Discussion: Is it worth trying to slow the game down again?

[Grumms]

For people wanting to slow the game, have you played with the 38mm balls, or even the celluloid 40mm? The game is so much easier for amateur player right now. At equal level, people can do way more thing than before. Even in not even regional level, people can do top spin regularly during a point, which was impossible to see 15 years ago.

If people want to put no effort in a sport, they can go to padel or pickleball, which are the mix of everything that is easy in every sport without the difficulty. No spin like TT, no stamina like tennis, no HIIT effort like squash or badminton. People can't accept to be bad at something, so the threshold has to be decreased all the time. Socialist way of thinking, and at the end everyone is bad and everyone is poor.

 

[ajtatosmano2]

I could see the merit of creating a regulated hobbyist equipment category. There would be a speed and spin range which manufacturers should stick to, maybe a durability regulation too (I don't know how feasible that is). These would be premades with an ITTF Hobby stamp, which would play something like an all- blade with something resembling a Mark V/Sriver. There would be a hobby tournament category where no one could complain about equipment, the game would be a little slower, more beginner friendly. If someone is interested, they could step up to the normal game played at a higher level.

 

[Grumms]

I could see the merit of creating a regulated hobbyist equipment category. There would be a speed and spin range which manufacturers should stick to, maybe a durability regulation too (I don't know how feasible that is). These would be premades with an ITTF Hobby stamp, which would play something like an all- blade with something resembling a Mark V/Sriver. There would be a hobby tournament category where no one could complain about equipment, the game would be a little slower, more beginner friendly. If someone is interested, they could step up to the normal game played at a higher level.

Why would we create that? Ping pong is slow enough for hobbyist. Whatever the change you'll make, bad players will lose to good players. At the end, the most capable players are prevented to express their skills because of the rules asked by bad players.

We have the perfect example at tennis. In 2003/04, Wimbledon completely changed the surface speed. Before that, it was almost impossible to succeed at Roland Garros and Wimbledon because it was required completely different set of skills. The best players ever before 2003, Pete Sampras, in spite of winning many Wimbledon, never achieved nothing at RG. And we can have the opposite with Spanish players or Kuerten winning RG and failing hard at Wimbledon.

When came the slowing down of the surface, we suddenly had the same winners or finalists : Federer, Nadal, Djokovic before, Sinner Alcaraz now. With almost the same semi finalist with exceptions (Anderson, Raonic, Kyrgios). And we have the same for M1000, whatever the tournament, we have the same games, same play style. It's a pain to watch, everyone play the same. There is no diversity, because the surface is so slow everywhere that attacking and coming at the net is almost impossible. The worst is looking at De Minaur, his playstyle is to send back the ball over and over and waiting for the opponent to be exhausted. The tennis is dying, because there is almost no more magic.

Table tennis is magic at almost every point. Taking risks is still valuable, the one that places the ball very well can win the point because the game is fast enough to prevent physical players to reach the ball. We can have people hitting very hard to win the point, but other that can hit smart. If you slow everything down, it will be only a matter of stamina, because a pro will be able to retrieve every shot, like we can see in tennis.

Edit : and I forgot that people struggling with spin have short/long pips or anti.

 

[ajtatosmano2]

Why would we create that? Ping pong is slow enough for hobbyist. Whatever the change you'll make, bad players will lose to good players. At the end, the most capable players are prevented to express their skills because of the rules asked by bad players.

We have the perfect example at tennis. In 2003/04, Wimbledon completely changed the surface speed. Before that, it was almost impossible to succeed at Roland Garros and Wimbledon because it was required completely different set of skills. The best players ever before 2003, Pete Sampras, in spite of winning many Wimbledon, never achieved nothing at RG. And we can have the opposite with Spanish players or Kuerten winning RG and failing hard at Wimbledon.

When came the slowing down of the surface, we suddenly had the same winners or finalists : Federer, Nadal, Djokovic before, Sinner Alcaraz now. With almost the same semi finalist with exceptions (Anderson, Raonic, Kyrgios). And we have the same for M1000, whatever the tournament, we have the same games, same play style. It's a pain to watch, everyone play the same. There is no diversity, because the surface is so slow everywhere that attacking and coming at the net is almost impossible. The worst is looking at De Minaur, his playstyle is to send back the ball over and over and waiting for the opponent to be exhausted. The tennis is dying, because there is almost no more magic.

Table tennis is magic at almost every point. Taking risks is still valuable, the one that places the ball very well can win the point because the game is fast enough to prevent physical players to reach the ball. We can have people hitting very hard to win the point, but other that can hit smart. If you slow everything down, it will be only a matter of stamina, because a pro will be able to retrieve every shot, like we can see in tennis.

Edit : and I forgot that people struggling with spin have short/long pips or anti.

I don't want to slow down regular table tennis, if anything I would like a little more spin personally, it's very hard to finish points against stronger players once there is a rally.
I am just brainstorming if somehow we could make the sport more accessible on the low levels without creating a different game. But more variety is good, so you're probably right about this ebing a stupid idea. Also, cheaper hobby balls tend to be lighter and thus slower anyway.

 

[Grumms]

I don't want to slow down regular table tennis, if anything I would like a little more spin personally, it's very hard to finish points against stronger players once there is a rally.
I am just brainstorming if somehow we could make the sport more accessible on the low levels without creating a different game. But more variety is good, so you're probably right about this ebing a stupid idea. Also, cheaper hobby balls tend to be lighter and thus slower anyway.

Ping pong is pretty accessible to low level. People play ping pong casually everywhere in the world, on stone tables, with stone or steel nets. They enjoy it. In every camping in the world you have tables and people can play. Ping pong is way more accessible than tennis, that requires a lot of work before returning the ball twice in a row.

 

[RefereeNumber2]

I think raising the height of the net is an interesting idea, and fairly feasible in practice. The biggest effects would be to make the serve and short game less effective. Serves and pushes would be slower and sit up higher, making it more effective to play a bit further from the table. The open and especially mid-distance games would not be affected very much.

I don't agree with the argument that this would dilute the sport or make it easier -- raising the net quite literally makes it more challenging to put the ball on the table.

Overall, it would place relatively greater emphasis on athleticism and mid-distance topspin play. IMO, the service and short game is currently the greatest barrier to entry into table tennis, both for general television audiences and amateur players. It just doesn't translate that well to the screen, and as a player it also requires much more table tennis specific training compared to the open game.

Whether this would be good for the sport is a matter of subjective judgment, but I think it would definitely make the modern sport of table tennis at least a bit more appealing/attractive to mainstream sports spectators and amateur athletes.

 

[Sriver1]

The ball slows down too fast which leads to players close to the table.
The spin has been reduced so topspin and chop are no longer useful as a defense.
So all players are close to the table hitting fast topspins. There is not style variety, almost all players play the same way.

 

[Tyce]

I don't want to slow down regular table tennis, if anything I would like a little more spin personally, it's very hard to finish points against stronger players once there is a rally.

Uhm, yeah, they're stronger players... If anything, better players will be even better if you add more spin on the ball. In my opinion a stronger, better player will also be better at dealing with spin and dishing it out.

The reduced spin has flattened the playing field in that regard. It is much, much harder to out-serve our out-spin someone, so when I'm playing people below my level I have to be the better rally player.
That being said, I can still trap plenty of people with heavy serves for a couple of points per game

Adding back spin will have the opposite effect, and make TT more skill based, and less fitness based.

Honestly, I'm OK with the current game. It's good for a fair bit of sweating yet spin is still a prominent element.

I am just brainstorming if somehow we could make the sport more accessible on the low levels without creating a different game. But more variety is good, so you're probably right about this ebing a stupid idea. Also, cheaper hobby balls tend to be lighter and thus slower anyway.

It's just as accessible as always on low levels, as long as you play against other low level players or people willing to help you learn.
You can walk into a club with a half dead premade bat and not be worried about spin much at all. And there is always going to be a section of players that don't want to use anything more than their classic rubbers, in 1.5mm preferably.

If anything, I would wish for a ban on fibers in blades. Only natural wood and glue allowed in a blade.
They could do it in light of environmental impact, and it would bring a little more balance towards spin while slowing the game down on average.

 

[Der_Echte]

I know it has not much to do with the initial question...

This sport is dying. If you like it or not. dying in terms of in the next years coming there will be only super amateur players if I have to put in terms of rating: Below currents 1300TTR and the other half being pros who work daily with coaches etc.

I think rating wise it will not change much but the player pool in between will shrink further.

I don't know what this sport needs to become popular but when I compare it to padel for example or even pickleball the learning curve is too steep. It is just way too hard to learn and too much effort to selflearn in comparison to those other racket sports I mentioned. It's is also less socializing compared to those.

Taking padel as an example it was a noname sport a couple years ago here. And now the playerbase already bigger than tabletennis. I personally enjoy it a lot myself. Long rallys, cool ball exhanges, no problems with complex serve returning, there is spin but its not overwhelming you too much. Lots of tactic and its about placement.

But tabletennis has one advantage and that is you can play it even if your super old. There are many examples of that. Padel, Tennis etc are just too hard to play in old age.

So why can't we make this sport more popular? My guess is noone feels responsible to teach the newcomers. The ones who do are players playing very low level themselves. Better players are only training together in their small circle.

So what is the key element that makes table tennis so fun? Why is the aim to slow it down? Some players will always play faster if they put in the work. So it doesn't really achieve much. Isn't it the problem to get beginners to intermediate level asap so they don't give up after a few session after realizing how hard this sport is to begin with?

If we could solve that problem, I think there would be more people sticking with this sport and once they reach intermediate level games will be even more fun for all of the participants. Right now its just declining a lot and I even see many people giving up and switching to Padel/pickleball etc. something. And the reason is not because it's too fast I think.

I like Zezima's attitude and contrarian view.

Figuring out how to get more people to love TT is a good thing to figure out.

 

[Der_Echte]

For people wanting to slow the game, have you played with the 38mm balls, or even the celluloid 40mm? The game is so much easier for amateur player right now. At equal level, people can do way more thing than before. Even in not even regional level, people can do top spin regularly during a point, which was impossible to see 15 years ago.

If people want to put no effort in a sport, they can go to padel or pickleball, which are the mix of everything that is easy in every sport without the difficulty. No spin like TT, no stamina like tennis, no HIIT effort like squash or badminton. People can't accept to be bad at something, so the threshold has to be decreased all the time. Socialist way of thinking, and at the end everyone is bad and everyone is poor.

Yes. Korrekt analysis and historical background/context.

This generation of ABS makes it WAY easier to hit through spin (and yes, there is less of it, but still large spin).

Before this gen of ABS ball, even the USATT 2000 level players, who are the bottom end of the top ten percent of active players, would NOT be trying to flip so many serves. There would be mostly short or fast/deep push strategy.

MAYBE at the 2400+ level, you saw aggressive serve receive with every possible flip... this is the bottom end of the top 1% crowd.

NOW... professionally trained 1500 USATT players who are in year 3-5 of a pro training regimen are constructing their points like the 2400 crowd of 10 years ago... a LOT of their rallies go like this...

Serve with spin, short, tight low. Receive with aggressive banana flip... server counters that attack strong for a winner.

Another year of training and now the receiver is attacking the attack of his flip... another little time into the training continuum and THAT attack is strongly countered.

At the end of the day, pro trained youth are doing this before they make 1500. Ten years ago, watching 1500 level players play was an error fest... it kinda still is, but with a lot of higher level hitting before the error.

This next gen ball slowed the absolute speed of ball as it makes it a meter or 2 past the table (and yes, make looping at a distance something anyone can do)... but enabled players to hit through spin with very firmly struck fast counters... Lets you more easily stay at the table, take ball early to pressure opponent and crack away with safety and danger/destruction to opponent... but they are now ready for that and are countering with heat seeking missiles.

The new ball enabled a lot more aggression with safety to the aggressor. That isn't terrible in itself - sports and skills aways develop with time.

 

[Grumms]

Yes. Korrekt analysis and historical background/context.

This generation of ABS makes it WAY easier to hit through spin (and yes, there is less of it, but still large spin).

I have to add that the game is easier also for myself. I stopped 13 years between 2010 and 2023. And now, I can do way more things than I was able to do in 2010 when I was at my peak. The drawbacks are that my BH and my serves are less lethal than before, but in every other sectors, I'm "better".

 

[Tyce]

I have to add that the game is easier also for myself. I stopped 13 years between 2010 and 2023. And now, I can do way more things than I was able to do in 2010 when I was at my peak. The drawbacks are that my BH and my serves are less lethal than before, but in every other sectors, I'm "better".

I have almost the exact same gap and completely agree. I feel like a better player lol except everyone has leveled up.

 

[Grumms]

I have almost the exact same gap and completely agree. I feel like a better player lol except everyone has leveled up.

Yes! When I came back to TT 3 years ago, I saw 'low ranked' players do things that I never did even if I was 500 or 600 points above before. I even believed it was pointless to play again seriously. But I saw myself being able to develop a very different game than before, and it all became very physical. If you slow the game more, fishing will be the meta.

 

[Matteones]

Yes. Korrekt analysis and historical background/context.

This generation of ABS makes it WAY easier to hit through spin (and yes, there is less of it, but still large spin).

Before this gen of ABS ball, even the USATT 2000 level players, who are the bottom end of the top ten percent of active players, would NOT be trying to flip so many serves. There would be mostly short or fast/deep push strategy.

MAYBE at the 2400+ level, you saw aggressive serve receive with every possible flip... this is the bottom end of the top 1% crowd.

NOW... professionally trained 1500 USATT players who are in year 3-5 of a pro training regimen are constructing their points like the 2400 crowd of 10 years ago... a LOT of their rallies go like this...

Serve with spin, short, tight low. Receive with aggressive banana flip... server counters that attack strong for a winner.

Another year of training and now the receiver is attacking the attack of his flip... another little time into the training continuum and THAT attack is strongly countered.

At the end of the day, pro trained youth are doing this before they make 1500. Ten years ago, watching 1500 level players play was an error fest... it kinda still is, but with a lot of higher level hitting before the error.

This next gen ball slowed the absolute speed of ball as it makes it a meter or 2 past the table (and yes, make looping at a distance something anyone can do)... but enabled players to hit through spin with very firmly struck fast counters... Lets you more easily stay at the table, take ball early to pressure opponent and crack away with safety and danger/destruction to opponent... but they are now ready for that and are countering with heat seeking missiles.

The new ball enabled a lot more aggression with safety to the aggressor. That isn't terrible in itself - sports and skills aways develop with time.

I kind of agree but I'm not completely sold.

I am a coach too, and indeed we now train the kids to be much more aggressive than before, but they still struggle a lot when given higher quality spin.
So when you see our 12-13 year old kids playing against each other it may be like you say. But then (a part from some very talented outlier) when they play with me or anyway seasoned adults with a good high level, they still can't handle the sheer amount of spin (and then when they can, on the next level, the deception of how much spin there is on the ball, a little variance still send them on a spiral of mistakes).
So I think that what you say is completely valid, but only in your general class - level. You can still be on a completely different level than most people at your club, up to semi-pro level, in the "old" way, spin and deception.

P.S. while we teach chiquita quite early to the kids, it is just as dangerous as anything else and if performed poorly (and it is usually performed very poorly all levels up to semi-pro) it is easily punishable.

 

[Grumms]

So when you see our 12-13 year old kids playing against each other it may be like you say. But then (a part from some very talented outlier) when they play with me or anyway seasoned adults with a good high level, they still can't handle the sheer amount of spin (and then when they can, on the next level, the deception of how much spin there is on the ball, a little variance still send them on a spiral of mistakes).

So what, do you want a game where in 3 years you can have the same skills than after 10 years?

 

[Matteones]

So what, do you want a game where in 3 years you can have the same skills than after 10 years?

Nope I don't want that. If anything I was saying that the exact opposite is true (now and before the changes too).