Is ma long the GOAT ?

[RidTheKid]

No problem Carl, I'm watching it now, at work I was always curious what WH said to ML after the match, as it seemed they weren't really best of friends. Zeio was very helpful and pointed out that WH asked ML if he was injured.

I’m not asking for an apology and I understood why you said what you said. I also understand why I said what I said. And my comment has to do with how you try to attack and smother anyone who presents any opinion other than your own. But I am okay with our interaction.

If you simply watch the 2013 match closely, it will be much easier for me to give time stamps and explain what I see. When I do, you can disagree. But, if you do, it would be nice if there is some reasoning behind it that has to do with what you see in the video. Rather than what WH said after the match.

BTW: I also heard that after the match WH said to ML something like: “you played well. You can hold your head high.” That is my memory from right after the match though.

 

[UpSideDownCarl]

No problem Carl, I'm watching it now, at work I was always curious what WH said to ML after the match, as it seemed they weren't really best of friends. Zeio was very helpful and pointed out that WH asked ML if he was injured.

Cool. I just think, opinions not tied to actual play don’t make much sense since we already have so many pages of that. I also think it is fine for us to not agree on everything. Especially since, as far as I can tell, everyone you are doing battle with still agrees that ML can be considered best ever.

So let’s tie the more subtle points about how rule changes have changed things (reduction of spin) may have helped ML. And I also think NL is saying “may have” rather than DID. So it is worth respecting the nuances.

I believe, in 2011-2013 NL was most likely in the camp of thinking ML would some day be best ever. So I do think it is worth really trying to understand some of what he has actually said. Because I have seen a lot of blanket misrepresentations and arguments against things he didn’t actually say. (Just choosing one person whose presentations seemed to have been misinterpreted).

 

[RidTheKid]

Sure, but what ticked me off was that NL wrote the ball change being the one thing that brought Ma Long to greatness like an absolute truth. Nuances I can agree with.

Cool. I just think, opinions not tied to actual play don’t make much sense since we already have so many pages of that. I also think it is fine for us to not agree on everything. Especially since, as far as I can tell, everyone you are doing battle with still agrees that ML can be considered best ever.

So let’s tie the more subtle points about how rule changes have changed things (reduction of spin) may have helped ML. And I also think NL is saying “may have” rather than DID. So it is worth respecting the nuances.

I believe, in 2011-2013 NL was most likely in the camp of thinking ML would some day be best ever. So I do think it is worth really trying to understand some of what he has actually said. Because I have seen a lot of blanket misrepresentations and arguments against things he didn’t actually say.

 

[NextLevel]

Sure, but what ticked me off was that NL wrote the ball change being the one thing that brought Ma Long to greatness like an absolute truth. Nuances I can agree with.

I never said that. You may have interpreted me as saying that but I never said that. I am the same person who felt that Ma Long was the greatest ever before he ever even won a WTTC, as crazy as that sounds (Carl say on the path, but I think results matter and bronze is a result, and I devalued the Olympics with the 2 per country restriction). I just find amusing your attitude when someone says something that doesn't worship Ma Long.

I do think the plastic ball accentuated Ma Long's general rallying gifts. Backhand opener and rally was much harder before the plastic ball.

 

[UpSideDownCarl]

Sure, but what ticked me off was that NL wrote the ball change being the one thing that brought Ma Long to greatness like an absolute truth. Nuances I can agree with.

I never said that. You may have interpreted me as saying that but I never said that. I am the same person who felt that Ma Long was the greatest ever before he ever even won a WTTC, as crazy as that sounds (Carl say on the oath, but I think results matter and bronze is a result, and I devalued the Olympics with the 2 per country restriction). I just find amusing your attitude when someone says something that doesn't worship Ma Long.

I do think the plastic ball accentuated Ma Long's general rallying gifts. Backhand opener and rally was much harder before the plastic ball.

And this right here is all that drew me into this.

Maybe it is that I have known NL for long enough to know that even when those losses happened it seemed to me he felt ML would ultimately go down as the best ever. Maybe that is why I get the subtlety that he is not saying the ball DID make ML better. But he is saying that people could argue that it MAY have have helped ML.

But I have just seen you misread, misrepresent and attack too many on this thread who were making subtle comments about how things could be interpreted while still saying they felt ML was best.

And it is worth knowing how that sounds from an outside perspective.

 

[tropical]

I can't believe someone with a little intelligence doesn't understand the concept of voting to temporarily settle debate. The original post ML is the GOAT has a fallacy. The falacy is "greatest of all times" . With a little understanding one should know there is no such thing as greatest of all times so the debates on the OP will continue forever. But it doesn't mean because of the fallacy we should stop people searching for the GOAT of their favorite sport. Other sports have GOATs already. Wrong or not they do.

The definition of majority applies in such case. It doesn't mean majority always win or is correct, it only means for this stupid question let majority decide the outcome. Everyone here has his/her points but nobody is absolutely right. Some even thinks others do not understand their opinions while they actually don't understand the others. But the concept of voting is right in this case. Hope you guys get it. If not that is pathetic because others sports all have GOATS by voting. Many of these people with the intelligence are actually better than ours.

 

[yoass]

It makes no sense. Chewbacca defense! Hence, the GOAT of GOATs is born.

And then we can proceed to vote whether or not Pi equals three. As the Scripture implies! It must be so, and all naysayers are infidels to be rooted out.

 

[NextLevel]

I can't believe someone with a little intelligence doesn't understand the concept of voting to temporarily settle debate. The original post ML is the GOAT has a fallacy. The falacy is "greatest of all times" . With a little understanding one should know there is no such thing as greatest of all times so the debates on the OP will continue forever. But it doesn't mean because of the fallacy we should stop people searching for the GOAT of their favorite sport. Other sports have GOATs already. Wrong or not they do.

The definition of majority applies in such case. It doesn't mean majority always win or is correct, it only means for this stupid question let majority decide the outcome. Everyone here has his/her points but nobody is absolutely right. Some even thinks others do not understand their opinions while they actually don't understand the others. But the concept of voting is right in this case. Hope you guys get it. If not that is pathetic because others sports all have GOATS by voting. Many of these people with the intelligence are actually better than ours.

I don't think there is an inability to understand I think there is a clear disagreement. What post led you to believe that there is an inability to understand? Could you quote it?

 

[tropical]

I don't think there is an inability to understand I think there is a clear disagreement. What post led you to believe that there is an inability to understand? Could you quote it?

I was discussing the voting concept and someone here (perhaps from countries where voting is not allowed) are criticizing the majority concept. I think that is the inability to understand.

t makes no sense. Chewbacca defense! Hence, the GOAT of GOATs is born.

And then we can proceed to vote whether or not Pi equals three. As the Scripture implies! It must be so, and all naysayers are infidels to be rooted out.

Indeed dumb!

 

[yoass]

Assumptions, assumptions. Why not ask when not getting it?

(Well-versed in political philosophy, sorry. Been there, done that, got the Ph. D.; and that might just be why I get tempted to point out fallacies every now and then.)

Anyway, let’s rephrase. The statement ‘X is the GOAT’ is a well-formed sentence that happens to be a so-called proposition: a statement of fact.

The core property of a proposition is that it has a truth value. X is the GOAT, or X is not. True or false.

There are also opinions and positions, of course. That’s where decision processes might come in. A single person gets to make the call; consensus between a peer-elected group of domain experts decides; a majority of rich white males decides (classical democracy).

Opinions being like assholes, as the proverb goes, they bear no consequence whatsoever to veracity. However big the majority vote that it’s raining might be, the plants will wither nonetheless if it does not actually rain.

Deciding propositions pertaining to value judgements, then? Does that make sense? Well, no. It really doesn’t matter how many would vote that Dom Perignon is the TOAT (tastiest of all time), I’d still prefer my sip of Fundador, thank you.

And dance my little dance if knowledgeful despair. So it goes, Kurt would have said.

 

[tropical]

Assumptions, assumptions. Why not ask when not getting it?

(Well-versed in political philosophy, sorry. Been there, done that, got the Ph. D.; and that might just be why I get tempted to point out fallacies every now and then.)

Anyway, let’s rephrase. The statement ‘X is the GOAT’ is a well-formed sentence that happens to be a so-called proposition: a statement of fact.

The core property of a proposition is that it has a truth value. X is the GOAT, or X is not. True or false.

There are also opinions and positions, of course. That’s where decision processes might come in. A single person gets to make the call; consensus between a peer-elected group of domain experts decides; a majority of rich white males decides (classical democracy).

Opinions being like assholes, as the proverb goes, they bear no consequence whatsoever to veracity. However big the majority vote that it’s raining might be, the plants will wither nonetheless if it does not actually rain.

Deciding propositions pertaining to value judgements, then? Does that make sense? Well, no. It really doesn’t matter how many would vote that Dom Perignon is the TOAT (tastiest of all time), I’d still prefer my sip of Fundador, thank you.

And dance my little dance if knowledgeful despair. So it goes, Kurt would have said.

PhD? I've seen and worked with many PhD's in my life/career and I have proven them wrong so many times.

Anyway, let’s rephrase. The statement ‘X is the GOAT’ is a well-formed sentence that happens to be a so-called proposition: a statement of fact.

It is not a "statement of fact". It was phrased like this "IS ML the GOAT?" It is a question. Now twist it any way you like PhD.

Pi equals 3 is a statement. You used it in your argument to prove majority wrong is pathetic. Some statements are easily seen to be not worth to vote. In this question for debate it is worth it to vote to settle even majority may be wrong (I said may be) or right.

Of all the GOAT's chosen by majority in listed sports, there are no GOAT's without criticism. But to criticize voting is wrong to find GOATs in these sports means this PhD has a huge problem in ability to understand why people did it.

 

[yoass]

Ah. Back to Chewbacca it is. With an extra slice of Ad Hominem.

 

[RidTheKid]

Carl, if you choose to put time into reading this long thread you'll see that people focus on finding points that will show that Ma Long is not the GOAT, like the losses in WTTC to WH. Me on the other hand choose to see Ma Long as a developing player who has improved every area of his game, especially his once shaky bh and mental game. I account those developments to hard training and change of bh rubber while others see Ma Longs greatness because he faces no quality opposition and change in balls. Short version: Ma Long has no real contenders since WH quit so he can never be the GOAT. I as a long time TT guy find that stupid since every player has someone they have more difficulties to play against.

And this right here is all that drew me into this.

Maybe it is that I have known NL for long enough to know that even when those losses happened it seemed to me he felt ML would ultimately go down as the best ever. Maybe that is why I get the subtlety that he is not saying the ball DID make ML better. But he is saying that people could argue that it MAY have have helped ML.

But I have just seen you misread, misrepresent and attack too many on this thread who were making subtle comments about how things could be interpreted while still saying they felt ML was best.

And it is worth knowing how that sounds from an outside perspective.

 

[RidTheKid]

I've re-watched the 2013 WTTC match between WH and ML, and the first thing that strikes me again is how poor ML's footwork was the first 3 sets. In the 4th and 5th set the rallies became longer and he could implement some dominance, but in the last set he seemed to practically give up, not like him we who've watched endless matches with him. ML looks like a shadow of himself. He didn't really seem to play with a purpose.

 

[UpSideDownCarl]

I've re-watched the 2013 WTTC match between WH and ML, and the first thing that strikes me again is how poor ML's footwork was the first 3 sets. In the 4th and 5th set the rallies became longer and he could implement some dominance, but in the last set he seemed to practically give up, not like him we who've watched endless matches with him. ML looks like a shadow of himself. He didn't really seem to play with a purpose.

What was WH’s serve placement? Push placement? Did ML seem to push some balls he would normally attack? Did ML try to attack any where he messed up? Did ML pop any balls up? Net any balls?

Did you notice any changes in WH’s tactics in games 4 and 5?

Do you see how you misunderstood what NL has been saying?

 

[NextLevel]

Carl, if you choose to put time into reading this long thread you'll see that people focus on finding points that will show that Ma Long is not the GOAT, like the losses in WTTC to WH. Me on the other hand choose to see Ma Long as a developing player who has improved every area of his game, especially his once shaky bh and mental game. I account those developments to hard training and change of bh rubber while others see Ma Longs greatness because he faces no quality opposition and change in balls. Short version: Ma Long has no real contenders since WH quit so he can never be the GOAT. I as a long time TT guy find that stupid since every player has someone they have more difficulties to play against.

So when you look at the semi-finalists and finalists and their level of experience and titles (I think Raineverever had a list) as well as the reduction in the competitiveness of the fields by the ITTF, you think the only point people are making is that Ma Long lost to Wang Hao? Or that Ma Long's period of dominance is coming against weaker fields? You think that ZJK 2011 or 2013 wins had weaker fields than any of ML's wins?

 

[NextLevel]

What was WH’s serve placement? Push placement? Did ML seem to push some balls he would normally attack? Did ML try to attack any where he messed up? Did ML pop any balls up? Net any balls?

Did you notice any changes in WH’s tactics in games 4 and 5?

Do you see how you misunderstood what NL has been saying?

A good Chiquita would have cut a lot of that crap out. My opinion. RTK doesn't have to accept it.

 

[tropical]

Ah. Back to Chewbacca it is.

No you are.

 

[ttmonster]

I really don't care what you think, now do I I know my level and it's extremely good for such little time I've put into it.

little time ... very trumpian and kind of sums up your approach and responses in this whole thread ...

Carl, if you choose to put time into reading this long thread you'll see that people focus on finding points that will show that Ma Long is not the GOAT, like the losses in WTTC to WH. Me on the other hand choose to see Ma Long as a developing player who has improved every area of his game, especially his once shaky bh and mental game. I account those developments to hard training and change of bh rubber while others see Ma Longs greatness because he faces no quality opposition and change in balls. Short version: Ma Long has no real contenders since WH quit so he can never be the GOAT. I as a long time TT guy find that stupid since every player has someone they have more difficulties to play against.

long time ... contradiction any body ... ?

 

[Luke James]

Hi everyone,

I've seen this match live and rewatched it a few times.

What if both RTK and Carl were right ?

It's clear that WH indeed caused ML a lot of troubles with his short game and tactics.
But ML didn't react like he normally does.
As soon as he started to loose, he was down. Facing WH, his short game and tactics again at this stage of the WTTC was too much for him to handle psychologically.
Had he Jike's ability to perform under pressure, we would've seen a better fight. Maybe would have he lost still but the match would've looked different.

I've seen him perform live at 2013, 2017 and 2019 WTTC. His attitude in this match against WH was terribly negative and totally different compared to his matches at 2017 and 2019 WTTC where he was always ultra focused and pumped up.