The way I see it you might want to check that vision.
;-)
True, but Federer has won 6 of the last 7 slams in dominating fashion. I don't think Tiger has ever won 6 out of 7 slams and by the end of this year Federer will have won at least 8 out of the last 10, 9 of 10 if he wins the French. He's won Wimbledon, which the equivalent of the Masters 4 straight years. Has Tiger ever won 4 striaght Masters? 3 straight US Opens? 36 straight Matches?
It's somewhat different with Tennis becuase of the different surfaces. Nadal is a clay court speacialist, Federer owns him on every other surface. Golf has different courses but it doesn't really have the clay/grass/hardcourt breakdown like tennis.
We can go back and forth but I'd just leave it that both of them are among the best ever in their sport and both of them dominate and are head and shoulders above the current competition. It should be a joy to watch them in their primes instead of arguing over who's better.
Like an NFL game in which the faster opponent isn't allowed to run fast...
like a MLB game in which the pitcher with the fastest pitches isn't allowed to throw it as fast as he can...
like an NHL game in which the fastest skaters aren't allowed to skate their fastest...
like an NBA game in which the highest jumpers are prevented from jumping high...
the French Open is a bogus grand slam event. It handicaps the slower, less agile players and brings them up a level. But I still dunno who's more dominant.