Daily Table Tennis Chit Chat

[UpSideDownCarl]

Where did you get the idea that you move faster from low?

The actual issues are:

1) strike zone; if your head and shoulders are up high and the ball is low and you are reaching down to hit he ball, you are not hitting from an optimal position.

2) if you are high you cannot use your legs to add power from the ground into your stroke.

But how low you should be also depends on whether you are close or far, whether the ball is high or low.

When you are forced to play over the table you need to be lower.


Sent from Inside The Chamber of Secrets by Patronus

 

[UpSideDownCarl]

Nah man, no butterfy's..
Im slappin on a insanly cut and boosted h3 neo on that old pg7 to see if it has some chance to be a player.
Reading up on that blade it should really crush the banda.. And it wasn't even close..

Man, I should have thought of this, I could have sent you the Nexy Oscar. That has a Hinoki outer ply and is an ALC blade. It has power. The description says something about a knockout punch. Hahaha.


Sent from Inside The Chamber of Secrets by Patronus

 

[Archosaurus]

Where did you get the idea that you move faster from low?

The actual issues are:

1) strike zone; if your head and shoulders are up high and the ball is low and you are reaching down to hit he ball, you are not hitting from an optimal position.

2) if you are high you cannot use your legs to add power from the ground into your stroke.

But how low you should be also depends on whether you are close or far, whether the ball is high or low.

When you are forced to play over the table you need to be lower.


Sent from Inside The Chamber of Secrets by Patronus

You don't move faster per se, but because your knees are more bent, and usually your weight is more forward than if you were standing, you will have more mobility. It will take less time to get moving, it will be easier to make small adjustments via hops, you won't be at so much of a risk of losing balance if you suddenly move etc. Consequently, you're also lower than if you were standing.

I've experienced both. I have no quality whatsoever if I hit from high: if I impact the ball with knees quite bent and at around chest or shoulder height, the spin for one is much greater, but so is the pace I can put on the ball because of my wider base for turning my hips, and also consistency because of more spin and because it serves as a landmark to me: I can "line up" everything based on feel.

Am I hitting my strokes too low or too high?

 

[pgpg]

Where did you get the idea that you move faster from low?

...

I believe Larry Hodges uses the analogy of someone guarding opponent in basketball, or baseball shortstop stance, or typical soccer goalie - in order to describe 'ready position'.

http://www.tabletenniscoaching.com/node/957

 

[Liten]

Man, I should have thought of this, I could have sent you the Nexy Oscar. That has a Hinoki outer ply and is an ALC blade. It has power. The description says something about a knockout punch. Hahaha.


Sent from Inside The Chamber of Secrets by Patronus

Haha, damn you carl.. Your namedropping worse than a politician and I keep googling more blades I don't need! XD

 

[UpSideDownCarl]

I believe Larry Hodges uses the analogy of someone guarding opponent in basketball, or baseball shortstop stance, or typical soccer goalie - in order to describe 'ready position'.

http://www.tabletenniscoaching.com/node/957

But getting low the way Archo is trying to is not going to help him move better.

There is an optimal height for moving but in TT you are getting low and staying low for being the right height for the ball.

Or, at least, that is how I always thought of it. I can think of plenty of times where I could feel I was too high for a good stroke.

In basketball defense, I always felt like you had to be low for not letting the ball or the player get past you rather than speed. The offensive player may be higher but seems to have the speed advantage in the scenario when the defender is low and in front of the offensive player. It serves a big purpose. But not speed. And if the offensive player has past the defensive player and the defensive player turns to follow, he will come up to a more upright (not fully) position for speed to catch up. Just like a runner does not have straight legs but they are not trying to get low.

Now, your knees need to be a certain amount bent, for you to move unless you are walking. But the optimal amount for speed forward and back or laterally is not all that low.

But, I guess, this is a good point and perhaps I was missing something. I will have to read the article thoroughly to see what I think.




Sent from Inside The Chamber of Secrets by Patronus

 

[NextLevel]

I believe Larry Hodges uses the analogy of someone guarding opponent in basketball, or baseball shortstop stance, or typical soccer goalie - in order to describe 'ready position'.

http://www.tabletenniscoaching.com/node/957

You don't move faster, you can cover more table in a certain context.

 

[Archosaurus]

Well, Carl has a point: sprinting would be the fastest way to move from one side of the table to the other, for sure. However, I think we can see the problem in that. We want to just be able to move a certain amount in a certain time, then recover as fast as possible to play the shot, right?

I'm not claiming that as low as I am is ideal for movement. I think I'm correct in thinking that a fairly low stance is ideal for close to the table shots, but I'm doubtful of my starting position and normal rallying height.

To my understanding, you will not want to move around at the height you hit balls at. I've observed that all good offensive players get somewhat lower during the stroke, then go back up to move. What I don't know is how low exactly should the baseline be at, at varying distances from the table. Lower when closer, higher when farther: but what's the ideal standard for any one person?

 

[NextLevel]

But getting low the way Archo is trying to is not going to help him move better.

There is an optimal height for moving but in TT you are getting low and staying low for being the right height for the ball.

Or, at least, that is how I always thought of it. I can think of plenty of times where I could feel I was too high for a good stroke.

In basketball defense, I always felt like you had to be low for not letting the ball or the player get past you rather than speed. The offensive player may be higher but seems to have the speed advantage in the scenario when the defender is low and in front of the offensive player. It serves a big purpose. But not speed. And if the offensive player has past the defensive player and the defensive player turns to follow, he will come up to a more upright (not fully) position for speed to catch up. Just like a runner does not have straight legs but they are not trying to get low.

Now, your knees need to be a certain amount bent, for you to move unless you are walking. But the optimal amount for speed forward and back or laterally is not all that low.

But, I guess, this is a good point and perhaps I was missing something. I will have to read the article thoroughly to see what I think.




Sent from Inside The Chamber of Secrets by Patronus

Here is some of my small knowledge on the subject:

Some of the quads support lateral movement, some of the quads support staying low. All other things being equal, the lower you are, the harder it is to move laterally. The benefits of staying low are not moving faster but that being lower makes your wingspan more effective at table height. If you stand straight, your effective wing span is much smaller than if you bring it to the height of the table.

There are also other issues like bending forward etc. but I just want to focus specifically on movement. If bending lower made us move faster, then runners would be getting lower. They hardly do. The reason why it works in basketball and hockey is the same as in TT - the height were the ball is demands that you bring your wingspan closer to to play effectively. There is also some spring in the legs when you crouch, but plenty of that can be gotten by staying on the balls of your feet with light bend, which is more similar to what runners do.

In the end, if you work out enough to be able to have strong quads for both getting low (I think this is the inner) and lateral movement (the outer, but I might have the order wrong), then get as low as you want. Most people find a balance somewhere in the middle based on their specific strengths and weaknesses.

 

[UpSideDownCarl]

Okay, he does describe the ready position. But it is not for fastest movement.

I just did this test:

1) I took a stance and bent my knees deeply till my thighs were parallel to the ground. Then I moved laterally.

2) Then I took the same stance with my legs a little less than half way between that deep bend parallel to the ground and straight. And I did lateral movements.

3) Then I had my feet just as wide but my legs just a tiny bit bent. And did lateral movements.

Try it. Tell me which one is fastest for you.

Also, which one is hardest to do?


Sent from Inside The Chamber of Secrets by Patronus

 

[Archosaurus]

1 is the winner when it comes to strain and ineffectiveness.

2 is fastest, because I can set off and stop just a little bit faster and more stable than 3, enough to notice. However 3 is the easiest, with 2 in the middle: but it's not particularly straining.

So, 2 for close to table, 3, perhaps a tiny bit more bent, far from the table?

 

[UpSideDownCarl]

I guess, more on this:

"Here's an easy way to find a good ready position. Imagine you are covering someone in basketball. Notice how you automatically spread your legs and bend your knees? This lowering of your center of gravity puts you in the proper ready position, allowing you to move quickly either way."

Another thing to note with the BBall ready position for defense is that the offensive player is generally moving forward/side-to-side and you are moving backward/side-to-side. More upright and you might fall backwards.

But in any case, try my test and see what feels fastest for movement.

There is no doubt that lower gives more power from your legs and the ground into the ball. But is lower also faster?

By the way, I think of the BBall defensive ready position as what Hodges describes, except with the arms low and wide and trying to poke at the ball while the offensive player dribbles. When the offensive player goes up for the shot, the defensive player goes up also, and that is also when the arms would go up. But if your arms were up for a shot while the offensive player was passing, that would not be a very good defensive strategy.



Sent from Inside The Chamber of Secrets by Patronus

 

[Archosaurus]

There is no doubt that lower gives more power from your legs and the ground into the ball. But is lower also faster?


Sent from Inside The Chamber of Secrets by Patronus

I'm inclined to believe that if I were to have to, say, travel 100m as fast as I can moving laterally, I would opt for 3. I feel that 3 is best for keeping up momentum in the most effective way over a longer distance. This is probably how you want to move when very far from the table, and then getting lower for a shot because there is relatively a lot of time.

However, the advantages of starting and stopping are much greater in 2, and that's mostly what we do in table tennis. So in this context, it'd allow you to cover more ground in less time closer to the table.

I think I've found my ideal height, or at least, consciously acknowledged it. Thanks.

The next challenge is being relaxed in the stance. I always tense up my upper body slightly, although my arm is usually loose. It's my back and core that's the culprit.

 

[UpSideDownCarl]

I think I've found my ideal height, or at least, consciously acknowledged it. Thanks.

The thing about this is, what I have seen coached is that you want to get low and stay low, particularly for the first 3 balls.

If you are getting low and then you come up and have to get low again, it messes with your vision of the ball and you waste energy.

And the ideal hight depends on the ball you are playing. Being low for a high ball is just as bad as being high for a ball that is low and over the table.



Sent from Inside The Chamber of Secrets by Patronus

 

[Archosaurus]

The thing about this is, what I have seen coached is that you want to get low and stay low, particularly for the first 3 balls.

If you are getting low and then you come up and have to get low again, it messes with your vision of the ball and you waste energy.

And the ideal hight depends on the ball you are playing. Being low for a high ball is just as bad as being high for a ball that is low and over the table.



Sent from Inside The Chamber of Secrets by Patronus

Well, most of the sport is played during the first few strokes. There it'd benefit to be in a mostly low stance, like in the number 2 described here. If the rally drags out, assuming it's a counterlooping/blocking rally and both players are consistent and stay around mid distance as close as possible, wouldn't the stance stay around the same height if similar balls keep coming?

Of course, the sport is not so simple. Sometimes you need to squat down relatively very low to hit a counterloop even pretty far away, or you have to hit a high ball close to the table. What I'm mostly talking about is pretty standard attacking play, or something like a loop to loop drill at a standard distance at a standard pace.

 

[ttmonster]

I think this stance thing at our level is very contextual . As NL said unless you work out enough to have quads to support both movements you have to optimize based on your physiology . e.g against players who have a very good close to the table game , serves are good, and consistently loop on both wings close to the table I prefer to stay lower, against players who prefer to play mid distance looping , and who don't serve that agressively I stay at my more normal more comfortable height ... so yes in general remaining low is essential but too low might offset the advantage you get in serve receive for particular serves, ( low short serves ) with disadvantages in other parts of the game .. .I find the 120 degree bend definition better ...

 

[JeffM]

It's not my playing that I'm embarrassed of. It's having to essentially have someone stand there, filming just me for however long it takes to get decent material to analyze. I'm enough of a tryhard as it is.

Although I have filmed some ancient sessions from a pretty crappy angle, and it was indeed enlightening. For one, I wasn't doing strokes at all how I think I was doing them, and I was moving far less distance and far less efficiently than I felt I was.

Now, I have more of an idea of what my game looks like from 3rd person. But it'd be indeed good to basically film every game I play, everyday, to be able to review them. I know I'm standing higher than I feel I am, in pretty much every game I play. My stroke technique is inconsistent too.

I'm usually not opposed to bothering people, but I'm too much of a candy ass to have someone sit there for 20 - 30 minutes filming me everyday, so I will just keep doing things as I am doing them, but push for more, because what I'm doing now is evidently not correct. I've improved, at least.

The most important thing I'm working on right now, apart from staying low, is having reference points for my good strokes, so that I can perform them more often.

Carl, you're fairly good with human movement: how is my posture in the video? It's not uncomfortable or anything, but something looks strange to me on video...

Good job for posting a video Archo. Nothing to be ashamed of, in fact, unless you have a coach, this is probably the best way you can get the best advice available.
You mentioned you want to film every every game you play. Make it happen! Some of you might remember I made a thread about video recorders (deciding between different models, thinking about whether a camera will be ok, or a cam corder, or a phone). In the end, I got a phone just because I needed a phone at the time, and it works fine! I was worrying about the size of videos on the phone and whether I can record long enough on it before it cuts off etc, but I have yet to play a match that lasts longer than 30 min (longest 16 min) and the limit on my phone (with good quality) is 31 min.
The other thing is you can try get a tripod. That will be the easiest option as you won't need to bother anyone else to hold the camera! But if you don't want to spend the money, there are ways around it, e.g. use your bat holder or whatever material you have available to hold your phone vertically as you play. You may feel weird when you first start filming yourself playing games, but if you persist, the feeling will be gone soon. I started filming myself more often this year, and at the very beginning, I feel nervous and cant play normally at all. But after a while, it gets better. One good thing also with filming yourself, is that you will capture your best shots, and after a while, you will have enough material to make a compilation video of your best shots. How cool is that! You get to be a superstar now in your video xD

With regards to your video, from the first loop you did, the little forward movement from your right leg seems to be quite restricted / tight. It seems like you are lifting the leg up and then forward and then placing it down. It might be that you are nervous, or that you are getting too low for your comfort.

 

[JeffM]

Highlight point from ytd's training matches.
I now focus on playing more games, unless I'm with the coach.

 

[ttmonster]

Nice backhands Jeff...

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=lcVx8NPSJRg

Highlight point from ytd's training matches.
I now focus on playing more games, unless I'm with the coach.

 

[Archosaurus]

Jeff, I'll probably get around to it some day. Once I do actually get myself a regular club with players who can kick my ass, I'll make sure to film everything. The NL method of essentially posting something from every session, and extensive amounts too, is not only transparent, but it's good for development in the long run.

I noticed that too. My body has been fairly tense these days: and it's always been. I'm working on it, but it's no 1 day feat. I've started with the grip, and it's having an effect.

In terms of my stroke, I see a lot of stuff that I can change from an efficiency standpoint. I'm also far too sideways for my own good: I can't recover if someone blocks a hard loop right back at me. It also makes my game pretty stale and easily predictable, anyone over 1500 probably wouldn't have a problem counterlooping my loops and just ripping into them because it's evident where they're gonna go.