Golf is playing against yourself. Tennis is playing against your opponent and yourself.
ROGER FEDERER IS MORE IMPRESSIVE THAN TIGER WOODS.

There is no way that Nadal will break his mark. He doesn't have anywhere near the durability necessary to do so.

I think in golf you have so many great players entering every Major, not just 1 or 2 other primary rivalries. All of which capable of winning and have won many majors themselfs. To come out on top time and time (14 times) again is incredible! In fact in Golf even those who have not won a Major before is a threat to win. To me it just seems far more difficult to stay on top of the Golf world than tennis. Personally I do regard tennis players as some of the most fit and talented athlets in the world but that was not the question at hand. In tennis when you are #1 and above everyone else it just seems easier to maintain that edge since the game is so physical.

The window to win majors is much shorter for tennis player - maybe a decade or so. You can have an 'off' day and still win a golf major, but in tennis you're done. As biznork says, there is no way Nadal will get close to what Federer has accomplished.

Federer's record is awesome, but Tiger's is more impressive. In golf, you have to beat an entire field to win, but in tennis, you have to beat one player at a time. Notwithstanding Tiger's lackluster match-play PGA stats, I suspect Tiger would have more majors if they were structured like a tennis tournament. Just look at his 3-for-3 US Amateur performance.

In golf, you can recover from a bad day 1 or day 2... in tennis, one bad match and you're out of the hunt. That makes Roger's 14 GS and Grand Slam even more impressive... so even though I admire both men, I'd have to give the nod to Fed

Due to tennis being taken more seriously, and a host of better players now, I will say Ken Rosewall and Jimmy Conners were the most fun to watch, and probably the best ever, however I don't go back far enough to know about the greats before them, but Sampras was quite good, and again, he was playing better players than Federer. A really good player can win often today, but it took to fantastic player to win 30 or more years ago. Jimmy Conners had the best anticipation and reflexes I have ever seen, he was moving to where the ball was going to be, as his opponent swung his raquet to hit the ball!

In tennis you play one person. In golf you have to play the course and 60+ other golfers at the same time.

I like golf, but it often seems as if it is playing against yourself, and it doesn't require that much athleticism. Tennis is playing against your opponent and yourself and is quite the workout in the process.
ROGER FEDERER IS MORE IMPRESSIVE THAN TIGER WOODS

The title of the poll is Federer vs Sampras? Whoever put Tiger Woods in the poll or Sampras in the title gets an F for proof reading...

Golf is not even a sport so the question itself is ridiculous. It's more of a hobby than anything else. Hitting a little ball across the grass? Sure it requires some skill. But if you can get through a whole game without breaking a sweat, then it is not a sport. Sorry.

I've played both at a somwhat competitive level--tennis takes an incredible amount of physical and mental strength. However golf is infinately more detailed and complex. You cannot get yourself "charged" or shake yourself into a golf match. There are 10 times as many variables in golf. Golf is much more akin to chess than to a physical sport. And Tiger has taken it to another level by making his athletisism dominate along with his mental superiority. In the end I consider both accomplishments virtually equal--but both Federer and Tiger are fighting for being the best of all time; and only Federer has a rival (in Nadal) who most of us know is better than him. It is an enigma to think of "the greatest" with this asterisk.

Federer goes three hours having about a half-second to make each decision between 500 and 1000 times. Woods - in about 4 hours - spends about 5 minutes making each decision about 70 times. It's a no-brainer. Who would you most respect?

golf is not a sport. end of argument.

...

Federer and Tiger are both amazing athletes with strength of mind that is truly incredible. They've both dominated their sport at similar levels but Tiger will outdistance Federer in total majors when all is said and done. It's a close call and I like them both, but I give it to Tiger in the end.

Well from all the comments, I've figured out Federer fans are just that, fans, not interested in seeing the best competition. Was looking back at the some of the guys he beat to get to 14, they were not anywhere near being his equal/rivals......Andy Roddick, Mark Philippoussis, Marcos Baghdatis, Safin, Fernando Gonzales, end of his carrer Aggaisi, etc. There was no Borg/Connors/McEnroe,,, Sampras/Aggasi, etc. until Nadal came along. Oh, *never mind the 6 grand slam loses and losing record to someone who is his equal. Don't get me wrong, this guy has alot of talent, one of the best ever, but I think Fed's quote said it best "It would be fine with me, if I never had to play Nadal again" or "Its killing me" this guy is in my way of racking up my numbers. My definition of best ever is I played the very best, beat them all, fair & square, but I've learned logic & analytical reasoning just gets in the way, when you are a fair weathered fan.

If the PGA Majors were match play I would bet that Tiger's victories would be far fewer. The head-to-head competion and multi-round match play in professional tennis requires a greater set of skills and a dramatic higher level of conditioning and pressure than golf. I mean come on, hitting a ball that just sits still waiting for you to hit it? There is a reason tennis players level of play drops off in their late twenties while golfers go on for decades. Tiger is great but Federer's feat is far more impressive.

Both Tiger and Roger are extraordinary competitors. However, it's an easy call for me as to which is the most impressive. Tennis is so much more physical. A major tournament lasts 2 weeks, not 4 days. The poster that mentioned the amount of decisions made an excellent point - there simply isn't any comparision when it's golf versus tennis. Another point in the nod to Roger is that Tiger is getting pointers (coaching) while playing. Tennis players are not allowed coaching during a match. I loved Jimmy Connors too, but hands down, Roger is the most brilliant player to have ever played the game of tennis. Most of his records will never be broken - and certainly not by Nadal. Roger's 20 grand slam semi-finals record is extraordinary and breathtaking. Congratualtions to Roger and many blessings to him for his up coming fatherhood.

Golf is a much more difficult game IMO.

Tiger Woods to me is considerably ore impresive. As is the sport of Golf in general.