Roger Federer & Tiger Woods: Head-to-Head

By now, most are aware of the well-done Nike commercial where Tiger Woods salutes tennis' Roger Federer before stating that he, Woods, has two more championships than does Federer:

Given the current trajectories of the two players, it may be Federer who will soon be championing the accomplishments of Woods while at the ending of the ad being able to say that he, Federer, leads Woods in major championships won.

Having just moments ago been eliminated from title contention in the 2007 British Open, Tiger Woods and Roger Federer each has one more opportunity to win a major during the current (2007) tour season. The PGA Championship remains for defending champion Woods, and the U.S. Open remains for 3-time defending champion Federer.

That both are defending champions of their upcoming majors is where the similarities end, however. Since the opening of their respective 2006 seasons, Federer has won 5/7 possible majors (and made it to the finals of the French Open in both 2006 and 2007). During that same time period, Tiger Woods has won but 2/7 majors.

Now, some perspective is required here. Many PGA players would give almost anything to win 2 majors in their entire careers, let alone in just the last almost 2 full seasons. By any stretch, Tiger Woods is a dominant champion.

Which only goes to show just how dominant Roger Federer has been during the last 4+ years (coming up on 5 years when he completes the Open): Being both approximately 6 years younger (31 vs 25) than Woods and having won his first major 6 years after Woods first won his (1997 vs 2003), Federer is still poised to tie the elder Eldrick's majors-won figure by the end of this season. Incredible.

Though Tiger is the defending PGA Open champion, he is winless in majors during the 2007 campaign. Contrast that with Federer, who already has won 2 of the 3 majors in his sport this year and will be heavily-favored (barring injury) to win his 4th-consecutive U.S. Open next month.

If recent trends continue, by the end of the year we could have the two men who seem destined to go down as the most prolific major championship winners in each of their sports all knotted-up at 12 majors won apiece.

Though in the less-physically-demanding world of golf Tiger should have more opportunity than Federer to eventually surpass however many majors Roger may eventually claim, we may not be far from a moment when Federer will at least be able to equal Tiger's bragging rights in a head-to-head majors-won contest. And, mind-blowingly enough, possibly even exceed the number Woods has won early in 2008, when the two-time defending Australian Open champion returns to the land down under, potentially in search of what could be his 13th major victory.

If Tiger Woods does not claim the 2007 PGA Open title, the door will be open for Federer to surpass Woods - however fleetingly - in total majors won with Woods unable to increase his own total until the 2008 Masters. Given their recent performances, there is little to suggest this is not a quite likely outcome, perhaps even probable.

That wouldn't be bad for a guy who didn't get into the "Major" leagues until 2003. And certainly something which could be worth a commercial for Nike containing some good-natured ribbing from one friend to another.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

The dawning of the 'Federer Era?'

Majors won in last 17 tournaments entered

Federer -- 11/17 -- 65%

Woods --- 4/17 --- 24%

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Fit to be tied?

Overall # of major titles won*

Woods -- 12 (won first major title in 1997)

Federer -- 11 (won first major title in 2003)


* - Each has an opportunity to win one more major title during his tour's current season
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Here is a recent article on the subject of Roger vs Tiger, written before Woods competed in this year's British Open:

http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070719/SPORTS04/707190333/1048

 

One area where Roger Federer is not likely to compete with Tiger Woods anytime soon?

Education.

Something many fans may not be aware of: Woods was awarded an honorary Ph.D. from Kasetsart University for philosophy in sport:


http://www.time.com/time/asia/magazine/2000/1127/tiger.woods.html

 

What does rokski2 think of the matchup?

 

Didn't we already go through this topic, and it was decided that you can't compare the two? Because this seems awfully fucken familiar.

 

No, absolutely not.

That argument (that you can't compare the two) was, however, offered up. That is true. Unless I missed some Unknowable Arbiter coming in and making his/her/its 'Final Decision' on said argument, there was no 'binding decision' on the matter.

Oh, and btw, the thread in which the majority of this (RF & TW) discussion occurred was the Wimbledon thread.

Doing some background research I came across Tiger's being awarded an honorary Ph.D. I thought that was pretty interesting, and felt that people might appreciate that information.

 

Honorary Ph.D's get awarded to pretty much everybody nowadays.

Artist David Hockney was made a Doctor of Letters this year by Cambridge University, even though he does more with paint than words.

While some are certainly honorable, Harvard's list being one of them, most Universities hand them out in an effort to get someone famous to show up on campus.

 

Dear RokShit:
Is Tiger playing tennis or is Roger playing golf? What sport exactly are they going head-to-head?

 

I think they should pick something neutral. Like wiffle ball. Or maybe lawn darts. Yes, lawn darts would be appropriate.

 

Beer pong.

 

Lawn darts, for sure.

 

So, you're saying the hours that Rok put into this research was for nothing?

Damn.

 

Bummer, huh?