"Official" Wimbledon Thread

The Australian Open briefly went to five-sets for both, I can't remember if it was for all rounds or just from the quarterfinals in, but reverted back quickly.

 

Comparing Federer and Tiger is silly. Besides the fact that tennis and golf are different sports, it's the format of the games. Federer's success is part to his tremendous talent and part to the head-to-head format of tennis, which allows for early-round mismatches and depending on how the bracket shakes out, a friendly draw.

Every Grand Slam he has to win six matches over two weeks, no more, no less. Six times, six victories and he's guaranteed a title no matter who is there to meet him in the bracket. He could beat Nadal or the 500th player in the world, as long as it's in the finals, it's the same title.

Grand Slam golf, Tiger has no control over anyone but himself. He could shoot four rounds of 60 and if someone else shoots three rounds of 60 and 59, than it's tough shit. If the grand slams become match play, then we can compare.

 

You actually started reading that drivel?

 

I went cross-eyed.

 

I don't remember that, but for a couple of years when they held the year-end championship at Madison Square Garden, the final was best-of-5. I remember Sabatini being involved in one, but I think it only went 4 sets.

 

naf, a singles player must win seven matches over two weeks. A small goof - your points still stand - but still ...

 

Nadal had it in his grasps today, but then he had to go out and get injured.

 

Maybe that was it. I remember the Australian announcing they were going to do it. Maybe they got shouted down by the players that the matches would be too hard in the head.

 

Injury wasn't a factor. Rafa had the fifth set in his grasp, and Roger came through with incredible tennis under pressure when he had to have it. It was a great match, and it's a great rivalry.

Comparing Roger and Tiger is silly. They aren't really comparable for all the reasons already mentioned above. They are both amazing athletes who would be among the top 2-3 of all time of their respective sports even if they stopped playing today. But Tiger will probably be competing at the highest level for another 12-15 years. Roger will be competing at the highest level for maybe four or five more years. Tiger is 30 now. When Pete Sampras was 30, he was hobbling around the court like an old man.

If Roger is going to pass Sampras -- and I sincerely hope he does -- he needs to do it in the next three years, because it's just the nature of the sport that his game will start to decline around age 28 or 29. I hope he can win the French once and get the career Slam and put an official stamp on the GOAT title.

I wouldn't be surprised if Rafa finished his career with 10 Slams as well. Obviously, he could win the French another 2 or 3 times and I think he'll get a couple Wimbledons before all is said and done.

I can guarantee you that none of Tiger's rivals will approach 10 majors.

 

The only way its possible to compare Tiger and Roger's major is if Tiger's majors were all match-play events like the WGC-Matchplay.

Tiger's won that twice in nine events.