World Table Tennis Championships 2019

[NextLevel]

What dont you get about a requirement for the player to serve legally in a manner that the umpire can clearly tell serve was legal?

Just about all of us formers wanted umpires to call borderline serves as faults... now we got umpires doing that and now we suddenly do not like it? Now it is killing the game?

How about a pro not serving illegal or borderline?

That isnt too difficult. They had over a decade to adjust.

Problem is umpires never had courage or desire to call serves by the rules... and players adjusted by serving illegally until it was too obvious.



Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

This is the plain truth but unfortunately it is hard to accept the truth when admitting to it will make you a liar.

 

[ttmonster]

Well you guys know my opinion is slightly different, the rule as it stands today is not enforceable with the number of umpires we have and their positioning on the court ... you need umpires standing behind the receiver to even guess properly if really a serve is hidden or not ... you cannot do it sitting on the side of the table ...

This is the plain truth but unfortunately it is hard to accept the truth when admitting to it will make you a liar.

 

[NextLevel]

The biggest problem with serving in general IMO is that most players are trained to serve over their racket leg hip and when you are side on, this point is behind the body. This is especially true for the pendulum serves and the reverse. So if you do not start your toss directly over where you intend to hit the ball, you serve is 99% likely going to be illegal. The tossing from another point back into the body and even the contact point almost always makes serves hidden. But people sometimes think making s serves legal will give the returners too much of an advantage. So this weird war continue between pushing boundaries and doing the right thing and the loser are all of us in playing a sport where unsportsmanlike ethics in following some rules conflicts with winning. All because umps are unwilling to fault supposedly borderline serves.

 

[NextLevel]

Well you guys know my opinion is slightly different, the rule as it stands today is not enforceable with the number of umpires we have and their positioning on the court ... you need umpires standing behind the receiver to even guess properly if really a serve is hidden or not ... you cannot do it sitting on the side of the table ...

This is only true if you believe borderline serving should be permitted. If you think that, then that is the problem. If you accept that borderline serving should not be permitted, issues with enforcement entirely vanish. Let me know how I am wrong. The rules are very clear.

 

[zeio]

Yeah agree Koki seems to be decent lately and Dyjas lost Polish Championships like a moth ago (didn't win). Koki seems to be the favorite for me and this is not just courtesy ...

Just like Lin Yun-Ju 3-4 Gionis and others, upset is the norm here at the WTTC.

 

[jawien]

The rules changed a decade plus ago and were very clear. Pro Players know what a legal serve is.

Rules were not the problem... one of the few rules changes ittf got right.

Problem is commitment to enforcement.

Collectively, umpires have been very weak willed to enforce... that is also a sign of weak leadership... that means the referee was not emphasizing and supervising... also means ittf was just as bad.

If I am in charge of an event as a referee, I would make damned sure my umpires had the ability and will to enforce... I would supervise and remove umpires not doing their job...

But let's get real... what kind of pay does an umpire make to be responsible for a professional job? What would referee do when too many umpires fail to properly call faults? Fire them and delay schedules? Overwork existing ones? Not pay them too?

Root cause of serve problems is not the rule.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

Ahh beg to differ Der ... the rule is unclear, it's more of an idea then a rule. "Enforcing" it in it's purest form would be imho a revolution for many players in terms of their style and tactics ... and the community wasn't simply ready. Rules are for people not the other way around ...

If there where trainings with pro players explaining the interpretation .. there are only a number of different serves, so everybody can be walked through those interpretations. Leaving the problem to "strict" judges does not solve it, because we are operating on the live body.

 

[NextLevel]

Ahh beg to differ Der ... the rule is unclear, it's more of an idea then a rule. "Enforcing" it in it's purest form would be imho a revolution for many players in terms of their style and tactics ... and the community wasn't simply ready. Rules are for people not the other way around ...

If there where trainings with pro players explaining the interpretation .. there are only a number of different serves, so everybody can be walked through those interpretations. Leaving the problem to "strict" judges does not solve it, because we are operating on the live body.

It is very easy to tell whether the ball is in front of the body or whether the racket hip is completely exposed with virtually no obstructions. That is why Samsonov's pendulum is so obviously legal (he also has the usual semi legal one that he used to hide and isn't always clear, but his famous high toss one is in front of the body).

Most serves are obviously illegal or borderline. The question is whether you want to maintain tradition and keep many borderline serves based on the idea that the receiver may be able to see the contact or you want to fault the serve if it isn't blatantly legal. This is where we differ. People should fault serves that aren't blatantly legal.

 

[ttmonster]

I know and understand what you are saying, but then people will start fighting about what is borderline and how to deal with borderline .. you cannot have perception based rulings ..

This is only true if you believe borderline serving should be permitted. If you think that, then that is the problem. If you accept that borderline serving should not be permitted, issues with enforcement entirely vanish. Let me know how I am wrong. The rules are very clear.

 

[jawien]

It is very easy to tell whether the ball is in front of the body or whether the racket hip is completely exposed with virtually no obstructions. That is why Samsonov's pendulum is so obviously legal (he also has the usual semi legal one that he used to hide and isn't always clear, but his famous high toss one is in front of the body).

Most serves are obviously illegal or borderline. The question is whether you want to maintain tradition and keep many borderline serves based on the idea that the receiver may be able to see the contact or you want to fault the serve if it isn't blatantly legal. This is where we differ. People should fault serves that aren't blatantly legal.

The law giver in this case didn't give a proper interpretation, but left it to "people" ... meaning umpires, and it was too much for them, it would be for anybody.

 

[GusShnaps]

Wow Tomorrow's games are Mini finals Sun Yingsha and Mima Ito . We will like it . Also Harimoto vs Freitas . Can Freitas bring up the first upset ??

Now those are some matches to watch.

 

[NextLevel]

I know and understand what you are saying, but then people will start fighting about what is borderline and how to deal with borderline .. you cannot have perception based rulings ..

No, not at all. The problem is that when the law is not enforced, it is like having a speed limit that no one is arrested for. It isn't about the law, it is about the willingness to enforce it. The thing is that we can pretend that the law is about visbility to the server but there are many components of the law, visibility to the server is just one. The main issue is whether you want to serve legally or get an advantage doing other things. I have not see a single umpire tell me that they couldn't tell whether a serve may have had issues or not. What they say is that if it is borderline, they are willing to let it go. Which is exactly what the rule dissuades.

There are other ways of writing the rule that would remove this but I suspect they wouldn't change much. The umps like the leeway and like the ability they have to hide behind it, but make no mistake, it is quite possible to call borderline serves. And many illegal serves are not borderline.

 

[NextLevel]

The law giver in this case didn't give a proper interpretation, but left it to "people" ... meaning umpires, and it was too much for them, it would be for anybody.

Interpretation is a given with any law. The law specifies the parameters. The point about borderline was supposed to be simply this - supposed in real time, you cannot tell the difference between a 5.5 inch serve and a 6.5 inch serve, then you should be allowed to say that it doesn't matter, your toss should really be closer to 8 inches so we can avoid this crap. And if it isn't don't blame me. If the umpire doesn't like your exact 6 inc toss, then fix it. Stop trying to get away with 5.5 inch tosses! This can be applied to every aspect of serving and if it were, we would not have the crap arguments we have today.

 

[jawien]

No, not at all. The problem is that when the law is not enforced, it is like having a speed limit that no one is arrested for. It isn't about the law, it is about the willingness to enforce it. The thing is that we can pretend that the law is about visbility to the server but there are many components of the law, visibility to the server is just one. The main issue is whether you want to serve legally or get an advantage doing other things. I have not see a single umpire tell me that they couldn't tell whether a serve may have had issues or not. What they say is that if it is borderline, they are willing to let it go. Which is exactly what the rule dissuades.

There are other ways of writing the rule that would remove this but I suspect they wouldn't change much. The umps like the leeway and like the ability they have to hide behind it, but make no mistake, it is quite possible to call borderline serves. And many illegal serves are not borderline.

But NextLevel ... for fh serves, everybody pretty much would have toh use the Samsonov style and this is not doable ...

 

[NextLevel]

Quadri wanted to give me a heart attack today. And winning the match with a dead push was just a copout. But a win is win, getting as far as you can get and earning the right to lose to Fan Zhendong is just about as good as it gets.

 

[Zaid323918]

But NextLevel ... for fh serves, everybody pretty much would have toh use the Samsonov style and this is not doable ...

why not?

 

[jawien]

why not?

Because this is a Samsonov style ... we have diversity in tt, why uniform everything ...?

 

[NextLevel]

why not?

Jawien is a professional devil's advocate. Do realize this before you get too deep.

 

[jawien]

Jawien is a professional devil's advocate. Do realize this before you get too deep.

Not true, need to leave you guys. Let's leave the discussion for another thread maybe, and not spoil the WTTC thread ...
See you guys tomorrow.

 

[NextLevel]

Because this is a Samsonov style ... we have diversity in tt, why uniform everything ...?

This is just weird. So because everyone is trying to loop, there is no diversity in TT? Because everyone is doing pendulum or backhand serve there is no diversity in TT? The rule is one way to make.it obvious you are not obstructing the serve with your body. There are other. But like you said, let us get back to WTTC. Quadri made it to the round of 32. He has done well!

 

[NextLevel]

Am the only one surprised that Harimoto is probably the only person under the age of 20 still left in the draw?