Federer
 

Gotta give Federer props. He's dominating tennis. Same props go to Tiger who has been, and hopefully continues dominating golf. Today begins the 2007 PGA season, right? Horray, something to watch on Sundays. Who in sports has risen to a level equal to these guys? Jordan, in basketball. Maybe Beckham in soccer. Sorenstam in womens golf? Who else?

Go Tiger. He aint the Chiefs, but he's really, really good.

to quote Fax:
"Sorry if repost"

Definitely not Beckham. Pele, for sure. Beckham is like the Steve Nash of soccer. Really, really good at what he does, but doesn't always have the ability to take the game over.

I don't think anyone, recently, besides Tiger, Sorenstam and Jordan have completely dominated their sport like Federer is doing now.

I hate the Tiger tour. Golf was more fun to watch when a different guy won every week. Now even when he's out of it, they still show every shot he makes.

It's boring now.

I wouldn't say Beckham had the same influence on soccer as Jordan or Federer, and 99% of the world does not care about women sports...

Rick Clunn > *

Beckham isn't even equatable to Nash. In reality he's a glorified free-kick artist. If he didn't look like he does, he'd be unknown to about the 95% of people who know him now.

Federer, on the other hand, is absolutely dominant.

What are these "tennis" and "soccer" things of which you speak?

Maybe, but his free kicks have won the teams he plays for several games. Hard to argue with that. He's a very good player, just not one of the elites.

Agree on Pele.

Zidane > Beckham in every aspect of the game.

Especially use of the head.

i remember you... didnt you use to be Metrolike?

I sure don't!

I think Federer is probably the most underappreciated athete of our time. He gets an occasional story on Sportscenter but pretty much nothing else. He has dominated tennis more than anyone else has dominated a sport, including Tiger.

It's because he's humble and isn't an overblown personality.

Hmm?

Michael Schumacher.

Not sure I agree he's dominated his sport more than Tiger, but, I agree he is underappreciated. Unfortunately for him, tennis isn't as popular as other sports. Federer dominated Roddick.

His album sucks, he's a horrible dance,r and he was married to that skank, Brittany Spears. Damned good tennis player, though.

we're discussing athletes

I don't watch tennis at all, but apparently Federer is dominating tennis the way noone else has ever dominated any sport before.
He's virtually unstoppable.

I would like to have seen him play against Sampras in his prime though. He dominated the sport during his time.

That is because he's in the top 2 of golfers all time. BTW, he playes in less than 25% of the tour events. I believe last year he played in the least events out of anybody in the top 50 of the money list. The guy only plays in shit that is worth his time. You see those try harders Vijay who goes to every event, whether it is the Disney Land Classic or what, and he plays in almost twice as many tourneys as tiger does. It's not worth Tigers time, he's too busy doing his hot wife and snorkeling in Aruba

I don't know. Sampras had a way of wearing the competition down with his dullness.

One can learn the meaning of true love watching blind people play tennis; love....love....love...

:shake:

That would be a good match-up.

They're both friggin animals.

Nadal has beaten him multiple times on clay. Other than that, yeah, he's pretty much unstoppable.

Would be excellent. Roger has more pure talent, but Pete's competitive nature and athletisism would even things out. *sigh* if only

Federer is hacking into the Matrix.

Seriously.

All you keep hearing is how Federer might have a tough match coming up, then he dismantles the competition.
When will people stop underestimating him?

Federer is absolutely cruising through his career. He has absolutely no consistent competition. Nadal is as close as it's gonna get for him, and that's not saying much.

Gonzales had a nice run but, has anyone really seen him play?? If you can keep him in the point for more than 4 shots, he'll get impatient and tee off for an attempted winner; and typically miss it.

The Sampras/Federer debate it in intriguing one. Federer is completely dominating. Like none have before. Even Sampras. But, Sampras had far better competition back in the day. Agassi, Chang, Courier, Muster, Becker, Kafelnikov, etc. All these players had grand slams under their belt. Only Roddick and Nadal have any slams currently.

An argument could be made that Federer won't let anyone else win; but I think that only goes so far.

Federer most likely will go down as the best ever. But I really don't think his competition is as strong (overall) as Sampras' was. I would have liked to see him play back in the mid 90's. That would have made things really interesting.

Randy Savage of Slim Jim eating contests.