same racket for a touch volley on top of the net as for a high ball to your backhand way behind the baseline.

Tiger doesn't actually play against anyone, he doesn't have to respond to their shots. The ball is right there for him to hit, and everyone takes their time and then they look to see who had a higher score. Roger is constantly playing against different strategies and different types of shots coming at him. In tennis you have to construct the point, and you face a huge number of possible angles, speeds, and heights for the ball, not to mention the different types of shots and the fact you are constantly having to move in any number of directions.

Golf is very much like darts or horseshoes. I've never seen a golfer out of breathe after playing golf.

Sorry, I was just going to post the article, but I couldn't help but post my opinion as well.

angiel
03-19-2007, 06:31 PM
Why dont you post the article so people here can read it for themselves and draw their own conclusion.:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :(

Burrow
03-19-2007, 06:46 PM
http://www.miamiherald.com/457/story/44685.html

I thought the writer was pretty impartial until he starts quoting these people that know nothing about tennis. I particularly thought it was pretty bad to quote people that have never watched or know anything, just saying that Tiger is better.

What they fail to mention is that golf is a skill that you can play without any athleticism, and tennis is a sport that requires movement and conditioning. You don't get to ride in a cart to each shot, and you use the same racket for a touch volley on top of the net as for a high ball to your backhand way behind the baseline.

Tiger doesn't actually play against anyone, he doesn't have to respond to their shots. The ball is right there for him to hit, and everyone takes their time and then they look to see who had a higher score. Roger is constantly playing against different strategies and different types of shots coming at him. In tennis you have to construct the point, and you face a huge number of possible angles, speeds, and heights for the ball, not to mention the different types of shots and the fact you are constantly having to move in any number of directions.

Golf is very much like darts or horseshoes. I've never seen a golfer out of breath after playing golf.

Sorry, I was just going to post the article, but I couldn't help but post my opinion as well.

Completely agree. Roger is obviously better.

R.Federer
03-19-2007, 06:50 PM
Amazing that Federer is still newsworthy this week.

I thought the uninformed media would have printed something about the demise of the Federer era after his loss last week.

Kitty de Sade
03-19-2007, 06:58 PM
http://www.miamiherald.com/457/story/44685.html

I thought the writer was pretty impartial until he starts quoting these people that know nothing about tennis. I particularly thought it was pretty bad to quote people that have never watched or know anything, just saying that Tiger is better.

What they fail to mention is that golf is a skill that you can play without any athleticism, and tennis is a sport that requires movement and conditioning. You don't get to ride in a cart to each shot, and you use the same racket for a touch volley on top of the net as for a high ball to your backhand way behind the baseline.

Tiger doesn't actually play against anyone, he doesn't have to respond to their shots. The ball is right there for him to hit, and everyone takes their time and then they look to see who had a higher score. Roger is constantly playing against different strategies and different types of shots coming at him. In tennis you have to construct the point, and you face a huge number of possible angles, speeds, and heights for the ball, not to mention the different types of shots and the fact you are constantly having to move in any number of directions.

Golf is very much like darts or horseshoes. I've never seen a golfer out of breathe after playing golf.

Sorry, I was just going to post the article, but I couldn't help but post my opinion as well.


That section pretty much sums it up, and I'd take the rest with a grain of salt. Golf and tennis are two entirely different mediums and drawing a comparison is pointless.

Of course someone like Gary Player will say Federer is not even close to Woods, etc.- what are the chances a pro golfer will provide an objective eye about tennis anyway?

Not sure what the point of this type of article is, but whatever sells copy I guess.

tangerine_dream
03-19-2007, 07:00 PM
This thread reminds me of something I read in last week's Wertheim column.
Please, please, please can we stop with the Federer/Sampras and Federer/Tiger comparisons? They're almost as boring as dissecting the Hall of Fame nominations. Thank you.-- Margaret, New Jersey
Amen to that.

R.Federer
03-19-2007, 07:03 PM
This thread reminds me of something I read in last week's Wertheim column.

Amen to that.

Are you Margaret of New Jersey?