Changes in Table Tennis

[Baal]

I am sure that raising the net height will be bad for choppers -- relative to offensive players. And the part in bold is the key point. It is not whether one is impacted and the other is not. All players will be impacted some. The question is who is impacted more? I am not a 2400 chopper, but I watch a couple of them pretty much every time I play. (One of them played Waldner several times). Their best defensive shots clear the net by a noticeably lower margin than attacker's balls. Statistically, an increase in net height by 1 cm, is going to have a greater impact on defenders by lowering their margin for error.

Yes, this is my opinion, but I think it is pretty hard to argue that I am wrong if you watch defenders carefully, especially from the side viewpoint where you can most easily see the ball trajectory.

 

[Suga D]

You must have got me wrong, NL.
What I was trying to say is, that to be able to judge, how much this change will affect anything, you should be seeing it from a high-Level choppers perspective. It´s not that i am a high level chopper myself, but i´ve had an interesting talk with one which was quite eye opening.
And yes, these little things can have a tremendous effect. Just look at the difference from 40 to 40+Balls and that wasn´t even 1 millimeter, and you guys keep repeating that 1 centimeter is like nothing, whereas i keep stating that a cm can be a whole f***ing lot, IMHO.

 

[Baal]

To improve the length and quality of points and of the rallies.

Is there a consensus that the current length and quality of rallies is somehow sub-optimal? I don't think so personally. I would much rather watch a modern match than one between one of my heroes as a kid. In general I think things have been fairly similar from a spectator point of view for the last 25 years. All this tinkering and a match between Waldner and Persson circa 1990 and one between FZD and Ma Long now, I can be equally entertained. Matches in Rio were fantastic.

There is one thing that is different now, though. There is less diversity in playing styles than there used to be, at least among men. You see the argument occasionally the Liu Guoliang was driven out of the sport by rules changes. Defenders have always been a minority style, so that part hasn't changed, but short pips penholders, for example, are more or less extinct. I don't think that is a good development. Is this just development of the sport or have rules changes contributed. I played in 38 mm era. Those balls were much trickier. You couldn't just rip everything with them.

 

[NextLevel]

You must have got me wrong, NL.
What I was trying to say is, that to be able to judge, how much this change will affect anything, you should be seeing it from a high-Level choppers perspective. It´s not that i am a high level chopper myself, but i´ve had an interesting talk with one which was quite eye opening.
And yes, these little things can have a tremendous effect. Just look at the difference from 40 to 40+Balls and that wasn´t even 1 millimeter, and you guys keep repeating that 1 centimeter is like nothing, whereas i keep stating that a cm can be a whole f***ing lot, IMHO.

Okay. In other words, you must be 2800 to have opinions about table tennis. If not, you are a know it all trying to speak about things you do not understand.

 

[Suga D]

Defenders were rare at the top levels as looping became more popular, which became more prominent as China switched to shakehand looping as well. If commentators were preaching the death of defense in 1987, people need to rethink some ideas.

Speaking of german TT, i must correct you again. AFAIK Looping came up in the fifties and got more popular from then on. At least over here. Erich Arndt from my neighbour town has made the looping technique popular over here,
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erich_Arndt_(Tischtennisspieler)*
whereas choppers got way less in the eighties, when the two-colour rubbers came up (IIRC).
Until then there were even choppers in the german National Team. Guys like Engelbert Hüging, Michael Plum and quite a few more. Just to name a few..

*it´s common sense over here that his backhand spin (which was at that time unorthodox and very Banana-flip like) was so spinny that it just crawled up one´s sleeve while one was still figuring a way how to block it...

[EDIT] More Info on Erich Arndt:
http://www.tischtennis.de/aktuelles/meldung/14303
http://www.tischtennis-pur.de/info/items/geschichte-des-tischtennissports.html
[in german]

 

[NextLevel]

I am sure that raising the net height will be bad for choppers -- relative to offensive players. And the part in bold is the key point. It is not whether one is impacted and the other is not. All players will be impacted some. The question is who is impacted more? I am not a 2400 chopper, but I watch a couple of them pretty much every time I play. (One of them played Waldner several times). Their best defensive shots clear the net by a noticeably lower margin than attacker's balls. Statistically, an increase in net height by 1 cm, is going to have a greater impact on defenders by lowering their margin for error.

Yes, this is my opinion, but I think it is pretty hard to argue that I am wrong if you watch defenders carefully, especially from the side viewpoint where you can most easily see the ball trajectory.

I don't substantially disagree with any of this but just like some choppers and pips players liked their increased consistency with the new ball even if they disliked Thierry spin reversal, there may be something we are missing that favors the defender in practice. At the highest levels, obviously, the fastest style with the highest consistency is usually the one that wins.

 

[Suga D]

Okay. In other words, you must be 2800 to have opinions about table tennis. If not, you are a know it all trying to speak about things you do not understand.

Has Arch captured your Account and is sailing under false flag or are you just misinterpreting me purposely? [Emoji6]
Please read again after you have calmed down a bit.
I´m outtie for now.

 

[NextLevel]

Speaking of german TT, i must correct you again. AFAIK Looping came up in the fifties and got more popular from then on. At least over here. Erich Arndt from my neighbour town has made the looping technique popular over here, whereas choppers got less in the eighties, when the two-colour Rubbers came up (IIRC).
Until then there were even choppers in the german National Team. Guys like Engelbert Hüging, Michael Plum and quite a few more. Just to name a few..

Topspin play had always been a part of TT, even with hardbat. Barna was not a chopper. If you look at videos in the 50s, the first guy who used inverted hardly looped to win the WC.

When I say looping became more popular, I really mean speed gluing and the Chinese adoption of the dual winged looping shakehand technique. But in any case, please watch the video I linked to and listen to the commentators. I think that again, it makes sense to try to understand where I am coming from rather than overlay your own assumptions on what I am saying over and over again.

 

[Baal]

I don't substantially disagree with any of this but just like some choppers and pips players liked their increased consistency with the new ball even if they disliked Thierry spin reversal, there may be something we are missing that favors the defender in practice. At the highest levels, obviously, the fastest style with the highest consistency is usually the one that wins.

Could be true, unintended consequences have occurred with about every rule changes. I am not personally thinking that the sport should take the gamble that somehow it will all work out for defenders if we raise the net, by some feature none of us anticipate. I watch how these two guys I see win points, often their very low defensive shots setup huge forehand attacks. You don't want to take that away from defenders. They will in time cease to exist at high levels. And they make for some of the most entertaining matches. JSH in his prime was always an amazing show. And since that is the ITTF justification for nearly everything (increase spectator appeal), I think it is a bad idea.

 

[Baal]

I was being taught to loop in 1970. The technique I was being taught then is not one that works well now (if you can find old video of Dragutin Surbek, you can see how things were supposed to be then).

NL is right, though, speed glue in time changed everything. I think the game got a lot more exciting, personally. But this is all a question of taste I suppose.

 

[NextLevel]

Is there a consensus that the current length and quality of rallies is somehow sub-optimal? I don't think so personally. I would much rather watch a modern match than one between one of my heroes as a kid. In general I think things have been fairly similar from a spectator point of view for the last 25 years. All this tinkering and a match between Waldner and Persson circa 1990 and one between FZD and Ma Long now, I can be equally entertained. Matches in Rio were fantastic.

There is one thing that is different now, though. There is less diversity in playing styles than there used to be, at least among men. You see the argument occasionally the Liu Guoliang was driven out of the sport by rules changes. Defenders have always been a minority style, so that part hasn't changed, but short pips penholders, for example, are more or less extinct. I don't think that is a good development. Is this just development of the sport or have rules changes contributed. I played in 38 mm era. Those balls were much trickier. You couldn't just rip everything with them.

Yes, I do not believe that the game needs changes. I am just making the argument the way it is framed so that you can be clearer on what you are are assuming.

 

[NextLevel]

Has Arch captured your Account and is sailing under false flag or are you just misinterpreting me purposely? [Emoji6]
Please read again after you have calmed down a bit.
I´m outtie for now.

I am calm. That you repeatedly compare what I write to what Archo does is rude but since you don't want to apologize but continue to repeat it, I will just accept that that is what you do. I am not coaching 2400 players on what the changes to table tennis are. I am expressing my own opinions on said changes just like anyone can. Since everyone knows my level and my playing style, they can make reasonable inferences. The idea that I am doing stuff like Archos used to is flat out rude and insulting. You can talk around it however you want to but you can't be serious.

 

[OldschoolPenholder]

depends. That's a matter of opinion.
1cm can be more than you think.
Just ask a girl how much 1cm can matter...

oh my guoyuehua!!!

Lololol

 

[NextLevel]

Could be true, unintended consequences have occurred with about every rule changes. I am not personally thinking that the sport should take the gamble that somehow it will all work out for defenders if we raise the net, by some feature none of us anticipate. I watch how these two guys I see win points, often their very low defensive shots setup huge forehand attacks. You don't want to take that away from defenders. They will in time cease to exist at high levels. And they make for some of the most entertaining matches. JSH in his prime was always an amazing show. And since that is the ITTF justification for nearly everything (increase spectator appeal), I think it is a bad idea.

Do consider the fact that more chops with heavy backspin will be below net height and need more effort for the looper to arc under said rule changes.

 

[OldschoolPenholder]

But: here: ITTF's future of the sport:

Now this looks fun as hell and I would enjoy playing it. But it is not table tennis. It is something else.

By the way, in that sport using 4 tables, I doubt you could use pips all that effectively. And the art of over the table play is totally not there. So, if you like the art and nuance of table tennis, many of the rule changes have eliminated some of that art as it has made it harder for defenders to stand with the top loopers.

This will kill me, both figuratively and literally ... my close-to-the-table play would be ineffective and me running all over to cover balls by playing close-to-the-table would gas me out lol

BUT DAYUM THAT LOOKS COOL!

 

[Persistence TT]

I have never played with a 1cm increase but you guys with ur arguements made me wanna test it. My guess/prediction is that NL is spot on about the rallies (slower pace/quality) , but baal and suga have some interesting points too.

Ill try to be quick.

Do we want longer rallies? I think yes because fans will enjoy the game more

Does a 1cm height addition guarantees that? Uhmm probably yes , but ignorant fans out of the sport will still find it hard to spectate and understand the whole serve/receive tactics/sorcery. Different camera angles could do a job. If you watch some 2016 full CTTSL matches, they sometimes switch for 1-2 seconds to a camera that clearly shows the contact point of the server and then immediately switch to full table mode. Ignorant fans will still ahve a hard time understanding sidetop or sideunderspin serves, but I found these camera views really exciting

Are pips/defenders in disadvantage? Please dont start throwing tomatoes at me, my viewpoint of the game is that pips and defenders were always at a theoretical/statistical disadvantage because of their limited style of play (im talking speed glue era and after, I dont know much about the previous years). Destroying your opponent's game is a strategy yes but if the opponent adapts its simply game over. A top looper will win 7-8/10 times against a top defender , regarding all the other factors the same.

I think the issue is purely psychological, Gionis didnt like the new balls at all and thought his game would be destroyed at first but after 2 years, he feels quite good and finally adapted (is it unfair compared to a looper, yes it is but we cant have it all can we??) . That are not my words but his words. Examining pips player again but this time short attacking, I dont think mattias karlsson for example will have a huge problem if the net increases. Probably will find it more difficult than attackers to adapt, some bad results after the change but in the end he will still be a beast of a player

Another assumption I made while I was reading you guys is that we wont have so many attacking banana flicks in the game(at least not at the current speed of execution), which will prolong the rally even more. The strokes will be a bit more vertical, thus more arc, thus more time for the opponent to react

The serve receive & opening phase will be also tricky, I cant imagine how short push after short push will affect the game, Im guessing that pushes will be less spinny or with a bit different technique (a bit bigger stroke maybe to pass it over the increased net height) . This also affects the recovery of a player after a short push/flick to quickly get into ready position for the next ball. I dont know all this is pure theory, If i find a willing partner and have a camera I will try it out

Cheers

 

[pgpg]

My somewhat pessimistic opinion is that rule changes are not going to do anything significant to TT popularity, especially as a TV sport. Main challenges are low participation base (why watch something you don't understand and appreciate) and problems for both in-person and TV spectator (the ball and action area are too small, pace is too high, you can't see the damn thing from the stands and angles on TV are not too great either).

So, tweaks to net height, ball size, serve rules etc. won't make a huge difference, I think. Getting more people to play, both juniors and adults, might help. As an anecdotal evidence - I was snickering at golf TV broadcasts for quite some time ('like watching grass grow or paint dry!'), until I picked up clubs and played few rounds myself. Suddenly it became a captivating show - because you realize that these guys are really good, to put it mildly, and yet there is drama lurking on every hole.

 

[Suga D]

The idea that I am doing stuff like Archos used to is flat out rude and insulting. You can talk around it however you want to but you can't be serious.

So to fully understand my rudeness:

It's totally appropriate for you to call out Arch, that his playing level isn't high enough to comprehend what is written, but when i tell the same thing to you, it's RUDE??

Alrighty then...

 

[NextLevel]

So to fully understand my rudeness:

It's totally appropriate for you to call out Arch, that his playing level isn't high enough to comprehend what is written, but when i tell the same thing to you, it's RUDE??

Alrighty then...

So you think that I get on archo because of his playing level? You have an interesting way of reading me.

I get on archo because he talks about things he has never experienced as if he is a strong authority on them without ever demonstrating relevant expertise. In fact, if archo had always posted video of his level, rather than pretending to know a lot about the sport while never having any relevant experience, it would have made no difference to me what his level was. The problem was that he always felt comfortable criticizing players at a higher level than himself without showing anything about his level of play.

Everyone knows how I play. I provided my opinion. It is okay to say that my opinion is wrong and I am not at the level to appreciate your argument.

But to say that I am doing anything like what archo did is something that you still fail to see what the issue is. I will give up on explaining it to you because you think that I am trying to say that archo is too low rated - no, I am saying that archo was often dishonest. If you can't see the difference that is okay.

 

[Archosaurus]

What the hell is even going on here?

Suga D, thank you for the defense, but NL is right. Read his last post and his reasoning is spelled out there clearly.