European Players & Tacky Rubbers

[berndtjgmann]

Boosters, foul serves.
Rubbers ineffectual.
Sport mocking itself.

 

[UpSideDownCarl]

Make no mistake. This is what the guy is talking about as "shakespearian swordplay":

And this is what he was referring to when he said, "Titanical iceberg of inconsonant serial solipsism."

And I said it was funny because getting mad as NextLevel did is what actually makes this guy happy. But he isn't worth arguing with when you can laugh at him instead.

 

[zeio]

To get this thread back on track.

Just as Berndt is hardbat-ridden, or as Jiang Jialiang is pips-ridden, European players in general are burdened by the '90s way of thinking.

Even if they start using H3 on their forehand today, it still won't change a thing unless they overhaul their approach to table tennis. Not just growing up playing with H3, but also the forehand-oriented mindset, which dictates how you act and react in a match. You can't wield the H3 using the dated '90s mindset and hope for the best.

 

[NextLevel]

And I said it was funny because getting mad as NextLevel did is what actually makes this guy happy. But he isn't worth arguing with when you can laugh at him instead.

Yeah. Usually, I ignored him at mytt. But I know he will inevitably get banned here as well. I guess people do different things for fun and trolling is unfortunately one of them.

 

[jawien]

I'll try to repeat it again : ) - comments and discussion about hardbats here basically hijacks the thread - I agree.

jawien, you are actually not getting what is going on.

It is true - it's just so funny how much confusion is going on here for me ... ha ha : )

But make no mistake, NextLevel is correct that he is looking for some naive modern TT player to blind side with nonsense.

Yes of course, I am naive here, in a sense that I too like the idea about today's "Game of Ping Pong". Same equipment, not so much physicality involved ... anyway different topic.

But if you don't realize he is trolling with that comment he made to NextLevel, then I don't know what to say to you.

I mean I don't know your history guys, but question (isolated) sounded legit ... of course little unfortunate in a sense that it hijacks the thread basically.

Jawein, the black plague of sponge....
"....as graceful and deadly as Shakespearian swordplay...."

Of course I get all of this and I watched the 1949 final really enjoying it ... "famous Barna's bh flick" ... ; )

And trying to get people to react to him saying, basically, modern TT sucks and you guys should all realize how much better hardbat was back in its glory days

Again, I don't know your history and previous discussions ... : ) but it is perfectly fine with me if someone says "modern TT sucks". It is B's opinion (probably should be expressed nicer) and he can say it. How "the game" can be insulted? : ) If Berndtjgmann wants to discuss the superiority of Barna's famous bh flick over ML insane fh quality ... I'm all for it. Just - you are completely right - not here.

Yeah. Usually, I ignored him at mytt. But I know he will inevitably get banned here as well. I guess people do different things for fun and trolling is unfortunately one of them.

NextLevel, no need to get upset. I just asked a question : ) I didn't know, you had previous discussions and it is such a touchy subject here : )

Boosters, foul serves.
Rubbers ineffectual.

Still just his opinion. Berndtjgmann refers to objective facts. Maybe remark about rubbers is little funny.

Sport mocking itself.

Yeah ... a little "over the top" ... not nice ...
; )


Note. I had too much time lately. Need to go back to posing one comment per day schedule ; )

 

[jawien]

To get this thread back on track.
Even if they start using H3 on their forehand today, it still won't change a thing unless they overhaul their approach to table tennis. Not just growing up playing with H3, but also the forehand-oriented mindset, which dictates how you act and react in a match. You can't wield the H3 using the dated '90s mindset and hope for the best.

Ok going back to the topic. What do you think about Simon Gauzy's comment than?

https://www.tabletennisdaily.com/podcast/11994-tabletennisdaily-podcast-5-simon-gauzy/
15:50 - 17:10

 

[NextLevel]

Ok going back to the topic. What do you think about Simon Gauzy's comment than?

https://www.tabletennisdaily.com/podcast/11994-tabletennisdaily-podcast-5-simon-gauzy/
15:50 - 17:10

It's a comment made by someone who hasn't played a full match with the supposedly better equipment. Freitas, Dima and Boll have said similar things. Only Dima seriously tried it for a short period. Remember what happened?

The biggest separator of China is the effort their players are willing to use to introduce the forehand. Their backhand play has become more physical as well but more to pick on and limit the opponents options as well as gain an early advantage in the point.

I am not entirely sold on zeio claiming that the European philosophy is stuck in the 90s. I just think there is a vast disparity training and talent investment/incentives. But that said you need the ability to move and play powerful forehand repeatedly to play with Chinese rubber. Dima had the power but lacked the movement.

 

[UpSideDownCarl]

First off, Next Level, table tennis is not exclusively your sport. Since the establishment of the International Table Tennis Federation in 1926, organized national and international table tennis has been the ITTF’s sport.


Let me ask you this. What is it that you can claim or say about “your sport”, that is table tennis as presently played, that might persuade anyone unfamiliar with it to invest the time and the money to become sufficiently proficient at playing, given the bewildering myriads of choices of equipment a prospective novice might choose and have to contend with that would make “your sport” sufficiently atrtractive to take up?

Well if I understand it correctly Berndtjgmann was simply asking what is so appealing of today's game as compared to the Victor Barna's epoch - quite innocent dilemma - seem to me. A matter of taste I would say ...

Sure ... maybe it is slightly off the topic ...

I mean I don't know your history guys, but question (isolated) sounded legit ... of course little unfortunate in a sense that it hijacks the thread basically.

Perhaps you are just trying to save face and I should simply let this go and let the thread go back to the intended subject matter.

But I fear, instead you are also being hard headed.

If you were a musician and, say, you played Jazz guitar, and some old timer told you: [because burnt-man wasn’t really asking]: “how could you like that crap when Vivaldi’s Four Seasons exists!” [Yes, hopefully you can see that not everybody loves Vivaldi’s Four Seasons].

First off, the premise of berndtjgmann’s question is that WE NEED a reason to like modern table tennis. We don’t. If you like it, that is enough. If you like something and someone is asking you: “why on earth would you like that, when you could like this instead,” they are not asking you a question. They are mocking you.

Second, berndtjgmann is presenting the idea that too many equipment choices are a problem. They aren’t. And when you understand equipment, there really aren’t so many choices as burnt-mann makes out. All, All+/Off-, Off, Off+, Defensive & Hybrid. Smooth, pimples, antispin. A moderate variety of surface playing options adds to the variety of play styles that can be successful. I would say this adds to the sport rather than how berndtjgmann is presenting that it is a problem.

The third thing is, in his trolling, there is this implicit idea that you can like hardbat OR you can like Modern Table Tennis but you can’t really like both. You have to choose. This is not true. The slower pace of the old timer hardbat leads to a totally different kind of chess match. And there doesn’t need to be a choice between the two.

However, if I was going to make the choice, it would definitely be modern TT. And here is why for me:

I love to spin the hell out of the ball. I love to make topspin loops that arc and kick so hard that my opponent hits the return 4 feet over the table. I love the feeling of the ball on the topsheet and sponge when you can feel the topsheet and sponge distort and compress while you are making tangential contact. I love how it feels when the topsheet really grabs the ball hard. I love when I do a sidespin hook shot, that I can aim the ball wide of the table and have it curve around the net and land four feet to the left or right of its original trajectory. I love that I can aim a hook shot at my opponent’s BH and have it curve so much that it ends up exiting the FH side of the table before the end line. I love what I can do with spin to get the magnus effect to warp the flight of the ball.

You cannot do any of that with hardbat. And while I can admire that hardbat requires totally different skills than modern TT and I am fine with berndtjgmann enjoying hardbat, when it really comes down to it, if he is saying we have to choose between what we like and what berndtjgmann likes, I CHOOSE MODERN TABLE TENNIS every time.

Jawein, you also should know that what berndtjgmann is doing is a learned behavior that is practiced and exhibited by MANY MANY hardbat ZEALOTS.

It was learned and modeled from some of Marty Reisman’s less likable antisocial behavior.

You see, in 1952 Marty was favored to win the WTTC. It would have been HIS YEAR. And in 1952 sponge was introduced. Marty not only lost, but got wiped out and totally embarrassed in an early round. And with the introduction of sponge, Marty was never able to REALLY compete at the top level again.

So for the rest of his life, Marty went around talking about how, without the cheating-sponge that these guys used, none of them would stand a chance against him. It was jealousy and vitriol of the highest order.

Now to me, seeing Marty come to a club in the 1990’s and take HUNDREDS of dollars from the club players who all wanted to bet they could beat him after he hurled all his insults at them about hardbat being for real men and sponge being a game for cheaters....well, there was something entertaining about it. But make no mistake, it was slimy and mean.

And berndtjgmann is really trying to keep that hardbat tradition of insulting modern TT players alive. And the question he asked NextLevel was not a question. It was an insult.

You can pretend it was something else. But it wasn’t.


Sent from The Subterranean Workshop by Telepathy

 

[jawien]

It's a comment made by someone who hasn't played a full match [...]

Dima used it for bh right?

Sure technique is a different world. Simon said it himself: "I'm not sure if we would be able to play with it".
It's just it shows that also top pro like Simon feels it is a Formula 1 situation. Well ... he played a full match with the opponent with "a better equipment", it is also a experience that should not be discounted easily.
Of course it would be rather naive and silly to blame China.

Not sure about the philosophy, but I would say it must be thought over, since we get beaten regularly. Game needs to be developed.

 

[NDH]

I've just listened to the Gauzy piece on the "magical" Chinese rubber...... I have to say, I don't really agree with him.

For starters, he goes from saying "it's better, and we don't have access to it"..... To saying "even if we did have access to it, we might not be able to use it".

That's the big thing for me - It works for the Chinese due to their footwork and technique (which has been discussed in great depth).

If the Europeans trained like the Chinese.... the conversation would be different.

If you gave all of the Europeans this magical Chinese H3..... They would not become better players - If anything, due to technique, they would become worse.

 

[jawien]

Perhaps you are just trying to save face and I should simply let this go and let the thread go back to the intended subject matter. [...]

I'll let go the face thing : )

Carl are you seriuos?! This is a fantastic piece of table tennis history you wrote about, Marty Reisman situation. Never knew it was such a hostility and war between "hardbats and sponges" ...

Would you hate me, if I created a thread like "Shakespearians vs solipsists" ...? ; ) Such an interesting topic. Although I don't know if I will have time for this due to my other obligations.

 

[UpSideDownCarl]

I've just listened to the Gauzy piece on the "magical" Chinese rubber...... I have to say, I don't really agree with him.

For starters, he goes from saying "it's better, and we don't have access to it"..... To saying "even if we did have access to it, we might not be able to use it".

That's the big thing for me - It works for the Chinese due to their footwork and technique (which has been discussed in great depth).

If the Europeans trained like the Chinese.... the conversation would be different.

If you gave all of the Europeans this magical Chinese H3..... They would not become better players - If anything, due to technique, they would become worse.

Yep. It gives a lot of control when you swing harder and allows you to swing a lot harder. But, when you don't swing as hard, it punishes that. If you are not well positioned, it punishes that. If your technique is not very good, it punishes that.

So the secret to the CNT play quality is hours and hours and hours and hours of training. And a philosophy of hitting the ball very hard while spinning the ball. And then this rubber that lets you hit the ball very hard while maintaining control, starts helping. Since the CNT players are systematically trained from a very young age, the advantage starts from there.

The advantages and disadvantages of H3 vs T05 can be encapsulated in the differences between topsheet spin and mechanical spin.

With H3, you get your spin and your speed largely from your own force and input. Technique with T05 or other rubbers like it, you get much more from touch, feeling, how you touch the ball, contacting the ball in such a way that the ball sinks in, distorts the topsheet while it compresses the sponge, and holding the ball on the topsheet for long enough so that the topsheet and sponge rebound while the ball is still being grabbed by the topsheet.

If you swing too hard while doing what I just described about mechanical spin, you lose control and you will not get as much power from the equipment. A swing that is too hard for T05 is about the minimum force needed to get the good stuff out of H3.

Totally different techniques. Totally different advantages and disadvantages.

But the biggest issue is that, by the age of 12, the guys who will be the top CNT players have had 100s of 1000s of hours more DISCIPLINED training than the guys who will become the top players in most other countries.

And, no, Dima did not put H3 on his BH.

 

[NDH]

Yep. It gives a lot of control when you swing harder and allows you to swing a lot harder. But, when you don't swing as hard, it punishes that. If you are not well positioned, it punishes that. If your technique is not very good, it punishes that.

So the secret to the CNT play quality is hours and hours and hours and hours of training. And a philosophy of hitting the ball very hard while spinning the ball. And then this rubber that lets you hit the ball very hard while maintaining control, starts helping. Since the CNT players are systematically trained from a very young age, the advantage starts from there.

The advantages and disadvantages of H3 vs T05 can be encapsulated in the differences between topsheet spin and mechanical spin.

With H3, you get your spin and your speed largely from your own force and input. Technique with T05 or other rubbers like it, you get much more from touch, feeling, how you touch the ball, contacting the ball in such a way that the ball sinks in, distorts the topsheet while it compresses the sponge, and holding the ball on the topsheet for long enough so that the topsheet and sponge rebound while the ball is still being grabbed by the topsheet.

If you swing too hard while doing what I just described about mechanical spin, you lose control and you will not get as much power from the equipment. A swing that is too hard for T05 is about the minimum force needed to get the good stuff out of H3.

Totally different techniques. Totally different advantages and disadvantages.

But the biggest issue is that, by the age of 12, the guys who will be the top CNT players have had 100s of 1000s of hours more DISCIPLINED training than the guys who will become the top players in most other countries.

And, no, Dima did not put H3 on his BH.

Ding ding ding (not Ning..... but the sound of someone nailing it).

This is everything anyone needs to know - If someone ever asks about H3 better than Euro/Jap rubbers, just copy and paste that.

It's very misleading to have Pro players say that the Chinese H3 is "better" than what they have access to - Which implies that part of the Chinese dominance is down to equipment no one else can use.

It's not.......

 

[zeio]

NextLevel more or less answered the question. I'd just add that, even if they can't get the "real" real deal, the least they could do is try out the provincial H3, to see for themselves how it plays and why the Chinese play that way.

To address NextLevel's concern over my claim, it actually didn't come from me but real experts. Below is an excerpt from a news article right after the WTTC 2017 about the new European Branch of Chinese Table Tennis Institute in Luxembourg. The gist is that compared to China, the technical ideologies of many European coaches are dated, quite a number of them are even stuck in the '90s. The ETTU now sends along the coaches from every association. While the kids train, the coaches learn as well. After the day session, a night session for coaches is held, to let them in on the latest and greatest developement in table tennis. The aim is to get them to change their comprehension of table tennis, and to implement the new stuff in daily training.

夏澄说：“和国内相比，欧洲很多乒乓球教练的技术思想比较落后，不少人甚至停留在上世纪90年代的水平，现在每次集训时欧洲乒联都会指定各协会派遣教练员一同来参加。孩子训练时，教练也在学习，白天训练完了，晚上还设有专门针对教练员的课程，主要内容是对乒乓球运动最新发展的理解，目的就是改变这些教练员对乒乓球的认识，然后回国后能将这些最新的东西运用到日常训练中。”

http://wenhui.news365.com.cn/html/2017-06/06/content_561579.html

That's not the first time it's said. Cai Zhenhua mentioned the reluctance of European coaches to change in 2011. China wants to help Europe, but they have to extend their hands. Just like how Europe did it in the '80s, by undergoing technical innovation and taking a page from Asia, ultimately reaching a higher height than Asia.

　　“我希望乒乓球不仅是在中国和亚洲其他国家得到重视，希望欧洲传统的乒乓球国家能这个领域里有一个重新认识，就像八十年代欧洲通过技术改进、通过向亚洲学习，最后达到高于亚洲的层次。我们希望有这个局面，这样对乒乓球发展有利。”蔡振华说，“如果中国乒乓队继续包揽下去，改变规则和器材是必然的，这也是我说为什么中国教练要站在高度上看这个问题。”
……
　　不过，蔡振华紧接着就指出，“欧洲现在最大的问题不是我们不开放，而是他们的理念没有变化，从教练员的定位到训练、比赛的理念都没有变化，比赛中出现的问题他们只是从技术层面看，而不是全方位考虑。”蔡振华表示，“中国队想帮助他们，但是他们不一定懂，这是个棘手的问题，就像让一个大学教授去教小学生，想一时半会教出高材生也是不现实的。”

http://sports.sina.com.cn/o/2011-05-16/03115578388.shtml

In early 2009, Cai Zhenhua pointed out China fell behind in late 80s for the same reason, because their coaches, players and even the entire table tennis community were living in past glory. He added that psychological trauma is very difficult to recover, and once your confidence is hurt, it's very likely to fall behind and get beat.

　　蔡振华回顾说，上世纪八十年代初国乒大捷之后，在运动员、教练员、乃至乒乓球界中产生了骄傲自满的情绪。不求进步，管理松懈，训练理念开始落后，训练手段老化，战术越来越简单，比赛中缺少回旋能力，与欧洲人的对抗明显力不从心。蔡振华认为，技术问题可以通过勤学苦练解决，而心理阴影很难消除，一旦信心受挫，很可能陷入落后挨打的境地。

http://sports.sohu.com/20090228/n262515924.shtml

 

[jawien]

I would not just simply assume - more or less - that Simon does not know what he is talking about.

Perhaps he wanted to say something else, that European players do not have as much support as China players have.

Not only ML, FZD are better athletes but they also have all the industrial and scientific support resulting in development better rubbers that suit their playing style. There are voices, that during the speed glue era the battleground was much more leveled in this aspect.

So yes, Simon might be right while doubting how they can compete with China. "Fernando Alonso is not only a better driver, but has a faster car too" ...

 

[NDH]

I would not just simply assume - more or less - that Simon does not know what he is talking about.

Perhaps he wanted to say something else, that European players do not have as much support as China players have.

Not only ML, FZD are better athletes but they also have all the industrial and scientific support resulting in development better rubbers that suit their playing style. There are voices, that during the speed glue era the battleground was much more leveled in this aspect.

So yes, Simon is right while doubting how they can compete with China. "Fernando Alonso is not only a better driver, but has a faster car too" ...

The whole Formula 1 argument is irrelevant. If you want to continue with that train of thought, you should consider what he said "I'm not sure we would be able to use it anyway".

So to carry on with the pointless F1 analogy, that's like saying "Even if Alonso was in the Mercedes car, he wouldn't be able to drive it".

The last time I checked, being able to drive the car, was the number 1 requirement for F1.

F1 is so very different from TT, you can't compare.

All the Europeans could be better athletes if they wanted to. But as others have said, at the very early grass roots level, TT in Europe isn't as advanced, and therefore they are starting off behind the Chinese.

I'm not saying Simon doesn't know what he's talking about - But he does contradict himself to a degree in his comments, and I fundamentally disagree with his take on the equipment situation (but perhaps some of the point was lost in translation).

 

[OhWell]

To the point of the extreme gap in training budding competitive players in China vs elsewhere. In the documentary "Top Spin" (on Netflix, at least in the US), there is a nice segment about Michael Landers going to train in China for a few months. IMO it does a nice job of putting faces on this issue, and providing a concrete illustration of the ramifications of the different training regimens through other aspects of those kids' lives.

 

[jawien]

The whole Formula 1 argument is irrelevant. [...]

While staying with the "Formula 1" notion ...
Here is another testimony, this time from the World Champion (Chiba City 1991)

Starting 15:50 and about 5 minutes long.

https://www.tabletennisdaily.com/podcast/12411-tabletennisdaily-podcast-9-jorgen-persson/

PS. I don't have time now to summarize. I hope you'll listen, and have your reply.

 

[NDH]

While staying with the "Formula 1" notion ...
Here is another testimony, this time from the World Champion (Chiba City 1991)

Starting 15:50 and about 5 minutes long.

https://www.tabletennisdaily.com/podcast/12411-tabletennisdaily-podcast-9-jorgen-persson/

PS. I don't have time now to summarize. I hope you'll listen, and have your reply.

I listened - It's still a completely irrelevant analogy to make.

To summarise...... Persson is saying that "With Mercedes being the best team in F1..... They aren't going to tell the other teams what they are doing, and they will keep their advantage".

He's referring to the Chinese H3 which no one else can get.

He also says that the H3 they use is quicker than anything else? I'd be very surprised if that was the case (quicker than T64?? or another fast Tensor rubber?)

Anyway....... He misses the fundamental point that IT DOESN'T MATTER if the Europeans have access to it. They don't have the technique to use it properly anyway.

It's just an excuse at this point - 1 of many reasons as to why the Europeans claim they aren't as good as the Chinese.

I would love the Europeans to have access to it - At least then this argument would be put to bed, and they'd see that it's more than just the rubber - It's the technique, training, coaching, footwork - Everything else!

I'm repeating myself (and others) now, so if you still don't see it, I can't help anymore.

 

[OhWell]

but they also have all the industrial and scientific support resulting in development better rubbers that suit their playing style.

This is a straight up empirical question, and I'm not in a position to provide a serious answer. But I seriously doubt that China has the industrial and scientific edge when it comes to equipment. My semi-informed bet for that would be on Japan and Germany.

Aspects of this issue to think about:

- Socio-economic causes of pro players' equipment choices?

- Socio-economic causes of young, developing athletes' equipment choices?

- Socio-economic causes of the kind of products a given TT manufacturer researches and develops?

- Socio-economic causes of the allowed but not sanctioned status of booster within the ITTF?


On the first point:

- Suppose a pro player and their federation are largely funded by manufacturers like Butterfly. To the extent that the manufacturers that funds a player relies on expensive, high tech (tenergy/tensor/etc) rubbers for their profit margin, there will be that much more pressure for the player/their federation to favor using this rubber type.

On the third point:
- How much incentive does Butterfly have for developing products that only the most elite players would ever use, vs products that both the most elite players and the majority of amateur players can use? (Or why tenergy is a golden goose.)