When you think of dominant athletes, names like Michael Jordan, Tiger Woods and Wayne Gretzky come to mind. But the most dominant athlete of this decade and perhaps of all time is not so well known.
Switzerland's finest, Roger Federer, has dominated the world of men's tennis like no other in the past few years. He just won the Australian Open without dropping a single set (a total of seven matches), a feat which has not been accomplished since 1980, and now has gone 10 straight matches without losing a set. Federer easily dispatched of fellow Aussie Open finalist Fernando Gonzales, who had beaten big names like James Blake, Rafael Nadal and Lleyton Hewitt with relative ease. The guy is simply untouchable, and his year of 2006 may have been the best year an athlete has ever had.
Federer went a crazy 91-4 last year, winning three Grand Slams. Three of his four losses came to Nadal, which has led to the only criticism of Federer that anyone can come up with. His lone weakness is that he can't beat one person (Nadal), mostly on one specific surface (clay). He'll have the opportunity to rectify that wrong in May, where he hopes to vanquish Nadal, who is currently on a 62-match winning streak on clay. If Federer is to beat Nadal in May, he will have basically accomplished anything there is to win in tennis.
Even if he were to slow down his current pace and win only one Grand Slam a year, he would still break the all-time record by the time he was 30. Federer is still relatively young at 25, and already has 10 Grand Slams, a mere four off the record Pete Sampras holds. Barring injury, Federer should win 20 Grand Slam titles, a record that will be incredibly difficult to ever match.
However, some people may still say that Tiger Woods is the most dominant athlete out there. After all, he has won seven straight tournaments, and has to play against a field rather than one person. I would argue that Tiger has never been completely unbeatable the way Federer is now, but I guess there's only one way to find out who is truly more dominant.
My friend Matt suggests a gauntlet of sports/events between Woods and Federer, and whoever wins gets the title of most dominant. Obviously Woods will destroy Federer on the links, and Federer will humiliate Tiger on the court, but who would win in a game of one-on-one? Would Federer be able to out-bowl Tiger? Boxing is unfortunately out with a high risk of injury, but put them in skates and make them have a shootout against Martin Brodeur. Tell me you wouldn't want to see if Tiger could posterize Federer with a dunk on the basketball court. Even throw in a little Trivial Pursuit to see whose mind is sharper. ESPN, you televise Scrabble and spelling bees, I think this matchup might get a little higher ratings.
Despite the fact I'm not the biggest fan of tennis, I may just have to tune in next time Federer is playing, if only to see history in the making. And hopefully one of the times I tune in, Tiger Woods will be attempting to return Federer's wicked forehand.
Zach can be contacted at zlkukkonen@dailycardinal.com.
