Given the number of PGA tour professionals who on any given weekend could win by virtue of a hot putter, I would have to say Tiger Woods is the dominate athlete. 5 years from now Federer will be gasping for breath as he battles an up and coming 24 year old while Tiger Woods will still be playing strong.
That's what tells me that Federer is the better athlete.
I'm not a big tennis fan at all, but I'm inherently biased on this one because golf is only marginally "athletic" in any sense of the word.
Interesting take.
But may I say, that just because tennis is a much more physically tough sport, and a player's career is much shorter because of that, there is no reason to base your decision on that.
I say if Roger plays the way he's playing now for the next four or five years, he and Tiger are right there on the same level.
And I think Roger will continue at this level
****
Rod Laver on Roger:
"He's a great champion and has proved it all along that he plays his best tennis in finals. I think he's certainly on his way.
"When I look at Pete Sampras, we all thought, 'could you get any better than Pete Sampras and his mark as being a great, great champion'?
"I think Roger is really in the middle of his career ... and the way he's compiling the grand slam titles, I think he's got a great chance of being the best ever.
"I have to believe it because he's got every shot in the book, and his experience of late seems to be (that) he's stepping it up even further.
"Just the shots that he uses in a match is quite incredible. He knows the safe zone and he knows when to hit out and go for winners.
"You don't see him being passed very often when he comes to the net and that's because he comes in at the right time. Sometimes (there is) the surprise attack and other times it's just (after) dipping the ball at a person's foot.
"I think the art of Roger is probably the best player I've ever seen."
****