Take a look at my avatar! 😉
I see a great and I recognise it instantly.
Aruna is a great role model in many ways.
Despite not having a conventional forehand, he is excelling with his uniquie forehand along with his althetism. Just shows that you don't have to have the 'Chinese' technique to be excellent in table tennis. While he may not reach world no 1, it should offer amateurs relief that they can still excel with an unconventional technique.
Looking forward to his match against Zhou Qi Hao.
If you're looking for a coach with unconventional technique, look at my coach !
yeh but I agree, sometimes you just look at Aruna FH he looks clumsy, but when you look at the ball he's just hit, its just wow...
That is why Aruna is such an enigma. In the world of TT, we have the chinese FH, then the european FH and perhaps we are seeing the emergence of the 3rd type: Wakanda FH.
It is a technically correct forehand though, mostly powered by the legs, with good leverage and forearm snap and largely topspin focused, maybe with a bit more back muscle action to take advantage of Quadri's strengths. I say that not because I really want to argue with you, but because I want to stress that unconventional technique is not the same as incorrect technique, and the latter is what amateurs need to avoid.
Look the FIDE rankings: there are 3 different ones for each kind of time limits, Standard being the typical 2h/2h limit (with numbers of moves varying from 30 to the typical 40 ones according to each tournament: no less than those number in the 2h limit), Rapid (20 mn, the most used time limit worldwide for amateurs) and Blitz, the well known NYC/Boston outdoor parks time limit. Bertween those 3 different rankings there are huge variations sometimes: Magnus Carlsen is still number 2 in Rapid and Blitz, but Nakamura jumps from the 13th rank from Standard time to the 1st one in Blitz, because with covid he wasn't able and allowed to play more in IRL competitions, so he competed in official online blitz tournaments, with Maxime Vachier Lagrave being blitz world champion in the official IRL World Championship Hikaru is still ranked n°1, and to me that makes sense (also because Magnus Carlsen sometimes do not take online blitz games seriously, he loves playing while being drunk hahaha).
I mean... you can't do better and fairer system than this one.
Yeah. I noticed low-level (# 27) Chen Szu Yu just beat Zhang Rui. Is she now top 10? Or are you still of the opinion that Adriana's win over CSY at the WTTC was jet lag and means next to nothing?
This is a very selective view of things. Why do they use Blitz matches to decide more and more things now in classical tournaments when blitz used to be the pariah of chess? Why are they using time controls with less increments in standard time controls in order to control the length of matches? You may or may not be old enough to remember when adjournments and resumption in chess were the norm, now they virtually do not exist in chess.
I'm 49 and played official tournaments in the adjournaments era dude... and it was freaking stupid, it was also unfair because you were finishing your adjournaments sometimes past midnight and then had to start the next morning at 8 AM !!!
No seriously, it's a good consensus, some competitions were ending sometimes 1 even 2 days after the "official" end of the tournament. And most of the time it was the "little" players who were fighting in ADJ mode to gain some points, but the top ranked one never ADJ before the last round, they prefered agreed to do some perpetual moves and end the fight in a draw. So at least the blitz ending system forces them to fully play. It's equity for the poor ranked players.
Yeah, but the strongest player is more often revealed by the longest time control, no? We should be playing best of 7 not best of 5. No, we should be playing 21 point games not 11 point games?
I am just trying to understand how you square these kinds of tradeoffs with making statements about how ranking systems or scoring that maximize your preferred strength measurement approach are objectively the "best" and not simply a preference based on focusing on some things over other things that might be equally important.
Ah okay. It is cool that someone's ranking 4 years ago impacts your perspective more strongly that her play and RC rating in 2022. You have a lower opinion of her than I do. My point though is that this is why we play the matches and it is easy to put too much into strength measurement without balancing it with the stress of performance, especially when people are allowed to choose when to perform and are not forced to perform on demand, as the current points format largely forces them to.
Nope, the stronger player is revealed by his deeper calculations, simple as that. Recently MVL has been lost in a spanish opening, his "madeleine de proust" because he didn't worked deeply enough on a single move the blacks opponent did. These guys work with their coaches prior to the match, when they have the whites it's easy to dictate the opening. MVL did a poor anticipation training with his coach, he didn't calculte deeply enough.
Hikaru Nakamura is the best in Blitz because he calculates deeper than the other in a short amount of time, but that does not mean he will calculate deeper with more minutes in his pockets. In that game, Carlsen shows he's the one who can calculate deeper than anyone, as Kasparov used to. (Kasparov has been Carlsen's coach for some times...)
Ranking only is a number you get from all existing past information. the beauty of RC Elo system, is that when new info (= new match results come in), RC ratings adjusts. Thats the Bayesian way of thinking. Very recommended if you want to win at poker, sportsbetting or stock market or make scientific predictions
Just to be clear, you have factored Diaz's continental advantages and potential for improvement into all this? Don't want a revisionist history in a year's time (assuming no injury/pregancy etc.)
