This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Forehand Loop against UNDERSPIN Technique
- Thread starter Brian Zhao
- Start date
This user has no status.
Well-Known Member
That's my teammates mother
There should be another button next to "Like" for posts of this caliber
I’m nowhere near yogi_bear’s level and yours to say but I “feel” like you’re just “mechanically” elaborating his point rather than disagreeing. That’s the strange thing about language.
“Feel” is very broad. Feel like you’re syncing your stroke with the ball, so you are feeling both the ball and your body. Although we tend to shorten it to “feel the ball”.
This user has no status.
Member
I’m nowhere near yogi_bear’s level and yours to say but I “feel” like you’re just “mechanically” elaborating his point rather than disagreeing. That’s the strange thing about language.
“Feel” is very broad. Feel like you’re syncing your stroke with the ball, so you are feeling both the ball and your body. Although we tend to shorten it to “feel the ball”.
I feel you might be right
, language makes all this a bit wishy-washy . I just wanted to show that it's possible to have poor mechanics while also having a good feel for the ball. Like pros in other sports trying table tennis often have great feeling, but horrible technique.I've heard Waldner has amazing feeling in golf but his swing is apparently questionable. Developing feeling might take a long time and to some extent be inherent, but learning correct technique doesn't have to be extremely complicated. Learning it is I suppose dependent on feeling though, so I agree with Yogi there.
Last edited:
says
ok, I will go back and make sure you have access.
Be...
Well-Known Member
"What is wrong with you guys? By the time you feel anything the ball is long gone."
Irony!!! I am reminded of the infamous Coefficient of Restitution thread at MyTT, which was actually how I became a moderator there. That flame war was possibly the longest in TT Forum history. It started with someone talking about blade "dwell time". BB (using a different name in those days) jumped in with arguments about the physics of the blade (undoubtedly correct, heavily infused with expositions on the Coefficient of Restitution). He was very upset with me when I pointed out that human ability to perceive a ball hitting the blade requires more than two orders of magnitude more time than what some people had measured for actual racket dwell times.
BB was angry at everybody, not just me. But definitely mad at me. His demeanor on this thread is VERY polite and reserved by comparison. People started to demand that he should be banned along with the notorious AgentHex, who was far more aggressive than BB). But, a moderator at the time (who also posts now under a different name) defended BB and AgentHex vigorously. (It turns out that he and AgentHex were clubmates). I told the moderator he was doing an incredibly crappy job of moderating the thread. The mod got pissed off and said, "ok, I've had it, I quit! You think you can do a better job, you do it!".
And so I did. I was definitely stricter about stepping in to stop flame wars.
Now I wonder if it was a mistake. In fact I'm quite sure of it. Several of the chronic flamers stopped posting. One in particular, who went by Assiduous, stopped posting. BB and AgentHex were banned permanently (both have been banned at every major English language forum at least once). Things are generally more civil.
And it is boring as hell.
Now I pretty much only intervene to stop for sale scamming, spammers of various sorts, and to eliminate grossly racist or homophobic comments.
It turns out, people like the flame wars. Its a bit like watching professional wrestling. You can think of BB as like the villain in a WWE match (I'm pretty sure he takes himself a lot more seriously than that).
Irony!!! I am reminded of the infamous Coefficient of Restitution thread at MyTT, which was actually how I became a moderator there. That flame war was possibly the longest in TT Forum history. It started with someone talking about blade "dwell time". BB (using a different name in those days) jumped in with arguments about the physics of the blade (undoubtedly correct, heavily infused with expositions on the Coefficient of Restitution). He was very upset with me when I pointed out that human ability to perceive a ball hitting the blade requires more than two orders of magnitude more time than what some people had measured for actual racket dwell times.
BB was angry at everybody, not just me. But definitely mad at me. His demeanor on this thread is VERY polite and reserved by comparison. People started to demand that he should be banned along with the notorious AgentHex, who was far more aggressive than BB). But, a moderator at the time (who also posts now under a different name) defended BB and AgentHex vigorously. (It turns out that he and AgentHex were clubmates). I told the moderator he was doing an incredibly crappy job of moderating the thread. The mod got pissed off and said, "ok, I've had it, I quit! You think you can do a better job, you do it!".
And so I did. I was definitely stricter about stepping in to stop flame wars.
Now I wonder if it was a mistake. In fact I'm quite sure of it. Several of the chronic flamers stopped posting. One in particular, who went by Assiduous, stopped posting. BB and AgentHex were banned permanently (both have been banned at every major English language forum at least once). Things are generally more civil.
And it is boring as hell.
Now I pretty much only intervene to stop for sale scamming, spammers of various sorts, and to eliminate grossly racist or homophobic comments.
It turns out, people like the flame wars. Its a bit like watching professional wrestling. You can think of BB as like the villain in a WWE match (I'm pretty sure he takes himself a lot more seriously than that).
Last edited:
Well, don’t we all come to the table to hit each other’s balls as hard as we can with angry faces? I watch players’ faces when they play (whereas most spectators just look at swings and balls). Trust me, sometimes you’ll be scared
says
Spin and more spin.
says
Spin and more spin.
Well-Known Member
Super Moderator
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Well-Known Member
If it would cause you to be injured due to improper strokes or the stroke is not optimized for it's purpose then i believe it is bad technique. I may not be a high level player but i know the proper strokes and movement do make a difference.
This user has no status.
Member
Try looping only with your arm and do not engage or do anything with your hips. This is "bad" technique.
Try to find me a professional player or even a top amateur player who does not twist their hips when looping against block. I will be amazed if you find one.
I used to loop only with my arm and it lead to a lot of arm soreness, poor recovery time and little to no consistency. I have seen a player who overuses their shoulder when looping and has shoulder issues because of that.
My grandad is 80+ years old and has had a hip replacement, maybe in his case he should be looping only with his arm, even with him I've tried to get him to twist his hips just a little for the FH.
Last edited:
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Member
I think there are technique that are better than other, but also feel that many good players play very different. Would they have become as good with better technique?
Schlager looks pretty stiff, and proably some coach has told him to relax more. I was a coach for Truls when he was young. If he hold the racket then like he did now i proably would have corrected it. Same with Seemiller. Would proably also told Boll to not change grip so much and use the body more in forehand. Waldner would proably have been told in China to play a little more mechanical? Not many coaches would have thought short pimple on Falcks forehand was a good idea? Maybe some coach told Gatien to get a better backhand and he should not play so close? and so on
I agree that there are more correct ways of playing but still think many players become good with not so good technique? Have been on some eduactions with the headcoach for a Swedish tabletennis school and i asked him about this. He was thinking in terms of instead of changing their technique he tried to make them as good as possible with their current one. better to change their technique or the way he was thinking? Maybe better to work around it? Know another international coach that thinks alot about strengths, and not not believe in making weakness so much better, better to focus on strengths and how to use them.
Alot of other things aswell that is important than just good technique.
Interesting discusssion this!
Schlager looks pretty stiff, and proably some coach has told him to relax more. I was a coach for Truls when he was young. If he hold the racket then like he did now i proably would have corrected it. Same with Seemiller. Would proably also told Boll to not change grip so much and use the body more in forehand. Waldner would proably have been told in China to play a little more mechanical? Not many coaches would have thought short pimple on Falcks forehand was a good idea? Maybe some coach told Gatien to get a better backhand and he should not play so close? and so on
I agree that there are more correct ways of playing but still think many players become good with not so good technique? Have been on some eduactions with the headcoach for a Swedish tabletennis school and i asked him about this. He was thinking in terms of instead of changing their technique he tried to make them as good as possible with their current one. better to change their technique or the way he was thinking? Maybe better to work around it? Know another international coach that thinks alot about strengths, and not not believe in making weakness so much better, better to focus on strengths and how to use them.
Alot of other things aswell that is important than just good technique.
Interesting discusssion this!
says
Spin and more spin.
says
Spin and more spin.
Well-Known Member
Super Moderator
Rather than talking in terms of good and bad, you could talk in terms of efficiency: more efficient; less efficient.
One of the things that could happen with someone using technique that is inefficient while still trying very hard and using more effort than they should is, that is where injury can occur.
So, maybe good and bad are not the right words. But more efficient technique and a useful amount of effort with as little wasted effort as possible is what you are looking for.
Which is also where BrokenBall's information actually becomes quite useful. If you do it the way he describes the physics, it is true that you can get more power (spin & speed) with less effort. So, it is worth noting what is valuable in what has been presented.
says
ok, I will go back and make sure you have access.
Be...
Well-Known Member
People can look pretty freaking awkward and yet always make good contact with good racket speed while making good tactical decisions. I've encountered and lost to people like that throughout my life. At a point when I was scouting somebody I learned to recognize people who are a whole lot better than they look at first. (Often these kinds of players have one weird Super Power, some shot you wouldn't think was even possible and they do it nearly every time, and you better figure out quick how to avoid it).
And some people look insanely good and somehow never get to where you think they should.
And some people look insanely good and somehow never get to where you think they should.
Last edited:
This user has no status.
Member
Of course there is variability, but the stuff you're talking about are the details, which I've mentioned I think are less important.
Timo boll twists his hips on the FH, the difference is he doesn't use a big backswing like most players do.
Technique is probably more important these days with the bigger ball as you need to be able to swing and hit harder.
I looked for some FH footage of Werner Schlager, if you pause here at 00:26 you'll see his hips have twisted and that his fh technique is good https://youtu.be/ksytl-Sqp94?t=26.
Maybe his technique on everything wasn't ideal, but it was good enough. Everyone doesn't need perfect technique on everything to be good. But I don't see why one shouldn't strive for optimal technique if you have a healthy and fit body.
I used to obsess about grip, but that was never my actual problem. Though I do think it helps to change the grip a bit between Bh and FH, they are fairly small changes. The grip should just be comfortable. Truls has found a comfortable grip that works for him. But grip isn't technique. Technique is (in my opinion) how you use the body optimally depending on the ball and it seems to me that the FH is very technique dependent and important.
I'm still really curious if you have ever seen a top player who does not twist or use their hips on FH against block.
Really agree with Carl's point. More or less efficient is probably a more useful term than good or bad.
Last edited:
says
ok, I will go back and make sure you have access.
Be...
Well-Known Member
Elaborating on what Richie wrote, Schlager could look a bit awkward but he had a couple of Super Powers. One was his serve. Another was his incredibly compact and efficient footwork, which made it hard to pressure him.
says
ok, I will go back and make sure you have access.
Be...
Well-Known Member
yes, of course there are some important basics. I would say grip is technique.
Proably everyone is using the hip a bit, more or less. Some players like Gatien, lebesson that play close to the table use less hip? Also think Boll is using arm more compared to other pros and therefore do not play so hard. Feel like that shows a bit when playing against a defender. I do think he use the legs a lot though, go very deep.
Proably a spectrum of how much hip players use and other technique.
Proably everyone is using the hip a bit, more or less. Some players like Gatien, lebesson that play close to the table use less hip? Also think Boll is using arm more compared to other pros and therefore do not play so hard. Feel like that shows a bit when playing against a defender. I do think he use the legs a lot though, go very deep.
Proably a spectrum of how much hip players use and other technique.
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Member
I think perhaps the biggest common factor for top players is their difference
ovtcharov
Falcks
waldner
lgl
klampar
douglas
to name few
says
Spin and more spin.
says
Spin and more spin.
Well-Known Member
Super Moderator
Truth be told, that is really just modern movement theory. When a movement is more efficient it is safer and the mechanics are more effective.
Where you get into things that are interesting is, because we all REALLY have different bodies, something that might be efficient for me may not be for someone else. Forearm length, upper arm length, shape and range of motion in shoulder joint, legs, hips, length of spine, shape of vertebra.
This is part of why you see ML, ZJK, FZD or any other top player have such different strokes. ML's strokes may not work as well for ZJK's body. And these players developed their technique through years of practice.
One thing Schlager had besides his serves was an amazing BH. He was awkward in turning to FH. But, he is still doing a hell of a lot that is efficient in how he meets the ball or he would not get so much power.
One of the ways to see efficiency in technique is the effortless quality. The work might be hard. But the performance of that work still has is seemingly effortless. This is the case in great dancers, gymnasts, or any other physical endeavor. Say, with a great dancer, and comparing that dancer to a really good dancer, they will do a lot of the same things, the same movements. The great dancer will make those movements look more effortless. The really good dancer will still do the same movements and do them quite well. But you will see a little more of the effort in their movement quality.
But what technique will be right for a person, will be dependent on so many things including joints, muscles, fitness level, bone lengths (length of levers).
What is consistent is that it will always be a complex chain of events, kinetic chains, synchronous movement patterns and muscle actions that create the movement. And the things that one should be paying attention to while performing those movements are often not the ones people would think they should be paying attention to. And certainly, paying attention to the biomechanics of the movement while attempting the movement could seriously interfere with the process.
Last edited:
Similar threads
