This user has no status.
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Well-Known Member
Totally correct. No matter if Tennis, Handball, Badminton... Everybody's struggling.
But mostly because people or to be more specific parents see a chance for their children to make a decent living from Football.
But it is possible to make a living from TT.
There are even Bezirksliga Players earning quite a bit.
Rumours say an ambitioned club around the corner paid their No#1 player EUR 8.000,- per month 'cause they wanted to advance to the next higher league so badly. I don't know how much of that is true though, but the source of this rumour was club member there.
That club (or actually few players) got caught cheeting not to long ago regarding TTR. If you have read TT-News.de you might know which club I'm talking about...
says
Spin and more spin.
says
Spin and more spin.
Well-Known Member
Super Moderator
In case you missed it, here is DTop Spirit's video parody on the subject. It's pretty funny. But also quite decently accurate.
Sent from the Subterranean Workshop by Telepathy
Sent from the Subterranean Workshop by Telepathy
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Well-Known Member
We have a club like that in our area as well, went from Kreisliga all the way to NRW Liga in a couple of years. Top player (some polish guy) is said to get 500 euros per match. A guy who used to play at our club got 4k per season when he was like #4 there. They are generally pretty hated around here because whenever nothing is on the line they play with way lower rated players to save money... You are not getting rich though which is the biggest problem I guess, in other sports like ski alpin you can get a job at the Bundeszollverwaltung at least.
I think the government/dosb should be responsible for professional athletes to have a future after the sport..
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Member
have you seen the world championships of ping pong 2016? The ITTF should just do that for all of their events!
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Well-Known Member
I remember when I was a child watching table tennis. The thing that captivated me was the pace and the speed. It's purely my opinion, but I love watching the fast pace - quick footwork, lightning fast stroke, lightning fast attack and deceptive serve.
Back then in 1990-2000s:
**Waldner's serve was deceptive and fun to watch
**Ma Lin's footwork was unimaginable
**LGL's short pip style was lightning fast
**RSM's footwork and powerful loop brought much excitement
Many legends have been destroyed by the combined effects of the ITTF changes (except Waldner).
As a result table tennis has become less diverse in terms of styles. Look at the current players, they are mostly shake hand two-wing loopers.
It's not good for a sport when most players play the same style.
Sent from my ONE E1003 using Tapatalk
Back then in 1990-2000s:
**Waldner's serve was deceptive and fun to watch
**Ma Lin's footwork was unimaginable
**LGL's short pip style was lightning fast
**RSM's footwork and powerful loop brought much excitement
Many legends have been destroyed by the combined effects of the ITTF changes (except Waldner).
As a result table tennis has become less diverse in terms of styles. Look at the current players, they are mostly shake hand two-wing loopers.
It's not good for a sport when most players play the same style.
Sent from my ONE E1003 using Tapatalk
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Well-Known Member
I've got no problem with any of the changes. Sports will change, what rules would you have liked to have changed? There's always a backlash in all sports about rule changes.
I believe the change to the plastic ball was a mistake and they realized this. Service became easier to read and would end even quicker than before. Instead of admitting they messed up and going back to the 40mm celluloid ball, it seems they're trying to correct the issue by raising the net.
We've tested a higher net by "1cm" at our local club and came to the consensus that it didn't effect us much at all. Serves took a bit to adjust but we all enjoyed the play just as much as always. And this is with around 24 players playing from USATT 1500-2300.
I believe the change to the plastic ball was a mistake and they realized this. Service became easier to read and would end even quicker than before. Instead of admitting they messed up and going back to the 40mm celluloid ball, it seems they're trying to correct the issue by raising the net.
We've tested a higher net by "1cm" at our local club and came to the consensus that it didn't effect us much at all. Serves took a bit to adjust but we all enjoyed the play just as much as always. And this is with around 24 players playing from USATT 1500-2300.
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Well-Known Member
says
Spin and more spin.
says
Spin and more spin.
Well-Known Member
Super Moderator
I actually am okay with the some of the Poly balls. I think the mistake with the plastic ball is that they all are so different. If you give me the Nittaku Premium or one of the Seamless 3 Star balls, I am happy to play with them. But the fact that they all are so dramatically different is the biggest problem with the Poly ball.
And the fact that ITTF allows those pieces of garbage that come from the DHS factory and the Double Fish factory to be APPROVED as 3 STARs is a farce. Those are not 3 star balls.
But the Nittaku Premium and the Seamless 3 Stars, if all the balls were just like either ONE of those it would be fine. But they are too different from each other to call both an official ball.
As far as the 1998 pips aspect ratio rule, and the 2004 pips density rules, I am not sure those rules were so good. And they did help kill defensive play at the top levels.
I don't think the frictionless pips rule was a big deal to any of the top players. But this rule affected lower level club players.
Still the result of Aspect Ratio rule in 1998-1999 was not a great rule and it affected most of the top level pips players of the day.
Sent from the Subterranean Workshop by Telepathy
And the fact that ITTF allows those pieces of garbage that come from the DHS factory and the Double Fish factory to be APPROVED as 3 STARs is a farce. Those are not 3 star balls.
But the Nittaku Premium and the Seamless 3 Stars, if all the balls were just like either ONE of those it would be fine. But they are too different from each other to call both an official ball.
As far as the 1998 pips aspect ratio rule, and the 2004 pips density rules, I am not sure those rules were so good. And they did help kill defensive play at the top levels.
I don't think the frictionless pips rule was a big deal to any of the top players. But this rule affected lower level club players.
Still the result of Aspect Ratio rule in 1998-1999 was not a great rule and it affected most of the top level pips players of the day.
Sent from the Subterranean Workshop by Telepathy
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Well-Known Member
Yes. 1cm isn't as much as you think. at our level it doesn't do much to our games. Maybe at the professional level that's different. But they'll adjust. If they can't adjust to a net height change, then they wouldn't be able to adjust to more difficult changes, like a new opponent.
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Well-Known Member
Depends. That's a matter of opinion.
1cm can be more than you think.
Just ask a girl how much 1cm can matter...
The number of choppers at top level is already very small and by implying this rule, it will become worse. But the game needs more diversity, not less! IMHO This will be the next stupid rule change for the benefit of loopers, since it was/is much more difficult to loop a chopped 38mm than a 40mm ball.
And i believe this rule change won't do much to stop defenders disappearing.
Last edited:
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Active Member
Ofc it does, just how many hours do you think professionals put into their serve practice trying to get the ball as low as you can get to the net
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Member
Depends. That's a matter of opinion.
1cm can be more than you think.
Just ask a girl how much 1cm can matter...
The number of choppers at top level is already very small and by implying this rule, it will become worse. But the game needs more diversity, not less! IMHO This will be the next stupid rule change for the benefit of loopers, since it was/is much more difficult to loop a chopped 38mm than a 40mm ball.
And i believe this rule change won't do much to stop defenders disappearing.
I can foresee a rise in the number of "fishers" as I like to call them. Players like Jun Mizutani who like to defend a lot, from back off the table. The reason I say this is because as the net is higher it would put more pressure on the attacker to make a mistake, whereas the defender can just keep clearing the net with lob balls. Players like Saive would have thrived in this change in my opinion
I'm not entirely convinced by the idea that choppers will struggle, imagine (as an attacker) having to lift super heavy backspin ball over a net that is harder to clear. Attackers will have to put less power on the ball just to stop mistakes! A defender can then afford to play a bit higher/safer over the net as the attacker is under the pressure to clear the net too whilst reading whatever spin has been put on the ball.
I may be wrong, so please let me know if I have missed a key point here
Last edited:
This user has no status.
Member
I can foresee a rise in the number of "fishers" as I like to call them. Players like Jun Mizutani who like to defend a lot, from back off the table. The reason I say this is because as the net is higher it would put more pressure on the attacker to make a mistake, whereas the defender can just keep clearing the net with lob balls. Players like Saive would have thrived in this change in my opinion
I'm not entirely convinced by the idea that choppers will struggle, imagine (as an attacker) having to lift super heavy backspin ball over a net that is harder to clear. Attackers will have to put less power on the ball just to stop mistakes! A defender can then afford to play a bit higher/safer over the net as the attacker is under the pressure to clear the net too whilst reading whatever spin has been put on the ball.
I may be wrong, so please let me know if I have missed a key point here
The issue with higher net for defenders is that because backspin forces the ball to sit up once it hits the table the ball will be easier for top players to hit due to it having to be hit higher over the net.
It won't make much difference at lower levels but at high levels it could be the difference - not that defenders are common up there anyway - Joo has been the best defender on the planet for the last 13 years and I don't see anyone lining up to replace him any time soon - there are some decent choppers (like Muramatsu), but none that are near Joo's level imo, so it'll be a while before we see another world class defender anyway, no matter whether rules change or not.
This user has no status.
Member
My main gripe is the difference between all the brands, as you say.
May I ask what the changes to aspect ratio/pips density were and what this meant for top level play? I didn't know those were rules changes so would like to know more
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Member
I'm still not entirely sure who will benefit,but I see what you mean.
However, surely once defenders adjust to playing lower over the net, it will be much harder for the attacker to lift the ball. And even If the ball has to be chopped a little bit higher, the attacker will still be at a disadvantage as they can't hit a powerful shot as chances are it won't clear the net due to there still being a lot of backspin, just a higher barrier to clear. I can see an increase in the "push one, spin one" technique of playing against choppers. (or push one, slap one)
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Well-Known Member
Thinking of the different trajectories of a topspin and a chop i see a clear disadvantage for the chopper.
Have you ever seen Ruwen Filus or Wang Xi play? Ever seen how low over the net their chops sometimes fly? Please tell me then who will have a harder time to adjust?
I think the answer is pretty clear.
Attackers don't have to adjust that much because of the arcs they produce.
Just like the
- the two colour rubber rule
- the bigger ball
- ban of frictionless pips
yet another disadvantage for defenders.
And for what? For 3 more viewers? I think having better quality livestream and better availability of them plus a little better marketing will do much more for the number of viewers than the net height ever will.
[Emoji15]
Dear ITTF, just look at the WCPP and what they are doing right and then freakin' learn from that.
[Quite sure one of them reads this]
I understand the motivations behind slowing down the game, but i think the ITTF is completely on the wrong path here.
In fact, from what i know and also hear from others, most people that watch TT or doing so 'cause they love that high-speed-chess game. Some even almost get an adrenaline-rush from the tempo.
And now they want to take that away from them? Don't they fear to lose more viewers instead of creating new ones?
Have you ever seen Ruwen Filus or Wang Xi play? Ever seen how low over the net their chops sometimes fly? Please tell me then who will have a harder time to adjust?
I think the answer is pretty clear.
Attackers don't have to adjust that much because of the arcs they produce.
Just like the
- the two colour rubber rule
- the bigger ball
- ban of frictionless pips
yet another disadvantage for defenders.
And for what? For 3 more viewers? I think having better quality livestream and better availability of them plus a little better marketing will do much more for the number of viewers than the net height ever will.
[Emoji15]
Dear ITTF, just look at the WCPP and what they are doing right and then freakin' learn from that.
[Quite sure one of them reads this]
I understand the motivations behind slowing down the game, but i think the ITTF is completely on the wrong path here.
In fact, from what i know and also hear from others, most people that watch TT or doing so 'cause they love that high-speed-chess game. Some even almost get an adrenaline-rush from the tempo.
And now they want to take that away from them? Don't they fear to lose more viewers instead of creating new ones?
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Member
Thinking of the different trajectories of a topspin and a chop i see a clear disadvantage for the chopper.
Have you ever seen Ruwen Filus or Wang Xi play? Ever seen how low over the net their chops sometimes fly? Please tell me then who will have a harder time to adjust?
I think the answer is pretty clear.
Attackers don't have to adjust that much because of the arcs they produce.
Just like the
- the two colour rubber rule
- the bigger ball
- ban of frictionless pips
yet another disadvantage for defenders.
And for what? For 3 more viewers? I think having better quality livestream and better availability of them plus a little better marketing will do much more for the number of viewers than the net height ever will.
[Emoji15]
Dear ITTF, just look at the WCPP and what they are doing right and then freakin' learn from that.
[Quite sure one of them reads this]
I understand the motivations behind slowing down the game, but i think the ITTF is completely on the wrong path here.
In fact, from what i know and also hear from others, most people that watch TT or doing so 'cause they love that high-speed-chess game. Some even almost get an adrenaline-rush from the tempo.
And now they want to take that away from them? Don't they fear to lose more viewers instead of creating new ones?
Perhaps they will have a harder time adjusting to a higher net, but I think once they have adjusted and manage to get the ball low over the net, life for a attacker could be pretty hard. So are you suggesting that a lower net would benefit a chopper? I think the opposite. Imagine how much more speed the attacker can put on the ball, meaning the defender will have less time to react and will probably struggle to even get to the ball. Its a different effect to the new plastic ball as this (the net change) is more to do with trajectory and not just speed. The complete opposite would happen with a net height increase, an attackers shots will be slower, giving the defender far more time to react and play a better shot.
Last edited:
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Well-Known Member
It might have come across wrongly.
We certainly don't need a lower net height.
Instead of messing with the rules once more there are other things of higher priority to do IMHO
We certainly don't need a lower net height.
Instead of messing with the rules once more there are other things of higher priority to do IMHO
Last edited:
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Active Member
My vote was bad for the game.
Outside of the changing the game from 21 to 11, I think all the changes have been negative.
If I had my say about it, I'd:
- Get rid of the no hiding service rule. Can't stand how, and when, people complain that this pro hides there serves when they're all trying to almost hide it anyways. Could be called basically on every point if one wanted to. Just let them hide away.
- In conjunction with allowing the serve to be hidden, because that makes for bad TV viewing, (just watch any Waldner game back when he could hide serves. So many points won on that alone) go with a two toned ball. Much like that DHS ball they used in the China Super League for a little bit there. The ball would translate well to TV on slow-mo replays showing fans how much spin plays a part in this game. With a pure white ball now, I don't think they get that.
- Go back to 38mm. This would bring back pips & other styles of play. It's bad for the sport if everyone is a shakehand duel-winged looper.
- If you want to play with frictionless LPs, go ahead.
- Speedglue would still be banned since it's bad for you. But if you want to boost, go ahead.
- Have more camera's down low towards the table like what was shown in those Russian Premier League. Basically the point Archosaurus was making.
Outside of the changing the game from 21 to 11, I think all the changes have been negative.
If I had my say about it, I'd:
- Get rid of the no hiding service rule. Can't stand how, and when, people complain that this pro hides there serves when they're all trying to almost hide it anyways. Could be called basically on every point if one wanted to. Just let them hide away.
- In conjunction with allowing the serve to be hidden, because that makes for bad TV viewing, (just watch any Waldner game back when he could hide serves. So many points won on that alone) go with a two toned ball. Much like that DHS ball they used in the China Super League for a little bit there. The ball would translate well to TV on slow-mo replays showing fans how much spin plays a part in this game. With a pure white ball now, I don't think they get that.
- Go back to 38mm. This would bring back pips & other styles of play. It's bad for the sport if everyone is a shakehand duel-winged looper.
- If you want to play with frictionless LPs, go ahead.
- Speedglue would still be banned since it's bad for you. But if you want to boost, go ahead.
- Have more camera's down low towards the table like what was shown in those Russian Premier League. Basically the point Archosaurus was making.
Last edited:
Similar threads
