KEY POINTS:
There are so many extraordinary facets to the rise and rise of Tiger Woods that it is a subjective business choosing one above the other.
A contender though was an event that occurred away from the major action.
Having already stepped on the first few rungs of a ladder that was firmly propped against the greatest golfing achievements in history, Woods hopped off, boldly redesigned his swing and - after a settling in period - proceeded to scale the heights two or three rungs at a time.
For a young man already feted by the public, media and sponsors to exhibit such remarkable self-analysis and assuredness under the spotlight, it defies belief really. Only Tiger.
Technically, it has taken Woods to an even more brilliant place than before; although a psyche that prevents him from successfully chasing on the last days of majors is now in need of an overhaul.
Tiger came to mind as Roger Federer, the elegant gift to the sports and tennis worlds, was pummelled to defeat by Rafael Nadal in a fine French Open tennis final on Monday morning.
It was a match of grunt and grace between two men who neither sulked at misfortune nor flinched on honesty when faced with errant line calls. There were a handful of sublime rallies and plenty of great - no genius - shots. Most of all, it was a glorious battle between the Swiss master turned underdog and the young Spaniard who is having such an influence on his legacy. For the third year in succession, Federer's date with history was slammed by Nadal in Paris. Nadal has, at just 21, won three French Opens in a row. Federer has yet to win one and, until he does, will face the same doubts about his greatness attached to Pete Sampras, who could not triumph when his feet were on the bright Paris clay.
The final included a statistic of freakish proportions: Federer had 17 break points and succeeded only once. It would be easy to spot a weakness in Federer's game on this score but it is easier instead to admire Nadal who unleashed brilliant shots under pressure.
For all of his confidence about one day claiming the French Open, Federer was outclassed on a surface which takes the sting out of power shots and pops the ball up nicely for the top-spin specialists.
Australian Rod Laver, who claimed the four Grand Slam titles in the same year twice, is rated by many as the best tennis player ever.
Laver played on two surfaces, slow clay and fast grass. It is difficult and maybe pointless comparing players from different eras but there is no doubt that any Federer challenge to Laver's status will rely on his winning the French event at least once.
Nadal has certain Laver-like characteristics - being a top-spinning leftie. The Spaniard is such a terrific athlete and chaser of any cause, although he wears long shorts, or are they short longs, that cry out lounging holidaymaker.
He puts so much top spin on the ball that Federer was left leaping about behind the baseline, hanging on for grim life at times. Federer, who rules on the other surfaces, was unable to skid the ball at Nadal often enough to prevent the turbo-charged replies coming his way and attacked the net only sporadically.
In short, if Federer is hell bent on claiming the elusive fourth part of the tennis Grand Slam, he needs to follow the Woods lead and reinvent his game, although whereas the golfer was preparing for all occasions, the tennis player will have a specific purpose in mind.
Otherwise, Federer will depend on Nadal failing through injury or a loss of form.
Federer had moments in the match when he translated his game to the slower surface but Nadal's terrier spirit never wilted. He was magnificent; the only drawback being the dreaded grunt.
Nadal's masculine moaning comes in spells. Being at a lower tone than Maria Sharapova's relentless screams, they are not quite as annoying as those emitted by the Russian, who moans with the precision of a metronome.
Compared with the horrors that blight other sports, it might be petty to moan about moaning. But it is a frustrating distraction and tennis would be better off without it.
Federer though needs more grunt on clay, no doubt about it.
Every time he found a wave of renewed confidence, there was an almost inevitable drawing back of the waters as Nadal steeled himself. To pile a load of Federer's shots in a column marked as unforced errors is to ignore the damaging effects of Nadal's relentless slow court ways.
Federer needs a system and stamina that enables him to hang in longer when needed and advance more often to upset Nadal's rhythm.
The question now is just how desperate is Federer to end Nadal's dominance in Paris. He is four shy of the Grand Slam record of 14 set by Pete Sampras and, at 25, is poised to overhaul that number with ease given his superiority on grass and hard courts.
Woods has always been a man in a hurry, chasing history down. Federer, by comparison, has let history come to him. It is easier to see Nadal at least sustaining this level on his favoured surface than imagining Federer mustering the will to tweak or re-invent his game
The French Open final was satisfying in its own right, aided by the quality of the (Australian) TV commentary team. It was an even greater treat because sport delivers so many duds on the big occasion.
It would be wrong to tar all of football with a bleak brush. It often delights and no more so than when Portuguese whiz Cristiano Ronaldo is anywhere near the ball. But the last World Cup descended as a spectacle and finished in embarrassment. Violence continues to threaten football and the wonders of the English premiership are often tainted by childish managerial rancour and a crass obsession with extraordinary amounts of money.
Rugby is full of half-baked tests and remedies. Cricket is not to be trusted and delivered the most abysmal world tournament of all time. Woods remains a great story, yet his morose, self-obsessed nature is cloying. As for boxing, the Tour de France, Olympics, Commonwealth Games and the manufacturers of both cars and results in F1 ...
Tennis though delivered a memorable final, one which brought a simmering rivalry back to the boil. Wimbledon calls and it is now Nadal's turn to find new ways on the most famous tennis patch.
Historical debates are interesting but great sport is about the here and now and thrives on rivalry. Maybe their personalities are not as sharply drawn as the stars of old - McEnroe, Connors and all. Maybe, like all sport, the sheer thrill of their contest is dimmed by the shadow of excessive commercialism. But Federer versus Nadal shapes as the best there is in terms of an enduring individual sports rivalry right now and, hopefully, it can also flourish away from the Roland Garros clay.
