Croatian player loses his sh#t

This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Well-Known Member
Feb 2012
2,010
1,441
4,714
Read 1 reviews
Thanks - now you all know why I wanted to see TTFrenzy loop (he can loop by the way, so I am just mocking him).


hahahah no hard feelings. on a bad mood that defender would have crushed me easily it happened so many times so far I lost count. Pimples always need a different approach and readjust your mindset to play them
 
  • Like
Reactions: UpSideDownCarl
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Well-Known Member
Feb 2012
2,010
1,441
4,714
Read 1 reviews
franjo capan is 60 years old. he very rarely attacks and he fares better in the league than the attacker. he used to play on a top level in yugoslavia back in the days of surbek and stipancic. i don't know how you got the impression that the "attackers technique is better than the defenders quality of chops".


Izra, forgive my style of critique I know I sound too stiff sometimes but when I see a player play, I always focus on his technique aspect only and then start to wander about the psychological aspect. For me as a "wannabe coach" is always a challenge to try to find why a player with a good technique misses a "relatively easy" (or what appears to be but it isnt) shot. But as Im a strict fan of correct form and energy consumption I always look at technique first and then tactics/psychology.

So from POV of technique only the attacker is better. BUT :

1) He mostly thinks the incoming ball is easy and is lazy on his feet resulting in a pathetic loop, which either is coming back or out or into the net

2) He gets pissed so much that he is too tight on his muschles and doesnt adjust his body with the arc of the ball.

3) He doesnt think at all what he is doing he just loops and loops hoping that he will loop kill after a certain point

So when I say the attacker is better in terms of technique I still believe it , but technique alone does not win the games does it ? We need tactics strategy patience persistence and of course good psychology. I was only commenting on the technique :p
 
Last edited:
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Well-Known Member
Oct 2014
12,286
17,747
44,315
Read 17 reviews
Izra, forgive my style of critique I know I sound too stiff sometimes but when I see a player play, I always focus on his technique aspect only and then start to wander about the psychological aspect. For me as a "wannabe coach" is always a challenge to try to find why a player with a good technique misses a "relatively easy" (or what appears to be but it isnt) shot. But as Im a strict fan of correct form and energy consumption I always look at technique first and then tactics/psychology.

So from POV of technique only the attacker is better. BUT :

1) He mostly thinks the incoming ball is easy and is lazy on his feet resulting in a pathetic loop, which either is coming back or out or into the net

2) He gets pissed so much that he is too tight on his muschles and doesnt adjust his body with the arc of the ball.

3) He doesnt think at all what he is doing he just loops and loops hoping that he will loop kill after a certain point

So when I say the attacker is better in terms of technique I still believe it , but technique alone does not win the games does it ? We need tactics strategy patience persistence and of course good psychology. I was only commenting on the technique :p

But nothing you have said applies to the defender's technique...
 
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Well-Known Member
Oct 2014
12,286
17,747
44,315
Read 17 reviews
@NL

I really like this post, lots of information here, I too, respect the "junk rubber" play style as it's something that must be learned just like any other style.



Let's take twiddlers out of the equation for a moment. If your opponent wasn't able to twiddle would you still feel a strong sense of struggles against these players?

IT's not so much struggle per se, but what they are able to do. Can they attack all kinds of balls with their pips or can they only hit one kind of ball? Or can they control all kinds of balls or can they control only one kind of ball? Usually, most pips players live off the unfamiliarity of the attacker with the pips ball. IF you understand TT enough, you will always adjust

Also given that you had time to get in place to perform a loop that's SLOW with strong topspin, wouldn't you prefer to hit it against the lp,anti side? I tend to play these players with slower spinny loops instead of a faster loop because firstly, it gives me even more time. Second, if they block with the lp/anti I'm getting another underspin loop which is what I'd prefer when trying to play a slower topspin game. And this is only in my experience, but if they try and counter my slow topspin off the bounce with their "junk" it does come at me moderately fast, but the spin is dead and I can really just slap it back.

The really good push blockers want you to spin heavy because they have designed their equipment to be as close to frictionless LP as much as possible. This enables them to produce extremely short and heavy backspin off topspin below a certain threshold if they catch the ball correctly off the bounce. And since most people do not practice attacking short heavy backspin over the table, even if it floats high, you are almost always screwed once they get the ball on the table as it is not going to come out to you for a reloop the same way a push or a mistimed ball will. And unless you are used to pushing that ball, which requires a fine but thicker contact than a regular push of a spinny serve, to give an example, you will almost always be screwed by that ball.

BTW i'm not considering short pips in this at all. I actually really struggle with strong short pip players as they tend to play close to the table and have very strong counter drives. Our second best player is a penholder with only 1 rubber and it's short pips. Very aggressive.


And again, twiddler's are a super breed. All respect to you.

Twiddlers are no different ultimately from people who use different rubbers on each sides - they can just crossover/pivot faster.


EDIT: I guess it would help if I describe my playstyle. I play close to the table. Against inverted players I'm very "blocky" I change the pace from aggressive to something I call pitter patter pace. I simply can't outplay speed. It's strange that I play this way because I'm extremely comfortable looping underspin, with both my fh and bh. So what I tend to do is open up with something heavy and spinny, if I'm opening up with FH. I can change the pace to fast and spinny or fast and less spinny with my fh loop. and then immediately go to pace changing blocks instead of another attack if they return it. My backhand doesn't tend to be very spinny but it's very consistent and I'm very comfortable flipping most, short balls.

Anyway I think what I like about playing the "junk" rubbers is that I get to do an opening FH loop and then comes another backspin ball for yet another of my stronger shot. It's the only time I get to actually feel like I'm attacking multiple balls in a row.

Since I don't back off the table and am moderately tall and lanky, my follow up to my opening loop is weak. I should be backing up for another loop since it's my strongest shot. But I don't.

Your style is similar to mine and that is why you like playing pips because you don't like to back up - I don't either. Vs topspin play, over time, you will need to find a good distance for rallying but your close to the table game will reward you when playing the pips players. In TT, you need all kinds of skills to match up with different opponents and we all build them up in different orders. In the end, just keep plugging away and avoid frustration. And serve and serve return are the universals so any improvements there will always pay your game.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Shuki
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Well-Known Member
Feb 2012
2,010
1,441
4,714
Read 1 reviews
But nothing you have said applies to the defender's technique...

Yes let me be more specific , I was only focusing on the attacker. The defenders technique as long as the ball is slow and not spinny is very good, he keeps the ball low and in spots that are difficult to attack.

But as I noticed when the attacker does not mess up and hits a good spinny FH then he takes the ball too early and with stiff motion resulting in a high chop.

Now after the high chop the attacker miraculously manages to miss it because he thinks its easy although it isnt most of the times you can hear the thin chop meaning it has good underspin. So the way I see it, it is a matter of mostly the attacker losing against himself. I find it weird that he can loop some good low chops but yet he fails to adapt on high balls

So in the end I suppose it is a matter of misjudgement, maybe too much self confidence?

Now I know I may sound too biased over the attacker maybe it is because Im an attacker myself, I cant even imagine how diffult it is to be a good chopper. So I know I cant have a 100 % objective opinion

But what I saw in terms of technique is : player A performs a good loop, player B chops it, the ball gets high, player A misses it for one of the reasons the forum users and I have mentioned.

In the rest of the match we can also see that the attacker makes some stupid choices also thats undeniable, but as i explained since want to become a coach when i watch a video the first thing that comes to my mind is to observe technique. Sorry for the long post
 
says Hi In first i want to thank you for your interest...
says Hi In first i want to thank you for your interest...
Well-Known Member
Feb 2015
1,431
916
5,318
Read 6 reviews
I think the chopper is outsmarting and outplaying his opponent very well. Despite what looks like inferior technique, he is the better player as he fairly comfortably takes home the win.

I don't agree that it's about superior technique, lazy execution or staying calm. That assumes that the attacker has the better technique and therefore should win in all cases.

IMHO, it's an illusion to think that "my technique looks far better so he is naturally not up to my playing standard". Your technique is just one part of winning a match. The other, more important one, is your head and how well you apply your skills and how well you contain your opponent. If you can't play that game, you will loosejust like this guy did.

Here's a video showing what most people on this forum would call inferior technique. Have a look at it for 2 minutes. That's all you need.
(Start from 7.50. They have warmed up a bit afetr the first set then)


I'm willing to bet that most who compare themselves to these players will say: "They look rubbish compared to me. Just look at their forehand techniques. They're awful: stiff and too jerky. And the guy in red can't even serve properly! I'll beat them both."

But you wouldn't. You wouldn't even come close.

Yes, they look awful technically, but they certainly know how to play the game of table tennis. At the time of that match, Pattantyus was in the 80's on the world ranking and Chtchetinine was in the 70's.

In short, none of us would have beaten them, despite most of us probably having more beautiful ("better") technique, because we can't think table tennis to the degree that they can. I certainly wish I had that ability :)
This is exactly the type of game i hate the most... I rather lose by scratching the match. Then play this type of game..... I do not need to win i just want to enjoy the match..... This are only pushchops what i understand for older people who are not so agile...
 
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Well-Known Member
Feb 2012
2,010
1,441
4,714
Read 1 reviews
I think the chopper is outsmarting and outplaying his opponent very well. Despite what looks like inferior technique, he is the better player as he fairly comfortably takes home the win.

I don't agree that it's about superior technique, lazy execution or staying calm. That assumes that the attacker has the better technique and therefore should win in all cases.

IMHO, it's an illusion to think that "my technique looks far better so he is naturally not up to my playing standard". Your technique is just one part of winning a match. The other, more important one, is your head and how well you apply your skills and how well you contain your opponent. If you can't play that game, you will loosejust like this guy did.

Here's a video showing what most people on this forum would call inferior technique. Have a look at it for 2 minutes. That's all you need.
(Start from 7.50. They have warmed up a bit afetr the first set then)


I'm willing to bet that most who compare themselves to these players will say: "They look rubbish compared to me. Just look at their forehand techniques. They're awful: stiff and too jerky. And the guy in red can't even serve properly! I'll beat them both."

But you wouldn't. You wouldn't even come close.

Yes, they look awful technically, but they certainly know how to play the game of table tennis. At the time of that match, Pattantyus was in the 80's on the world ranking and Chtchetinine was in the 70's.

In short, none of us would have beaten them, despite most of us probably having more beautiful ("better") technique, because we can't think table tennis to the degree that they can. I certainly wish I had that ability :)


Great insight but ok chechetinin is an established player and he managed to beat some of the top names in Europe, its not an accurate comparison.

His serve might look simple but it isnt , just because it doesnt look flashy as ma long's doesnt mean its not a good serve. I would consider it world class because the motion is very small, the motion before and after contact is the same, and he always changes the tempo on the serve.

Now I totally agree with some aspects of your post.

From a 100 pool of good amateur players it would be interesting to see how many of them would be sure that they could beat chechetinin or pattantyus BUT without knowing who they are. Maybe repost the video on another forum without the names and check the reactions, I bet people would start betting on their ratings and start pointing fingers on their "bad" serves and form.
 
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Well-Known Member
Feb 2012
2,010
1,441
4,714
Read 1 reviews
ok I just watched the 2 sets again a few times. But this time I replayed some points and focused only on the defender.

He finds it difficult to control slow spinny loops with his inverted rubber but his BH chop with the pimples is pretty sick. In fact its so good and low that he made 3 net balls in single set which seem to be only luck but it isnt. His tactic was to make it difficult for the attacker to loop kill and pin him on the BH side, now on the other hand the attacker failed to realize that he wins most of his points by playing to the FH side of his opponent. Because when the defender chops with inverted the ball is high and easy (doesnt matter if the attacker gets so pissed that he also loses these easy balls, the strategy im talking is correct, no way he could beat that guy with looping on his BH side)


All in all excuse me for my previous analysis, I believe this one is more accurate
 
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Member
Aug 2015
73
303
397
Had a bit of a look at the original video back in post #1 and a read through the thread.

As someone who had spent a lot of time defending in the past, here's a few thoughts on what is going on in my own humble opinion:

Summary:

The attacker is not switched on mentally at the time we start watching the video, at 5-2. The frustration is obvious but you can also see his inconsistent recovery/footwork, and repeated failure to read the spin by not paying attention to what the chopper is doing.

The chopper looks like somebody who was very good when younger, and still has nice touch although somewhat limited mobility. He definitely plays the forehand more upright than the backhand, possibly due to sore knees or a bad hip? The backhand chop looks solid, the forehand looks a little different than most choppers (much less backswing, not as high), but it is still getting the racket through the hitting zone consistently.

The chopper does put a couple of balls high, which can sometimes be due to trying to get under the ball for more spin and slightly mistiming, which puts the ball higher, or misreading the amount of spin on the loop. Sometimes though a sneaky chopper will purposefully chop the ball higher to tempt the opponent into attacking more often instead of pushing. I'd guess maybe a bit of both in this video. Slightly higher balls will keep the opponent attacking instead of pushing, so the chopper doesn't have to run in and out as much.

Technique wise - I find it hard to say. You've got a young attacker who's not concentrating properly but who seems to have fairly standard technique versus an older chopper who probably has some movement issues, and who has an odd looking but perfectly workable forehand. Plus a lovely smooth and quick twiddle.

Finally, a little point by point analysis from a chopper's point of view:

5-2, 5sec - nice twiddles, good backhand by the attacker out wide caught him by surprise


5-3, 17 sec, another nice twiddle coupled with a lovely long pip backhand from down low


6-3, 34 sec, sneaky floated backhand deep chop with the inverted, opponent failed to read it at all and played for the non-existent backspin


7-3, 46 sec - even rally - some forehand chops going high possibly because he tried to spin heavy and missed the timing a little, good finish of a short ball by attacker


7-4, 1:14 - very nice twiddle and control of the forehand inverted chop


8-4, 1:34 - good serve and follow up wide to the forehand by attacker, sets up a lunging fh chop which goes high and is put away. The chopper looks uncomfortable wide the forehand - possibly poor knees/bad back?


8-5, 1:48 - sneaky bh inverted return of fast serve which goes high because he has got under it a bit and chopped it with more spin. Could be on purpose to tempt an unwise attack, or could be accidentally higher than intended. Either way, no reading of spin by the attacker.


9-5, 2:04 - screaming fh attack by attacker but straight to fh wing of chopper, beautifully controlled low fh chop, attacker stops recovering after this and gives up the point by trying to hit a fh from a bh stance


10-5, 2:20 good wide bh attack and fh attack follow up, defender gets caught a little close to the table and tries to finesse a chop ball with a float, but goes a little high and long


10-6, 2:28 - attacker tries to play safe, rolling the attack, but misreads spin on chop and puts push into net.
 
This user has no status.
Well in our region finding somebody who plays with long pips is hard enough. As consequences, it's always hard for our club members and few other clubs to deal with them. I need to face the guy 3 times to get used to his pips. Damn, I am dumb.

Most of the time, I played with enough patience though. A loop, a push, another loop, another push. I will keep it until I feel the ball is high enough for me to loopkill it.

So yeah, you need to be patience when up against a chopper. It's frustrating as hell but as long as the ball goes on your opponent's half, you will win. :D
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: TTFrenzy
This user has no status.
It's so sad when people can't acknowledge the skill it takes to execute a different style (anything that doesn't include, attack all balls coming at you with top spin) of play. Just because he doesn't hit the ball with top spin it doesn't mean his technique is inferior. I would say that some of the returns he hit display far more technique than the basic looping done by the youngster.
 
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Well-Known Member
Feb 2012
2,010
1,441
4,714
Read 1 reviews
It's so sad when people can't acknowledge the skill it takes to execute a different style (anything that doesn't include, attack all balls coming at you with top spin) of play. Just because he doesn't hit the ball with top spin it doesn't mean his technique is inferior. I would say that some of the returns he hit display far more technique than the basic looping done by the youngster.

You didnt read all of my posts :) if you did you would notice that I analyze some of his strengths as well.

And please guys, its boring and funny when someone talks about "people doing that and that"

I was the only one here that criticized his technique as inferior, Im not "the people" so please have the courage of your opinion my name is TTFrenzy or George whatever you like. Hiding yourself behind words is pathetic, unless you are 10 years old
 
  • Like
Reactions: BeGo and NextLevel
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Well-Known Member
Feb 2012
2,010
1,441
4,714
Read 1 reviews
It's so sad that "people" forget that the forums are for discussion and not for pointing fingers or downgrading anyone. Just because I said his technique is inferior doesnt mean that he doesnt have good technique. Can you spot the difference "people"?

My mistake was that I was not 100 % objective, but please be my guest can anyone of you be objective about technique issues all the time? I think its time for me to start playing again, too much work on computer got me into pointless conversations about who or what is inferior. like it matters to anyone...cheers
 
  • Like
Reactions: NextLevel
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Well-Known Member
Oct 2014
12,286
17,747
44,315
Read 17 reviews
You didnt read all of my posts :) if you did you would notice that I analyze some of his strengths as well.

And please guys, its boring and funny when someone talks about "people doing that and that"

I was the only one here that criticized his technique as inferior, Im not "the people" so please have the courage of your opinion my name is TTFrenzy or George whatever you like. Hiding yourself behind words is pathetic, unless you are 10 years old

Table tennis punditry is not easy my friend. But we try to be nice and not name people. That way, people can think they are like Lord Voldemort and we fear them...;)
 
  • Like
Reactions: TTFrenzy
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Well-Known Member
Feb 2012
2,010
1,441
4,714
Read 1 reviews
the main reason the defender won is rather simple: the attacker couldn't read the spin well enough.

now, how good would you say this defender is?



i know a very good player who beat both of them a couple of years ago and said that the older gentleman was a more difficult match because his chops were more deceptive.

Well for sure he oursmarted pitchford in the 3 sets that he won. Pitchford underestimated him and didnt vary his tactics, the defender adjusted very well after the first set which he lost rather easily.

Overall I would say he won because of his tactics, his technique especially after the first successful loop is not equal to pitchford's loop. Most of the times pitchford was caught off guard and didnt have a solid position to loop effectively, when he had he also had the initiative and most of the times he won the point. pitchford also lost many points right after his serve a sign that shows that the defender totally grasped how to set liam off guard
 
This user has no status.
Well for sure he oursmarted pitchford in the 3 sets that he won. Pitchford underestimated him and didnt vary his tactics, the defender adjusted very well after the first set which he lost rather easily.

Overall I would say he won because of his tactics, his technique especially after the first successful loop is not equal to pitchford's loop. Most of the times pitchford was caught off guard and didnt have a solid position to loop effectively, when he had he also had the initiative and most of the times he won the point. pitchford also lost many points right after his serve a sign that shows that the defender totally grasped how to set liam off guard

that is not why i posted that video. it was to say that a player who beat both of those defenders found the older gentleman harder to play against only a couple of years ago (okay, up to 10 years ago to be honest). his deception is amazing and you can't see that on video, that's why it's beside the point to reflect on the young attackers mental state or technique as the reasons he lost.
 
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Well-Known Member
Feb 2012
2,010
1,441
4,714
Read 1 reviews
that is not why i posted that video. it was to say that a player who beat both of those defenders found the older gentleman harder to play against only a couple of years ago (okay, up to 10 years ago to be honest). his deception is amazing and you can't see that on video, that's why it's beside the point to reflect on the young attackers mental state or technique as the reasons he lost.


well 10 years isnt a couple of years is it ? :p and certainly the comparison does not mean much because 10 years before the old player maybe was a great player . The young player's mentality was playing its part. he missed several easy balls that he wouldnt have missed if he wasnt so pissed of.
 
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Well-Known Member
Feb 2012
2,010
1,441
4,714
Read 1 reviews
Table tennis punditry is not easy my friend. But we try to be nice and not name people. That way, people can think they are like Lord Voldemort and we fear them...;)


One of the reasons I appreciate you and CArl is that you always refer/name the person you disagree with, providing arguements. It does not matter who is right or wrong but to get into a creative discussion
 
Top