I still think you have a better chance in golf than tennis (although I did vote for Roger)...
What I mean is that some people say it's harder to win in golf because you're playing against 'the whole field'. In a way that's true, but looking at it another way - you have 4 chances to win it in golf. If you suck one day (one round) you're still in it and you can improve and win by having 3 other good rounds.
In tennis...suck one match and for the most part - you're out! You don't have an opportunity to 'come back' the next day and redeem yourself. I wonder how many grand slams would Tiger have it all the majors were played in the 'match-play' format? He doesn't do that well in match-play? Why? Because although Tiger is the best golfer, sometimes you get that 1 player who really gets hot and have 1 great round and can knock you out. In match-play..that's it! Plus, Tiger can his a drive for 300 yards and that's fantastic. No one is at the other end of his shot driving that ball back to him! (You can tell I'm pro-tennis)!
Anyway, the big question mark for Roger is the French. If, by chance, he can manage to win that one....I think it's on then because he has proven that he can and have won Wimbledon and the US Open. If he can win the French, Roger's the type of player that "relaxes" when he wins and plays better. He's played 'better' since becomming #1 than he did before he was #1 (he even said that). He said he just 'relaxed' once he became #1 and seem to have player better. Let him get that French title - look out world!