Atlete of The Decade

[OddJack]

http://sports.espn.go.com/espnmag/story?id=3297734


A month ago, during simpler times, Tiger Woods was presented with a tricky question: Who would he pick as the athlete of the decade?

Plenty of possible choices - Lance Armstrong, Roger Federer, Kobe Bryant, Barry Bonds, Tom Brady, among them. Tiger, too. Told the list of candidates, and leaving himself out of the mix, Woods contemplated their merits for two holes during a pro-am in China before he finally found himself torn between Federer and Bonds.

http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/spo.../78689912.html

Well, since Tennis is tougher to play than Basketball or Baseball, I would go for Federer.

[coyfish]

Meh federer definately deserves to be among the top of the list but I really hate sports comparisons. Its just not right. Too many variables and differences. They should at least separate team / individual sports.

[President of Serve/Volley]

Lance Armstrong or Federer.

[OddJack]

Originally Posted by coyfish

Meh federer definately deserves to be among the top of the list but I really hate sports comparisons. Its just not right. Too many variables and differences. They should at least separate team / individual sports.

Even comparing eras within tennis is not right, let alone comparing different sports. Yet this is something people cant help doing.

[boredone3456]

Originally Posted by President of Serve/Volley

Lance Armstrong or Federer.

I'd agree with this, Bonds sorry no, not even in the discussion. Kobe, as popular as he is, athletically does not stack up to me. Brady, well I will admit I am a huge fan, being from New England, the man is an amazing QB and could probably be argued as the best QB of the decade....but best athlete....mehhhh I wouldn't go that far. He has a good tactical mind when it comes to football, but I would not say athletically he is up there. Armstrong, Fed, and maybe even Phelps or other olympic level athlete's could be in contention, but I would not put Barry Bonds and Fed in the same sentence in terms of athletic ability. My Choice would be either Armstrong, Fed or maybe Phelps. But I am sure there are other athlete's in sports that none of us would or are thinking of that could be up there to, at least further up there than Barry Bonds and Kobe Bryant

[Feña14]

Federer, Armstrong, Zidane, Woods, Giggs, C. Ronaldo has been the best player in the world since 2006 which is a hell of an achievement also.

[AAUS]

Originally Posted by boredone3456

I'd agree with this, Bonds sorry no, not even in the discussion. Kobe, as popular as he is, athletically does not stack up to me. Brady, well I will admit I am a huge fan, being from New England, the man is an amazing QB and could probably be argued as the best QB of the decade....but best athlete....mehhhh I wouldn't go that far. He has a good tactical mind when it comes to football, but I would not say athletically he is up there. Armstrong, Fed, and maybe even Phelps or other olympic level athlete's could be in contention, but I would not put Barry Bonds and Fed in the same sentence in terms of athletic ability. My Choice would be either Armstrong, Fed or maybe Phelps. But I am sure there are other athlete's in sports that none of us would or are thinking of that could be up there to, at least further up there than Barry Bonds and Kobe Bryant

at the NFL combine, Tom Brady ran a 40 slower than 5 seconds
I dont know what to compare it to but I'll just let you know its absolutely terrible

[shaysrebelII]

the only viable argument that I can see against Federer is that he won his first slam in 2003. It would stand to reason that if this is an award for a decade's worth of accomplishments, it would count more than just the last 7 years.

that being said, Fed went from completely unknown to almost unanimously thought of as the greatest player to ever step on a court, all in the last ten years. how could you not pick him?

[Knightmace]

Originally Posted by shaysrebelII

the only viable argument that I can see against Federer is that he won his first slam in 2003. It would stand to reason that if this is an award for a decade's worth of accomplishments, it would count more than just the last 7 years.

that being said, Fed went from completely unknown to almost unanimously thought of as the greatest player to ever step on a court, all in the last ten years. how could you not pick him?

Tru but it was more like last t6 years

[Quite Please]

No question: Ole Einar Björndalen
But biathlon doesn't get much attention sadly.

[OTMPut]

Usain BOLT. End of discussion.

[tintin]

Federer for making ALL 4 majors finals for the 3th time

[Tsonga#1fan]

Lance Armstrong, Tigger Woods, Roger Federer....in that order. Tigger's personal problems don't have any place in my consideration as his life outside his sport is of no big interest to me anyway. I always thought he was boring at least now he seems human and obviously likes to loosen up and have a little fun. Go Tigger!

[Andres]

Originally Posted by OddJack

Well, since Tennis is tougher to play than Basketball, I would go for Federer.

Aha. Ehm. Ahum. It's not.

[Seany]

Decade would suggest from 2000 onwards, which puts fed out of the discussion.

Woods himself is the best candidate.

[coyfish]

Originally Posted by Tsonga#1fan

Lance Armstrong, Tigger Woods, Roger Federer....in that order. Tigger's personal problems don't have any place in my consideration as his life outside his sport is of no big interest to me anyway. I always thought he was boring at least now he seems human and obviously likes to loosen up and have a little fun. Go Tigger!

Tigger is from winnie the pooh.

Anyway you just cant compare sports. TOOOOO many variables. What about boxing??? One of the most difficult sports. Its very difficult to dominate for a decade. Manny Paquiao?? Oscar??? Pretty boy Mayweather???

Or sports like soccer where not every player gets recognized. Sure C. Ronaldo can score goals. But R. Kaka is a much better all around player who glues teams together.

Michael phelps . . .

I think its an insult to name a "athlete of the decade" based on sporting performance.

[mcshift]

100% federer..no question. totally dominating the sport and making it to almost every slam final since 2003. Its easier to pick federer because tennis is an individual sport while kobe and bonds are occasionally carried by their teams.
With Tiger, sure hes a great athelete but i think all the recent events and his horrible sportsmanship should ruin his chances of getting it.

[Rhino]

Originally Posted by Seany

Decade would suggest from 2000 onwards, which puts fed out of the discussion.

Woods himself is the best candidate.

Tiger Woods should not even be part of this discussion. He's a golfer not an athlete. Golfers walk slowly around a big field, with lots of rest breaks. That is not athleticism, which is why guys in their 50's and fat guys can be top golfers.

I'd go for Federer, Bolt, and Lance Armstrong (possibly Phelps too).

[OddJack]

Originally Posted by Andres

Aha. Ehm. Ahum. It's not.

that's cute, but still say Being a top tennis player is tougher than being a top basketball player. So I put Fed above Jordan.

[akv89]

Originally Posted by OddJack

that's cute, but still say Being a top tennis player is tougher than being a top basketball player. So I put Fed above Jordan.

Physically, tennis is an easier sport to play than basketball. There is more technique involved in tennis, but you need more stamina and strength for basketball.