Now you gotta wait until WCQ retiresIt will be interesting if service review is utilized. I have often said tongue-in-cheek that Hawkeye for service review would never be adopted until Ma Long retired lol.
Now you gotta wait until WCQ retiresIt will be interesting if service review is utilized. I have often said tongue-in-cheek that Hawkeye for service review would never be adopted until Ma Long retired lol.
Nah. I think WCQ will actually accelerate the desires, and it might actually be used against him in 2028 lol so Felix can win. Ma Long just became too big and clean to be stained.Now you gotta wait until WCQ retires
Not if the CNT has anything to say about itNah. I think WCQ will actually accelerate the desires, and it might actually be used against him in 2028 lol so Felix can win. Ma Long just became too big and clean to be stained.
The server still has a distinct advantage over a player doing chiquita, but it requires a change of mindset in serving. In the past the norm is to serve short and then attack the 3rd ball. Now that will simply get you killed because of the amount of sheer variation you can do on the short receive. That is why now you can see a lot of fast long serves and wide serving to keep receiver guessing. Chen Meng vs Miwa Harimoto - there were way more fast long and wide serves than short serves, many were direct winners.Not if the CNT has anything to say about it
Seriously though, I wonder if with the advances in BH flicks that if service rules are strictly enforced that services may be detrimental to the player at the highest level, like in say volleyball. After all, it's the only shot that needs to bounce twice. If that's the case, then it's possible that pros may simply try to serve to avoid being attacked, so everyone just serve really short backspin/nospin all the time kind of like in doubles.
Yeah, long serves are definitely useful for countering chiquitas, but as you mentioned, part of it is the variation in spin. If spin can be more easily read, would it be less effective as well at the very top level?The server still has a distinct advantage over a player doing chiquita, but it requires a change of mindset in serving. In the past the norm is to serve short and then attack the 3rd ball. Now that will simply get you killed because of the amount of sheer variation you can do on the short receive. That is why now you can see a lot of fast long serves and wide serving to keep receiver guessing. Chen Meng vs Miwa Harimoto - there were way more fast long and wide serves than short serves, many were direct winners.
Fast long serves these days are not just topspin, it's all the way from underspin to sideunderspin (both sidespin directions) to sidetopspin to no spin to topspin.
If someone chiquitas you can still counter the chiquita and enter a rally on equal terms.
A hawk's eye would already help a lot but why wait. Any self-respecting referee can see that irregular services are given and far more in men than in women. Just about all services where the player serves from the side of the table go wrong. The fact that almost only when the 16cm rule is thrown up, as with Dima, is almost laughable. So many others go wrong with other tricks that are much more detrimental to an opponent.It will be interesting if service review is utilized. I have often said tongue-in-cheek that Hawkeye for service review would never be adopted until Ma Long retired lol.
Mmmmm, I see more and more players now (among the men, anyway) returning a simple short serve. From their BH service to the middle (or to their opponent's FH) of the table without/with backward effect. (Seen the Lebrun brothers do this several times at the World Cup)The server still has a distinct advantage over a player doing chiquita, but it requires a change of mindset in serving. In the past the norm is to serve short and then attack the 3rd ball. Now that will simply get you killed because of the amount of sheer variation you can do on the short receive. That is why now you can see a lot of fast long serves and wide serving to keep receiver guessing. Chen Meng vs Miwa Harimoto - there were way more fast long and wide serves than short serves, many were direct winners.
Fast long serves these days are not just topspin, it's all the way from underspin to sideunderspin (both sidespin directions) to sidetopspin to no spin to topspin.
If someone chiquitas you can still counter the chiquita and enter a rally on equal terms.
If the receiver can read the serve perfectly every time, the server is indeed at a disadvantage for sure. But it is really not easy to read serves in TT....Yeah, long serves are definitely useful for countering chiquitas, but as you mentioned, part of it is the variation in spin. If spin can be more easily read, would it be less effective as well at the very top level?
Part of the problem with serve calls is that a protesting player can bring embarrassment to the sport over inconsistent officiating. What Hawkeye on serve faults does is take the call out of the subjective realm. In the match I watched where it was used, when the umpire called the fault, the player would complain. And then the video would show that the player (Ma Long or Liang Jingkun) was clearly serving behind his body to some degree, but because the aerve looked normal and was from Ma Long, people could pretend the machine wasn't working instead of accepting that Ma Long drops the ball behind his body most of the time. In the current situation, making the call just requires a brave umpire and it can be hard without a way of closing the conversation.A hawk's eye would already help a lot but why wait. Any self-respecting referee can see that irregular services are given and far more in men than in women. Just about all services where the player serves from the side of the table go wrong. The fact that almost only when the 16cm rule is thrown up, as with Dima, is almost laughable. So many others go wrong with other tricks that are much more detrimental to an opponent.
yeah, LYJ's pain came back too.Iseki is satisfied with the result and points out that LYJ could've done better against Felix but was very tired and that they had a chance against France if CCY won his match against Felix.
CCY will officially retire after Paris 2024.
「成績には満足。自信になりました。林昀儒は相当疲れていたね」(タイペイ・偉関監督)
https://world-tt.com/blog/news/archives/165882
莊智淵第6度前進奧運後將退休 曬萌兒「超有戲」表情
https://sports.ettoday.net/news/2691122
Some sports just don't want that though. Baseball is probably the most egregious, since the pitch zone is literally involved in every single pitch.Part of the problem with serve calls is that a protesting player can bring embarrassment to the sport over inconsistent officiating. What Hawkeye on serve faults does is take the call out of the subjective realm. In the match I watched where it was used, when the umpire called the fault, the player would complain. And then the video would show that the player (Ma Long or Liang Jingkun) was clearly serving behind his body to some degree, but because the aerve looked normal and was from Ma Long, people could pretend the machine wasn't working instead of accepting that Ma Long drops the ball behind his body most of the time. In the current situation, making the call just requires a brave umpire and it can be hard without a way of closing the conversation.
Do remember that even in tennis, when umpires made crazy line calls before Hawkeye, players used ro complain with no ability to seek closure. Even on clay, we are seeing that the mark is not always reliable. Having something people cannot argue with which is reliable ends all that nonsense. Hawkeye has eliminated such things in tennis. Clocks have eliminated big arguments over time wasting. Using things that people can review to agree on what happened makes things better. It is the only way the serve rules will ever get enforced (if they ever do) in my opinion.
In other sports there is no problem, tennis, hockey, volleyball, basketball, etc....Part of the problem with serve calls is that a protesting player can bring embarrassment to the sport over inconsistent officiating. What Hawkeye on serve faults does is take the call out of the subjective realm. In the match I watched where it was used, when the umpire called the fault, the player would complain. And then the video would show that the player (Ma Long or Liang Jingkun) was clearly serving behind his body to some degree, but because the aerve looked normal and was from Ma Long, people could pretend the machine wasn't working instead of accepting that Ma Long drops the ball behind his body most of the time. In the current situation, making the call just requires a brave umpire and it can be hard without a way of closing the conversation.
Do remember that even in tennis, when umpires made crazy line calls before Hawkeye, players used ro complain with no ability to seek closure. Even on clay, we are seeing that the mark is not always reliable. Having something people cannot argue with which is reliable ends all that nonsense. Hawkeye has eliminated such things in tennis. Clocks have eliminated big arguments over time wasting. Using things that people can review to agree on what happened makes things better. It is the only way the serve rules will ever get enforced (if they ever do) in my opinion.
Yeah but look at the number of referees they often have in other sports. Table Tennis is too complicated for the puny resources we put into enforcing the rules.In other sports there is no problem, tennis, hockey, volleyball, basketball, etc....
Gosh in my view there is actually little that can go wrong in refereeing table tennis. Each on a side of a table gives more than enough opportunities to judge something, in my opinion, even without a hawk's eye, but the biggest problem is as you also wrote, the referees' sense of responsibility but above all the nerve to go against (renowned) players.Yeah but look at the number of referees they often have in other sports. Table Tennis is too complicated for the puny resources we put into enforcing the rules.
The biggest problem is the players have not taken the cultural responsibility to make serving obviously legal and the umpires are largely volunteers not professionals. The complexity of the rules leads to many pros serving illegally in one aspect or the other. The pendulum serve often leads to a shielding of the ball with the body depending on where the receiver stands to see the serve. Same with other side on serves like the hook. Then there is the tradition around warning. Then inconsistent punishment of dodgy serves.Gosh in my view there is actually little that can go wrong in refereeing table tennis. Each on a side of a table gives more than enough opportunities to judge something, in my opinion, even without a hawk's eye, but the biggest problem is as you also wrote, the referees' sense of responsibility but above all the nerve to go against (renowned) players.
I don't remember who it was with but I did see a referee in the last World Cup reprimand a player on a ball that was thrown too much to the body. If it is flagrant, it can be noted. yet there are players who can throw a ball metres high straight (or almost straight anyway). So...The biggest problem is the players have not taken the cultural responsibility to make serving obviously legal and the umpires are largely volunteers not professionals. The complexity of the rules leads to many pros serving illegally in one aspect or the other. The pendulum serve often leads to a shielding of the ball with the body depending on where the receiver stands to see the serve. Same with other side on serves like the hook. Then there is the tradition around warning. Then inconsistent punishment of dodgy serves.
Craig Bryant made an interesting video yesterday about ball tossing and if you watch it, you realize that unless you toss the ball maybe about 24 inches and even with that, the toss must not go more than maybe 10 ‐ 12 inches laterally, your serve is likely illegal in toss angle. How will someone objectively determine that visually? The rules say 30 degrees from vertical. Good luck with using your eyes to call it.