This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Dignics 09c vs hurricane 3
- Thread starter TableTennisDaily
- Start date
This user has no status.
I pity Pathfinderpro who put in so much work only to have someone come in and say science is shit.
I pity JRSDallas who posted some meaningful measurements only for it to fall on deaf ears.
The world was flat until someone proved it different, and they killed the guy who said it out loud first.
Don't waste your time Brokenball.
I pity JRSDallas who posted some meaningful measurements only for it to fall on deaf ears.
The world was flat until someone proved it different, and they killed the guy who said it out loud first.
Don't waste your time Brokenball.
This user has no status.
Well-Known Member
This is interesting. What result from physics did pathfinder pro find specifically that helped your table tennis? Same with JRSDallas. Thanks.
I wasn't around for brokenball's first rodeo but can you summarize what was said?
My guess is talking about theoretical CORs or rubber capabilities can be right in theory but it really doesn't matter in real life, if 99% of the people posting here can't really put a rubber to it's theoretical limits.
This user has no status.
Both helped during my peak EJ days. Mostly about the approach to forming a hypothesis about how gear "might" feel and perform before buying one. Helped feed my curiosity in a "slightly" more objective way.
I can't say "gear knowledge" made me play better. But it did make me a more informed consumer. And if a custom blade maker asks, I tell them the exact specification of what I need. As I've said before, I'd rather have access to more information than I need, than to have what little information available distorted beyond usefulness.
This user has no status.
Actually, its the ball that's the limit, and anyone using any rubber should be able to push it to the limit at least some of the time. I think Brokenball would be able to explain that better. If he's bothered to haha.
This user has no status.
Well-Known Member
I am not clear on how your response differs materially from anything that has been written. The problem you seem focused on is how to evaluate equipment suitability before you can test/use/buy it. This is not the same thing as whether knowledge of physics makes you a better TT player or improves your table tennis.
This user has no status.
Well-Known Member
I think you are granting too much even here. Most of the information that you need about using equipment is gained by practicing with it. No one has equations that let's us know what equipment is best suited for them to play their best. And in fact, some people may play better with equipment they don't like to use!
This user has no status.
Expanding a little bit, if someone bothered to put me through a motion capture set and told me how I can better sync my muscle groups or approach impact at a more efficient angle, I would be a better player.
Also, being able to evaluate "equipment" to find the kind of feel I like makes me more enthusiastic to play more, and get better.
About the next post, knowing more about equipment would tell you that it doesn't take a lot to get one that let's you play your best. And knowing is better, at least you know what you want to change and how to get that "feel" on your next purchase.
Last edited:
This user has no status.
Well-Known Member
I hate to ask this but what is your TT playing level? And have you actually coached players before?
I was talking to an international coach recently and asked him what I should do if I play the ball to someone on the backhand and I can't go to the forehand but I need to generate errors. He said that I should move the ball around. He said that some people would say to use spin variation but he told me that if he coached a pro in a match and told him to vary the spin, the pro would probably wonder if the coach had ever played table tennis at a good level before.
By the way, people can do everything you are saying without motion capture. Coaches do it all the time just not in the way you are saying it for many reasons... I think what I am trying to say is "where is the physics in any of this???"
Last edited:
This user has no status.
~8 years total playing time with 3 sabbaticals in between. Not a coach. But how is this relevant?
People can do a lot of things differently, but how is knowing more detrimental?
says
Spin and more spin.
says
Spin and more spin.
Well-Known Member
Super Moderator
This is better looked at in the field of movement, movement theory, and motor learning.
I did a decent amount of study of movement theory. It helps me with my work. A lot of lay people and fitness type people always seem to want to know what muscles engage in a movement pattern. This can really hinder the movement process.
So, in this one class, I remember there was a person who kept asking, what muscles do this action. It was the same question being asked over and over for different movements. The teacher, after answering multiple times, got frustrated and said: "Do you see this movement:" and he stood up from his chair and sat back down. Then he did it again, and a third time. Then he said, "it takes over 180 and muscles, many acting in synchronously, many acting antagonistically, to create that movement. If we had to think of contracting the muscles at the right time, we all would have been eaten by predators eons ago. You want to think of the movement pattern. Your brain, your nervous system understands the movement pattern. It knows what a good movement pattern looks like. Educate yourself on the image of the movement pattern you want to create and the muscles that are supposed to engage will do what they are supposed to at the correct time."
There is very practical application of movement theory. This is also why shadow training while looking in a mirror to see the movement you are doing can really help improve movement patterns for TT. You can see how things should be changed. You can see how what you are doing does not look like what you thought you were doing instantly because of the mirror. This really can help. But of course, only to a certain extent. Ball feel is more important.
This user has no status.
This is better looked at in the field of movement, movement theory, and motor learning.
I did a decent amount of study of movement theory. It helps me with my work. A lot of lay people and fitness type people always seem to want to know what muscles engage in a movement pattern. This can really hinder the movement process.
So, in this one class, I remember there was a person who kept asking, what muscles do this action. It was the same question being asked over and over for different movements. The teacher, after answering multiple times, got frustrated and said: "Do you see this movement:" and he stood up from his chair and sat back down. Then he did it again, and a third time. Then he said, "it takes over 180 and muscles, many acting in synchronously, many acting antagonistically, to create that movement. If we had to think of contracting the muscles at the right time, we all would have been eaten by predators eons ago. You want to think of the movement pattern. Your brain, your nervous system understands the movement pattern. It knows what a good movement pattern looks like. Educate yourself on the image of the movement pattern you want to create and the muscles that are supposed to engage will do what they are supposed to at the correct time."
There is very practical application of movement theory. This is also why shadow training while looking in a mirror to see the movement you are doing can really help improve movement patterns for TT. You can see how things should be changed. You can see how what you are doing does not look like what you thought you were doing instantly because of the mirror. This really can help. But of course, only to a certain extent. Ball feel is more important.
This is a great response, thanks. I know nothing about movement theory. If someone who knows about it and tells me its more productive to focus on intended effect and let the rest naturally balance out, then I learned something useful.
But it takes someone to know the theory to point out its application. If I had the willingness to learn that theory, it won't be detrimental.
This user has no status.
If you are going to quote, at least have the courtesy to quote correctly. "Any experienced player will know the subtle differences between MXP and Tenergy don't mean sh!t in effective play. ".
You can use a lot of similar stuff to similar effect. Knowing more lets you choose something that feels better which is more more personal. Or are you trying to imply something else?
This user has no status.
Well-Known Member
It helps me place your statements in context. My point is that nothing you are talking about requires an understanding of textbook physics. Carl didn't get training in physics, he got training in how to use the body better. When I coach I am trying to tell people how to get more from using their body parts a certain way.
Brokenball is not talking about how to use the body better, he is talking about knowledge of the physics of materials and collisions. People who use speed glue didn't know physics, they just stumbled onto the practice by accident. And even the people who design rubbers still have to test the rubber. Most of the information is in using the equipment not on your knowledge of physics.
says
2023 Certified Organ Donor
says
2023 Certified Organ Donor
Well-Known Member
NextLevel said:
I can testify personally that TTD member ERM got me to play a much slower wooden blade (the Persson Power Play) for a year... I absolutely did NOT like those hollow handles (he got me a few solid handle ones later), I did NOT like 82 gram weight for blades, did not like the slower top end... blah blah blah could list a dozen things I didn't like.
However, I couldn't argue against facts and evidence. I could see an immediate improvement in opening loop consistency without any noticeable drop in quality. Overall, in a lot of my shots, a year with that blade did me good, and if I can manage to play in the coming year, playing wood blades (the ones Nate has built for me) will do so again with softer rubber.
That is my personal accumulated experience with the statement from NL I made large in blue from his quote.
I would agree, sometimes, you just realize you play better with something you may not like.
To take it a step further, sometimes, maybe often, a player will NOT LIKE discovering he or she is not playing like they think they are and are not winning and losing points like they think they are.
Apologies for the misquote, but I don't think my version of the quote functionally differs from what you were saying. Inexperienced players generally don't know much.
The reason I ask is, I am wondering if your research and theories led you to the conclusion that all rubbers within a certain performance class have no functional differences and the differences are purely personal preference?
says
Spin and more spin.
says
Spin and more spin.
Well-Known Member
Super Moderator
Perhaps this is just language and does not matter. I am not sure what you mean by "intended effect". But I think it may be beside the point from what I was talking about.
Let me see if I can explain more: Usually when someone is performing a movement pattern inefficiently (wasted effort actually precludes good form) some of the issue is because their brain and nervous system understand the movement incompletely or incorrectly. One of the interesting things with this, with simpler movement patterns, when you replace an inefficient movement pattern with a more efficient one, the nervous system knows instantly and after repeating several times, it won't go back to the less efficient pattern unless under stress. Once the more efficient movement pattern is performed enough times, it won't go back at all.
So, if you can get the brain to understand a more efficient movement pattern, then get the brain to have a good image of the more efficient movement pattern, then get the body to practice that pattern enough times, the pattern sticks and the nervous system knows what to do.
With a table tennis stroke, things are a lot more complicated because a table tennis stroke is not one action at a time. Your lower body and upper body are actually doing things that counterbalance each other and you could sort of say they are in opposition to each other. While you rotate your upper body forward and to the left, your right leg presses down, back and to the right. The arm is synchronized with the legs, torso, hips, chest, but the movement is actually at least 3 moments from the shoulder joint [(glenohumeral joint, MOG, glenohumeral joint is the main shoulder joint; but there are also the acromioclavicular joint and the sternoclavicular joint, so, three joints)] the forearm movement, and the movement of the wrist. The movement of the wrist is much more complicated for a shakehand player than a penhold player because the penhold grip makes it so you can use the wrist mechanically, how your wrist is designed (flexion and extension).
So, because of how complicated a TT stroke is, it can take a lot of practice hours to change one part of the stroke. And then when you change another aspect of the stroke, it can throw everything out of whack before the stroke improves. I guess the other thing that can make improving technique in a table tennis stroke so complicated is, you do always have to adjust the stroke so the blade face intercepts the ball mid-flight.
This is also why, often older players, instead of having a stroke, line up their racket in the trajectory of the ball and push their racket forward to ensure contact which is very different than having a real stroke where your racket makes a semi-circular motion and the only point where the racket's path and the ball's path collide is on contact. This is why my friend the tennis coach (not table tennis) talked so much about skills of tracking and intercepting the ball. For adult learners the skill of doing this while keeping the form of a stroke can take a while to happen.
But part of why kids learn so fast is they do, without realizing observe role models and model form from them very quickly. And without knowing why, those kids can see better movement patterns over not as good movement patterns without realizing what they are doing. Kids are like learning sponges.
Adults can see better form too. It is just harder for them to model it. Because, as we get older, we have so many ingrained patterns of movement that we don't realize are there that hold us back from changing form.
This is also related to why, someone who trained as a kid say: 6-15 and stopped playing till they were 35, they still may end up having good strokes and good technique without having played for all those years.
Last edited:
This user has no status.
"anyone who knows anything" can be perceived as condescending. I also apologize if my response was too direct.
I did not do research. I only expressed that I appreciate those that did, and taking my understanding of their work helped point the way in my equipment choices.
As for performance limits, this article demonstrates (https://www.ittfeducation.com/wp-content/uploads/resources/199408014 - Tiefenbacher - Impact.pdf) that even an allround blade is able to return a bounce close to a block of marble at high impact. Any material will only affect how much (less) energy is lost. Also, that all rubbers are dissipators of energy.
Knowing this wouldn't hurt any (consumer). And with a bit of their own EJ'ing, might come to the understanding that all the latest and greatest are just marketing.
I have to thank Brokenball for quoting this somewhere for me to read it.
Last edited:
Similar threads
