Changes in Table Tennis

[jmillsy2]

The downside of pips are always people in lower leagues that play way higher with them than they usually would. It is just frustrating to play against someone who you know is technically way lower skilled than yourself, yet you struggle.

It can also be frustrating for pips users to lose to players who are lower skill level but know to do nothing with the ball and put everything to the pips over and over again and so can beat you by doing that (it is surprisingly difficult to play around if you cannot punish these shots very easily).

So it swings both ways.

 

[pgpg]

Another way to look at it - low level pips players are a good filter to separate players who understand spin and tactics from the ones who do not (but think of themselves as 'highly skilled' )

 

[Shuki]

Suga, I think this is going to be a situation where we're just going to disagree. Nothing you've said has edged me even a little toward the changes being a bad thing. And nothing I've said has done so for you. We both see reasons that make the other wrong, and we see those reasons as outweighing the opposition.

I mean no disrespect to you by disagreeing, you present your side very well and I'm glad you did so. But I think my feet are planted too firmly here.

 

[UpSideDownCarl]

Another way to look at it - low level pips players are a good filter to separate players who understand spin and tactics from the ones who do not (but think of themselves as 'highly skilled' )

This is a great post. If you understand what it means, then you probably are happy, win or lose with any opportunity to play a pips player of your own level or higher.

Well, really, a pips player of any level.


Sent from the Subterranean Workshop by Telepathy

 

[jmillsy2]

Also, for those who think the sport is now 'better' or blanket state that the level of play of today's top players is higher, look at highlight clips like this:

This match is from 1999 and easily has just as many exceptional rallies as any match you could find nowadays. And it's before most of the big changes were made to the sport.

The only thing they needed for more attraction was better video quality!

 

[Shuki]

Another way to look at it - low level pips players are a good filter to separate players who understand spin and tactics from the ones who do not (but think of themselves as 'highly skilled' )

True, but I see the reverse to be true as well. I've seen players who could deal with short pips at higher levels but couldn't deal with the spin of an inverted player.

Here's a real example. My training partner, now he's better but a while back he couldn't deal with heavy spin. Here's a video of him playing with a multiple-time US national hardbat champion. He pulls complete matches out of the guy. But then at the time he would also lose to 1500 players who put decent amounts spin on the ball.

I think it comes down to style, this guy isn't a looper, he's a counterhitter/blocker. So when the spin changes aren't that extreme he does better.

 

[Suga D]

Btw: for those of you who think pips are boring to watch, here, one of the best matches ever:

Kong Linghui vs Joo Se Hyuk in the 2003 China Open:

Sent from the Subterranean Workshop by Telepathy

That point at 4:03
[Emoji15]

Wow. Just wow. Lightning fast feet. I believe he wasn't much slower than RSM.

Young Joo and the great King Kong.

What a match.
So many outstanding rallies.
What a crowd.
What a noise level.
[Emoji15]
Almost like a time travel.

Thank you so much for sharing, Carl.

 

[pgpg]

True, but I see the reverse to be true as well. I've seen players who could deal with short pips at higher levels but couldn't deal with the spin of an inverted player.

Here's a real example. My training partner, now he's better but a while back he couldn't deal with heavy spin. Here's a video of him playing with a multiple-time US national hardbat champion. He pulls complete matches out of the guy. But then at the time he would also lose to 1500 players who put decent amounts spin on the ball.

I think it comes down to style, this guy isn't a looper, he's a counterhitter/blocker. So when the spin changes aren't that extreme he does better.

I think the common thread here is that up to a certain level everyone has pretty obvious holes in their game: be it pips, heavy loopers, hitters, or blockers. Yes, let's not forget about close to the table blockers who play the angles extremely well

 

[NextLevel]

It can also be frustrating for pips users to lose to players who are lower skill level but know to do nothing with the ball and put everything to the pips over and over again and so can beat you by doing that (it is surprisingly difficult to play around if you cannot punish these shots very easily).

So it swings both ways.

Creating nothing balls consistently with inverted at a decent level is a skill. Putting pips on your racket and just taking advantage of the fact that your opponent has never practiced seriously against them is not.

 

[NextLevel]

Another way to look at it - low level pips players are a good filter to separate players who understand spin and tactics from the ones who do not (but think of themselves as 'highly skilled' )

No, not necessarily. Lower level pips players often take advantage of the fact that their opponents are just inexperienced vs pips. I am not against pips play, but there is no point sugar coating this fact.

 

[pgpg]

No, not necessarily. Lower level pips players often take advantage of the fact that their opponents are just inexperienced vs pips. I am not against pips play, but there is no point sugar coating this fact.

Sure, but the same argument applies to lefties, penholders, blockers, classical defenders, hardbat, Seemiller grip players etc. The original pushback also came against the statement that pips need to be banned since they allowed lower level players to beat someone with a much better technique.

 

[NextLevel]

I think it comes down to style, this guy isn't a looper, he's a counterhitter/blocker. So when the spin changes aren't that extreme he does better.

I was that kind of player for a while and in some ways I still am so I know exactly what you mean.

But I think it is just better to say that you play better vs what you practice against and what you understand. I understand why people complain about pips. At every level, you have to practice against them to avoid losing to them and it can be bothersome if you don't. But since we have lots of pips players in Philly, I actually got decent against them pretty quickly and struggle more with the inverted ball.

Today, I played a guy with long pips and didn't even realize he was using long pips. A teammate of mine was disgusted at how he looked and called him a basement. Another teammate beat him at 1,2, and 4 or something like that (his main practice partner is a long pips expert who has been as high as 2300) and said that he could not believe that his opponent was 1700+.

I actually won the first 2 games against the guy without realizing that he was using long pips. He had shown me the pips but I failed to register them! In any case, our match would not count as our team had already won the match. After I beat him, my two teammates and I had this conversation about pips which guides what I write below.

The idea that players who can't play pips don't understand spin is simply untrue. It's really that players who haven't practiced much vs pips respond to pips as if they are inverted rubbers as spin reading happens at a subconscious level. We make assumptions about our every day environment. After all, I am far better at looping backspin than I am at looping topspin and no-spin because I never looped topspin until I was maybe 1900-2000, while I often looped backspin even when I Was 1400 as I wanted to learn. No one explained to me that you could loop any ball as long as you adjusted your stroke to the contact point so I thought of every loop as a special technique. But even now I intellectually understand spin, I still struggle to read and loop non-backspin balls instinctively as my instinctive loop is vertical. I can do it, but it is a struggle.

And I have seen guys who are 2200 and have taken 2600 players to 5 games lose to 1800 players who used pips. So which is more likely - they cannot understand spin when returning 2700 serves, and therefore lose to 1800 pips players, or they just haven't practiced vs pips and therefore struggle to play competently against them? You mean losing to DeWitt means you don't understand spin? Seriously?

I will close this out with one more story. Back in 2012, I was about breaking 1700 and playing at the NA Teams. Myself and a couple of my junior teammates played a guy rated 1600 or so. And my teammate came back and gave the first game score as 11-2 or something ridiculous. And after, he was like, we should all beat the guy, because he discovered that if he served long no spin into the guy's pips, the guy would just chop the ball off the table. And after we all beat him either 3-1 or 3-0, we all asked the same question - how could that guy be 1600?

I think we all know the answer - he takes advantage of the fact that people don't get much practice vs. pips.

 

[NextLevel]

Sure, but the same argument applies to lefties, penholders, blockers, classical defenders, hardbat, Seemiller grip players etc. The original pushback also came against the statement that pips need to be banned since they allowed lower level players to beat someone with a much better technique.

I guess you can decide whether your argument has merit as many of the styles you listed take advantage of pips, including hardbat and traditional Seemiller. I do not agree that pips should be banned outright, but pips are not allowed to be used in under 10 ( or is it a higher age) tournaments in Canada for example. The other styles are not banned, so is Canada simply singling out pips for some reason or is there an admission in there somewhere that pips can turn the skill apple cart upside down in a way that being a lefty, penholder, blocker, classical defender or Seemiller grip player does not?

 

[NextLevel]

BTW, to stick to the original thread, I don't think that changing the net height will be as big a deal as some make out and I take the view of Jorgen Persson that at some point, we need to stop changing equipment and look at other things if we want to slow the game down.

 

[Baal]

Why do we want to slow the game down?

 

[NextLevel]

Why do we want to slow the game down?

To improve the length and quality of points and of the rallies.

 

[Suga D]

Suga, I think this is going to be a situation where we're just going to disagree. Nothing you've said has edged me even a little toward the changes being a bad thing. And nothing I've said has done so for you. We both see reasons that make the other wrong, and we see those reasons as outweighing the opposition.

I mean no disrespect to you by disagreeing, you present your side very well and I'm glad you did so. But I think my feet are planted too firmly here.

It´s all good. I don´t take this as disrespect. And hopefully you do the same with the following...

BTW, to stick to the original thread, I don't think that changing the net height will be as big a deal as some make out and I take the view of Jorgen Persson that at some point, we need to stop changing equipment and look at other things if we want to slow the game down.

Since Shuki and you are neither choppers nor high-level i heavily doubt you guys can speak from a higher level chopper´s perspective. In case there are any higher leveled choppers [+2400 USATT] around you i highly recommend to take a [offline] chat with them!

Otherwise it´s a bit hypocrtitical and contradictive how often you keep saying to Archo, that he shouldn´t speak on things he only knows from theory and yourself are just doing the same.

 

[NextLevel]

It´s all good. I don´t take this as disrespect.



Since Shuki and you are neither choppers nor high-level i heavily doubt you guys can speak from a higher level chopper´s perspective. In case there are any higher leveled choppers [+2400 USATT] around you i highly recommend to take a [offline] chat with them!

Otherwise it´s a bit hypocrtitical and contradictive how often you keep saying to Archo, that he shouldn´t speak on things he only knows from theory and yourself are just doing the same.

Shuki, for one, played in a club where they actually raised the net heights to test the change. I am venturing an opinion just as I have a right to, an opinion which I prefaced with the pronoun "I" to show that it is an opinion. Sometimes, I find it curious how you get rude out of nowhere over trivial things.

 

[Suga D]

That´s rude? ´Cause i said you and Shuki aren´t high Level? Really? Did i miss anything and Shuki and you turned into high-level choppers over night?
You guys might be good but certainly not semi-pro/pro high level. i thought you knew that?
There really wasn´t any offense intended, just please practice what you preach.
I do beg your pardon, in case that came across rude.

 

[NextLevel]

That´s rude? ´Cause i said you and Shuki aren´t high Level? Really? There wasn´t any offense intended, just please practice what you preach. I do beg your pardon, in case that came across rude.

No, because you said that I criticize Archo for doing what I am doing now. I am not a high level player (max rating USATT 2078) so what about my post infers that I am even speaking from the perspective of a high level player? I am presenting my own opinion. I can't even speak for 2400 loopers, so why are you trying to make me speak for 2400 defenders? IT would be like me saying that saying that you cannot speak for 2500 level hard bat players. Why should I presume you are? Why not just assume you are speaking for yourself?

But since you want to discuss defenders, let's do that in good faith, rather than pretend that you can read my mind and say that I am speaking for them - I did not even think seriously about them when making my initial comments - I just thought that a 1cm difference would slow the game down but not change anything radically.

For the record, here is a Waldner match from 1987. Note all the comments made about defenders in 1987 are still made today. I personally don't blame the ball as much as the increase in athleticism, the changes in serve rules and the more direct style in the game in general. Whether that would have taken as much hold without the ball and score rules changes is anyone's guess. Defenders were rare at the top levels as looping became more popular, which became more prominent as China switched to shakehand looping as well. If commentators were preaching the death of defense in 1987, people need to rethink some ideas.