Panatta says Fognini technique second to Fed

[stroke]

https://www.tennisworldusa.org/tennis/news/Roger_Federer/69661/only-roger-federer-has-a-better-technique-than-fabio-fognini-says-panatta/

[jeffreycounts]

That's a good find. Fabio is entertaining. And he can play. But Roger Federer he ain't.

[gzhpcu]

Do not forget Panatta is Italian...

[stotty]

Fognini is technically superb and, relative to his own game-style, every bit as good as Roger technically in the baseline department. It's just Roger is a genius and, unusually, vert gritty for someone so talented. Usually genius is flawed yet Roger isn't. It makes you wonder what Nastase and McEnroe might have been like had they had Roger's calm and internal stability.

The problem with genius is the owner of it has to carry it. There are two stunning examples in recent times of sportsman who have done that admirably; Roger and Lionel Messi. Neither man has suffered distraction in their careers either because both are on the phlegmatic side, which helps.

What fascinates me is how someone like Novak, who is far more limited than Roger, can thwart him. That's what I love about tennis. Players with more limited means can still find a way thwart someone twice their genius.

[stroke]

I always thought Henri Leconte is in that flawed genius category also. Roger has taken full advantage of his genius obviously. Novak to me is like a Lendl. Lendl was not a genius out there, but he massively outworked McEnroe. The last wins for Novak over Roger, age was a big factor. Novak seems to be the only player that can push Roger enough to bring fitness into the equation. There is just no way Roger can equal Novak's fitness/endurance at this point.

[don_budge]

Adriano Panatta was a beautiful players in his own right. Probably every bit as elegant as the mercurial Ilie Nastase. I saw him play once and he pulled off this remarkable shot in a remarkable match against Jimmy Connors. It was five sets of this most beautiful tennis. I remember watching Panatta on the practice court the day before and I was so impressed with his strokes that I told my companion that he could not be counted out against Connors.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Vx6Uoax6uk

I watched this match from the very top row of the stadium. Panatta underestimated Connors just a tad and feathered the volley just a little too much. Connors ran it down and played a prayer down the line. It was answered.

The Panatta comment about Fognini is pure Italian. One Italian about another. Just a little excited over an event that sparked some Italian passion. The heat of the moment. I like Fognini...I like him a lot. But the comment is somewhat over the top.

[stotty]

I always thought Henri Leconte is in that flawed genius category also. Roger has taken full advantage of his genius obviously. Novak to me is like a Lendl. Lendl was not a genius out there, but he massively outworked McEnroe. The last wins for Novak over Roger, age was a big factor. Novak seems to be the only player that can push Roger enough to bring fitness into the equation. There is just no way Roger can equal Novak's fitness/endurance at this point.

I don't buy into the fitness thing. Novak has been winning two thirds of their encounters going back to 2011. Roger has been pushed physically even more by Rafa yet has still managed to turn the tables despite being in his mid 30s. Roger is a biological anomaly. But Novak has emerged the better player of the two and it's hard for even the most ardent Roger fans to refute that.

For me, what will be interesting, is if Roger can maintain his stunning form and meet with Novak at this year's Wimbledon. Roger has more nous and versatility now than he has ever had, and on a forgiving surface like grass you wonder if he couldn't put in a gargantuan effort and undo Novak. You can envisage it is possible for Roger do it...it's just the execution in real life isn't always that easy.