POLL : Is theoretical discussion worth it ?

A forum might instigate these type of threads by unknown posters to generate interest. Advertising dollars probably on the line.

Let one hundred flowers bloom

Without those threads we might never have gotten some of the most memorable posts from Der_Echte about the inner workings of the goon squad

I find that a large proportion of hobby/avocation forum posts are about equipment, and many of those posts are from persons new to the hobby. Simply put, they want to explore what the best equipment is, such as not to limit themselves by using poor equipment.

Your point remains, that without adequate knowledge of the player's skill, what is best for them cannot truly be determined. I don't think this point is well understood by most of us, actually.

ttmonster said:

Lately, I see an abundance of threads in TTD where posters ask for advice on equipments and technique without any video evidence of their playing level.

Click to expand...

And there you go...

Apparently, different people have different learning styles. Some need to go hands-on first, some need to see and emulate, some need to read, reflect, overthink, and then start trying and adapting — https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Learning_styles.

If there is a grain of truth in that, I would say: leave room for all learning styles.

I don't even think there is a "best for you" when it comes to equipment. I know for sure that I can play equally well (albeit slightly different) with vastly different equipment. Yet none of the bats seriously impove my game. In fact, a friend encouraging me to attack more is way more effective than the fastest bat in the world during the game.

I think the same goes with coaching. I've seen people changing coaches faster than they change clothes. Yet, I think at our level (beginner to lower intermediate on Carl's scale) there are huge gaps in the technique that's even the worst coach can easily identify.

All that said, I think the effect of discussion is just more engagement with the game, which sometimes is just fun. So even if it is not as useful as expected, still contributes to one's mood, and encourages advancement in the sport.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Controversial opinion alert......

I don’t think anyone should ask for advice specific to their game (that part is important), without providing video footage.

Likewise, I don’t think people should give advice, without providing video footage of their own game.

We we all have smart phones and the internet, getting 30 seconds of footage is not hard.

Talking about equipment is very different, as this can often be a crowd sourced opinion, which offers more than one perspective.

If I ask a question about a rubber I haven’t used, but it has been used by 20 players who play at a worse standard; I still value their opinion because I have nothing to base it against.

If someone offers advice on my forehand technique...... well, unless they have video footage themselves, I’m not going to take any of it on board.

Idea Alert

I’d love to see a “verified” tick (like Twitter), next to the users who have posted video of themselves - It would be good if a USTT rating could be “crowd sourced” for them as well - Just to give an idea to other people what level they are at.

NDH said:

Idea Alert

I’d love to see a “verified” tick (like Twitter), next to the users who have posted video of themselves - It would be good if a USTT rating could be “crowd sourced” for them as well - Just to give an idea to other people what level they are at.

Click to expand...

May I add that it should be easier to find someone's video. Maybe a small gallery could help. Or at least a place to keep track of video links. Then clicking on the tick can take you there.

I’d say each user should be able to have one video of themselves playing - So when people click on their profile, they can see the standard of the person giving advice.

Of course its useful. Its silly to discount it.

For example, almost all knowledge of european martial arts and weapon techniques was passed to us through written treatises and manuals.

Many old musical instrument techniques were passed to us in a similar manner. Chopin wrote, for example, of the way of playing like a 'waterfall' with respect to the use of the weight of the hand instead of the power of the fingers, etc etc.

Lest u say that theres a difference between what a master writes and what laymen discuss, remember that much of of those matters was common knowledge and commonly discussed at the time.

That, and one's theoretical knowledge can easily exceed his proficiency (and most often does).

It is a process by which many learned and were enriched by the knowledge and experience of others.


Here you do the same.

Case closed

NDH said:

I’d say each user should be able to have one video of themselves playing - So when people click on their profile, they can see the standard of the person giving advice.

Click to expand...

So what kind of video would be ok with you? Some kind of drill or match play? Just curious as I've found that people quite often look very different in the two.

I think basic forehand to forehand and back hand to back hand would be a start - You can usually tell a fair amount from someone by looking at this.

Appreciate training and match play are very different - But you’ll never cover all basis.

What if we added a video link to our profile page?

The only thing we’d need would be some form of “verification” - Like you have “equipment experts” for example - Something quick and easy to tell people that you have a verified video, and they can look at it if they wish.

I think you missed where i wrote that these things were common knowledge in those times and discussed at length in the appropriate circles.
Thats why it doesnt matter its not chopin telling you personally. It can be someone telling you what chopin said and it would be equally valid. Or it can just be common sense translated into common knowledge, which is even more valuable than the very specific advices of the masters, that very few can even understand enough to make use of.

And the way i see it, playing an instrument, martial arts and playing tt are one and the same in having very specific techniques (and equipment) that can be documented and discussed, though proficiency can only be gained by tons of practice.

I feel some top rated players would be bad coaches and some intermediate players could be great for low to intermediate rated players. If you have been drilled from age 8 in the correct technique you never have to overcome bad habits which many adult learners suffer from.

I don't see how any discussions on this forum are theoretical. They are simply opinionated.
I do agree that people asking for advice should post a video showing their play. In some cases the flaws are obvious.
I know that watching my own videos has helped as much a coaching but one needs to know what to look for.

Too many people ask advice about equipment. They want someone to pick out a paddle or rubber for them. I don't see how this will work because we all have different preferences and biases.

In the end I don't think any real harm is ever done. People are very good at adapting to whatever they are playing with and player skill trumps equipment any time.

Too me a theoretical discussion would be on a topic such as "Is dwell time good or bad". I would like to hear what any coach has to say about that. Since coaches are not physicist they would probably get the answer wrong.

In any cases theory is obligatory. Opinions can be discussed, advices can be neglected, but theory is always there, and no matter is it expressed or not it always works making opinions and advices more or less true or wrong. In fact aside from theory any opinion and advice is partly right and partly wrong for the percipient. A good answer needs a well formulated question. If the asker can not formulate the question a video may be helpfull. But in most cases every thing is very obvious and no video is needed. Most of the questions are about equipement and they don't need video too. About the video of the advisers - I see here something like "show me how you play to know can we trust you" and "if I play better I should be trusted more". Well - Chen Weixing beated Jorg Rosskopf, so is he a better adviser or coach? Can Rossi beat Timo Boll? If not why should Timo listen to him? I think that in every club there are players who would beat their coaches, but they are still coaching. When I advice to beginers to choose a coach I don't show them how the coach is playing, but I show them the cups and medals of is trainees. And another point of view - many players want to play like someone from the top 10, ML mainly, and many players think that playing with the same equipment will help that. Its an iconizing, neglecting the own unique personality and ability. Will the opinions of the adviser be more right if he just prooves to be a better player, and will they proove wrong if the player is weaker than someone else?