Backhand smash tips

[vossi39]

2014 -> 2023 ---- The game has changed !

 

[Tony's Table Tennis]

2014 -> 2023 ---- The game has changed !

fundamental of skillset is still the same

what do you think the coaches are coaching in 2014 and in 2023? Totally different things?
When you need to execute a shot, there are many ways to do it.
If you don't agree, you can always start your coaching channel videos and teach others your ways.

If the ball goes in, there is no wrong way.

Blahness, you need to stop posting Coach Meng's stuff....and stiring really pointless debates (this is too soon after the backhand flick one lol)

 

[vossi39]

fundamental of skillset is still the same

what do you think the coaches are coaching in 2014 and in 2023? Totally different things?

Well. Fundamentals I'm not questioning.

I hope that coaching is different from 2014 (where we introduced plastic balls) and table tennis has changed since then. Otherwise it would not makes sense to offer TT coaches in DTTB regular technique updates in their training catalogues. The importance of BH has changed a lot since 2014 (mainly driven by Harimoto) and therefore the technique used.
But hey...If every shot being on the table is the right one, why debate technique at all.

 

[blahness]

fundamental of skillset is still the same

what do you think the coaches are coaching in 2014 and in 2023? Totally different things?
When you need to execute a shot, there are many ways to do it.
If you don't agree, you can always start your coaching channel videos and teach others your ways.

If the ball goes in, there is no wrong way.

Blahness, you need to stop posting Coach Meng's stuff....and stiring really pointless debates (this is too soon after the backhand flick one lol)

Hahahaha I have more to post xD

 

[zeio]

2014 -> 2023 ---- The game has changed !

Here is one from last month. Not as high a chop-block as the one at World Cup 2014 (roughly 2 nets vs 3 nets), but the same principle.
https://youtu.be/z8qgoUnDxH8?t=179

BTW, in 2020, Mizutani made the following statement in an article of Table Tennis Kingdom.

https://sports.sina.cn/others/pingpang/2020-06-22/detail-iirczymk8425324.d.html

水谷隼认为，张继科改变现代乒乓球主要有三个方面。在技术上，张继科把反手拧拉技术发展成强有力的进攻武器，改变了“有发球权就天然占优”的概念。他使用逆旋转发球，第三板反手发力，改变了中国乒乓球运动员的打法模式。现在樊振东、林高远等年轻主力在打法上都有类似的进攻模式，应该是受到了张继科的影响。水谷隼还认为，张继科在赛场上激情澎湃，吸引了大量球迷，颠覆了乒乓球运动员的旧有形象。从2011年开始，以中国队为首的乒乓球运动员开始有了狂热的粉丝。

Mizutani believes that there are 3 main aspects of modern table tennis that Zhang Jike changed. Technically, Zhang Jike developed the backhand chiquita into a powerful offensive weapon, changing the concept of "the one who has the serve is naturally dominant". He used the reverse pendulum serve and a powerful backhand on the third ball, which changed the play style of Chinese table tennis players. Now Fan Zhendong, Lin Gaoyuan and other young main players have similar offensive patterns in their play style, which is likely influenced by Zhang Jike. Mizutani also believes that Zhang Jike's passion on the court has attracted a large number of fans and subverted the old image of table tennis players. Beginning in 2011, table tennis players headed by the Chinese team began to have fanatical fans.

https://www.tabletennisdaily.com/forum/topics/fraser-riley-1-who-is-the-best-young-player-in-the-world.24633/post-333454

https://www.tabletennisdaily.com/forum/topics/return-of-international-tt-matches.23956/post-329150

Mizutani: In 2011, the victory of Zhang Jike changed the world of table tennis dramatically. It was a shock

Zhang Jike, the man who changed modern table tennis in 2011

 

[NextLevel]

Well. Fundamentals I'm not questioning.

I hope that coaching is different from 2014 (where we introduced plastic balls) and table tennis has changed since then. Otherwise it would not makes sense to offer TT coaches in DTTB regular technique updates in their training catalogues. The importance of BH has changed a lot since 2014 (mainly driven by Harimoto) and therefore the technique used.
But hey...If every shot being on the table is the right one, why debate technique at all.

Give us a break, the advice to pivot and use the forehand on high balls is as old as the 38mm ball. Learning to use your backhand to handle more balls is never a bad thing as long as your shot selection is still good. Or maybe Ma Long should never do chop block, he should just work on his footwork and play a forehand.

The forehand will always have advantages for such balls vs the backhand. But anytime you can play quality on the backhand against an equal level opponent to hold your table positioning, it is an advantage. So again, shot selection isn't the same thing as technical capabilities.

 

[NextLevel]

I think you misunderstood my post. Taller players have an advantage in BH smash because more balls are at chest height or lower which makes it easier to press down. It's harder for shorter players to BH smash imo because balls can come up to head height very easily. PechPong who is also on the shorter side also has the exact same issue and he talked about it on his videos.

I guess the ease of looping low balls compensates. 🤣

 

[Tony's Table Tennis]

this is getting funnier now

 

[Tony's Table Tennis]

Otherwise it would not makes sense to offer TT coaches in DTTB regular technique updates in their training catalogues.

I'm not sure about DTTB, but if all national ass are the same, the regular updates are income generation and mostly zero productivity.
This is the feedback I have encountered in many places.

and next level is right
haha

well, you should do some youtube videos.
there is too many people coaching the coach on TTD this week

 

[vossi39]

I never stated to ALLWAYS use forehand. I instead stated, that backhand technique changed in recent years a lot and modern backhand is played in front of your body.

But it’s sure due to my bad english, that I don‘t get this across. Backhand smash is a technique from the past. Ok. Declare victory. You didn‘t convince me, though.

 

[zeio]

Hmmm.. if I look at the heights of the balls in the video, I‘d rather recommend to work on your footwork, then learning this (in my opinion wrong) backhand smash. You have ample time to pivot and smash with your forehand.

Pivoting to smash with the FH is actually what the CNT players used to do more than a decade ago.

Around that period, there was a coach by the handle 我爱国球 at sundns.org that was very vocal against this "FH first" mentality (one reason he didn't like ML) and coined it "京帮单面拉" (Beijing camp single-sided looping) and the frequent patrons used to poke fun at that term.

WLQ
https://youtu.be/BrHQtIGEdcY?t=333
https://youtu.be/BrHQtIGEdcY?t=410
https://youtu.be/BrHQtIGEdcY?t=450
MLin
https://youtu.be/BrHQtIGEdcY?t=490

 

[NextLevel]

I never stated to ALLWAYS use forehand. I instead stated, that backhand technique changed in recent years a lot and modern backhand is played in front of your body.

But it’s sure due to my bad english, that I don‘t get this across. Backhand smash is a technique from the past. Ok. Declare victory. You didn‘t convince me, though.

Yes and modern forehand is Quadri Aruna? Ma Long? Fan Zhendong? Felix Lebrun? Wang Chugin? Truls? Modern backhand is Fan Zhendong? Lin Jun Yu? Alexis Lebrun? Felix Lebrun? Harimoto? Calderano? Truls? Adriana Diaz?

Your post makes zeio point about how biomechanics is "underlooked" even more relevant than I thought it was when he made it.

 

[vossi39]

Please then, enlighten me with the „bio mechanics“ in the video shown.

 

[NextLevel]

Please then, enlighten me with the „bio mechanics“ in the video shown.

Try smashing a mid high topspin ball with your backhand. Especially if the ball has good topspin. Many people who try to replicate the motion that they think works on their forehand side don't swing through a similar path to what they do on their forehand and often hit the ball long. The video shows you what the racket does on the forehand side and one way to achieve the same effect on the backhand side. Hope that helps. If you need more detail, let me know.

 

[zeio]

Here is another one from the just concluded final between AJY and Gauzy at the WTT Feeder Havirov 2023. Closer in height to the one at World Cup 2014 but with Gauzy a little further back from the table.

https://youtu.be/i-bKhSaROkw?t=7714
https://youtu.be/lEVWTawQlfc?t=139

 

[IB66]

http://mytabletennis.net/forum/foru...for-bachhand-topspin-against-backspin#1055315
It's been over 4 years. How time flies.

In table tennis, biomechanics is one of those topics that's severely "underlooked (suspicion and mistrust)" compared to strokes. We see that all the time. We often ask for comments on our strokes but too often the focus is placed on interpreting the superficial form (for/against) rather than deriving the underlying principles of biomechanics (how/why). Put another way, this is what we are doing, but for the former, we somehow ask "is that what we are really doing or should be doing?", whereas for the latter, we ask instead "do we reflect (faithfully or appropriately in words) what we are really doing or should be doing?" It's like prescriptive and descriptive grammar.

If we use the underlying principles of biomechanics to evaluate how to maximise power, speed, accuracy, recovery,etc and reduce likelihood of injury, does this lead to a superficial form?

 

[longrange]

I can explain what I believe.
I want you to explain how the follow through affects the trajectory of the ball after the ball leave the paddle.

Ok, let me approach this exercise.
1. Fairly obvious, that a racket hitting the ball belongs to the physics of rotational motion. A player accelerates the racket during the backswing, hits the ball in the middle, where the rotational velocity is maximal and decelerates the racket during the follow-through. This can be done by body rotation as in the famous example of the drum with two balls on strings. Why the follow through is important? Because otherwise the player would at least destroy his joints trying to stop the racket right after the hit (this is trivial) and it would require additional unnecessary stopping force.
2. Why the shape of the follow-through is important? If we take the motion on a sphere, then the shortest path between two points will be a circle's arc and this will be the easiest to execute for the player. I.e. if you want to hit the ball at the right point (middle of the racket trajectory) you gotta choose two points on the sphere and execute the swing from one to another along the circle. (Similar to minimal action if not exactly it). If you wanted to change the follow-through from the circle, you'd again have to apply force and damage your joints.
3. Now we don't swing along a circle since we have to adjust not only the contract point but at least the contact angle as well (and have several joints) and therefore the motion becomes more complex and the follow through might look unnecessary complicated, but I'm pretty sure that if you decompose the motion you'll find out that it is minimal/shortest in the sense of 2.
3.a. Actually after moment's thought, say, FZD's motion and follow-through look pretty much like a circle's arc to me as well. I guess it's what blahness was referring to.

 

[zeio]

If we use the underlying principles of biomechanics to evaluate how to maximise power, speed, accuracy, recovery,etc and reduce likelihood of injury, does this lead to a superficial form?

If done like how hard-headed engineer does it, then of course.

At this point, biomechanics in table tennis remains in the descriptive and comparative stages, where most studies only try to describe the racket head velocity, angle and angular velocity of various joints for, say, the loop stroke upon impact, and only a handful that I've come across monitor how they change throughout the entire stroke. There are not enough studies and therefore data to come up with a comprehensive theory.

https://ojs.ub.uni-konstanz.de/cpa/article/view/693

Different kinds of studies are generally
undertaken: descriptive studies in which the general aspects of the biomechanics of a
particular sport skill are explained and analyzed studying the athletes' performances;
comparative studies in which the technique of two or more subject or group of subjects are
compared to assess the most productive or safest of them; longitudinal comparisons in which
the technique changes are monitored over the time to assess the effects of training or
rehabilitation programs; setups of motor evaluation test (biomechanical testing protocols) to
help the athletes to perform at their best potential.

https://ojs.ub.uni-konstanz.de/cpa/article/view/1746

One way to strengthen the foundation of biomechanics may be to combine
descriptive specifics with philosophical thought. The discipline is typically known for
providing specific descriptions for various types of movement. However, it may be
missing the combining philosophical aspects and applicable generalities that may be the
key to gaining respect from other professions, and making biomechanics the stand alone
type of discipline that it has the potential to be.
The introduction of philosophical thought requires certain amounts of creativ
ity and theorizing. Traditionally biomechanists have been more involved with providing
specific descriptive types of information instead of well-based theoretical frameworks and
conceptualizations. Perhaps some of the on-going philosophical issues are those related
to defining coordination and balance, and providing explanations of various movement
functions that can be applied more generally instead of specifically. It is true that in
order to arrive at general conclusions, specific types of information need to be gathered
and assimilated. However, this assimilation process is not always completed and there
fore, the information remains specific. Many times this type of specific information is
used only once and then tossed aside to make room for more studies.

 

[brokenball]

Ok, let me approach this exercise.
1. Fairly obvious, that a racket hitting the ball belongs to the physics of rotational motion. A player accelerates the racket during the backswing, hits the ball in the middle, where the rotational velocity is maximal and decelerates the racket during the follow-through. This can be done by body rotation as in the famous example of the drum with two balls on strings. Why the follow through is important? Because otherwise the player would at least destroy his joints trying to stop the racket right after the hit (this is trivial) and it would require additional unnecessary stopping force.

Yes, but this assume one stops right away.

2. Why the shape of the follow-through is important? If we take the motion on a sphere, then the shortest path between two points will be a circle's arc and this will be the easiest to execute for the player. I.e. if you want to hit the ball at the right point (middle of the racket trajectory) you gotta choose two points on the sphere and execute the swing from one to another along the circle. (Similar to minimal action if not exactly it). If you wanted to change the follow-through from the circle, you'd again have to apply force and damage your joints.

??? I don't see what circular arcs have to do with the return to ready.

3. Now we don't swing along a circle since we have to adjust not only the contract point but at least the contact angle as well (and have several joints) and therefore the motion becomes more complex and the follow through might look unnecessary complicated, but I'm pretty sure that if you decompose the motion you'll find out that it is minimal/shortest in the sense of 2.

I would not return the paddle to the ready position using circular arc. I would try to reduce the radius of motion to reduce the inertia.

3.a. Actually after moment's thought, say, FZD's motion and follow-through look pretty much like a circle's arc to me as well. I guess it's what blahness was referring to.

The initial FH stroke does more or less. I am sure it isn't constant because we must adapt to the situation.

 

[Jim]

My tip is to jump to raise the swing plane of your backhand for those high-high balls.