Daily Table Tennis Chit Chat

[UpSideDownCarl]

38mm anyone.......... ? Suddenly feeling older.....

I still have some 38mm Nittaku 3 star balls. It is wild to play with them with today's equipment. The difference is staggering.

But, today, most people who are talking about this era and adapting to the 40+ ball and equipment changes that were useful in adapting to the 40+ ball are talking about transitioning from 40mm celluloid ball to 40+ mm Poly ball. There was no transition from 38mm ball (2002) to 40+ ball (2014). Although the transition from 38mm to 40mm was hard in some ways and smoother in others.

What ways was the transition to 40mm ball smoother than the transition to the 40+ Poly ball? The material was the same from 38mm to 40mm. When the transition to 40+ started, they really had not figured out what materials would work for a Poly ball and the result was top pro players complaining in tournaments that the balls were garbage. The bounce was funny, every ball was soooooo different that 40+ balls from 3 different companies were unrecognizable as the same commodity. Some balls bounced high. Some did not seem to bounce at all. Some bounced okay on some parts of the ball and then did not bounce if the seam hit the table. The seamed balls would split apart mid rally. Those seamless balls were often not round. Many of the seamed balls were not round.

In the 2016 Olympics, this was a big enough issue that the networks (oblivious to many things) even picked up on it and did a story on it interviewing players and showing buckets of broken TT balls from the tournament. I believe they had Ovtcharov on camera saying the balls were total garbage.

So, the size was an issue going from 38mm to 40mm. But not the material. And fairly quickly, the quality of balls was consistent enough that, a 3 star from any brand would still be a good 40mm ball. Whereas, until something like 2019, a lot of stuff that was being labeled 3 star 40+ balls were still worse in quality than a ZERO Star 40mm practice ball.

But yeah, if you have any 38mm balls hanging around, it would be worth pulling one out and banging the ball around for a little while to feel the difference.

 

[Ghostzen]

It's funny you say that. I have a Halex and TSP which only last month I hit with for a bit with one of the guys I practice with. The weird thing is how small it looks to a "normal" ball to be honest. It's like oh ...wow... really!

Next I'll dig out the Tip Top Bike glue and my old Kenny blade or Stiga one. Then ...Game on.

 

[Richie]

Eslöv (Truls team) played Söderhamn UIF just now in the final for the league win. Wow, it was intense.
I only managed to catch the last singles match on stream, Tom Jarvis lost and it was down to the doubles. Kosiba (Eslöv) also lost to japanese player Koji Uezu after being up 2-0, 7-2. Truls and Jarvis played the doubles and lost. Jarvis served in the net at 7-9 I think.

Something similar happened last season, Truls and Alex Naumi played the doubles in the final and lost to Helsingborg. Truls looked as disappointed in his teammate then as now. Also, apparently Truls got a red card for accidentally hitting the umpire with a racket toss.

 

[blahness]

what is a 38mm ball? never even heard of it lol

 

[Gozo Zyreruna]

1) You talk about the 40+ era. Did you play in the 40mm celluloid era to be able to compare? Or are you just repeating something you heard others say because they were comparing their experience now to back when the ball was 40mm celluloid? Clearly, this does not really matter. I am just curious.

2) Can you feel the 0.5mm thickness difference in your hand? Even though that is small, that difference also may make certain actions while holding the racket easier.

I know for me, I like the feeling of a blade that is 5.5mm-5.8mm thick. Holding shakehand you can do a lot more wrist manipulation and use a lot more whip mechanics with a thinner blade. To me, even 6.5mm-7mm feels thick and clunky.

Does that slight bit thinner make the blade feel like you can manipulate the racket more freely while playing?

1) You talk about the 40+ era. Did you play in the 40mm celluloid era to be able to compare? Or are you just repeating something you heard others say because they were comparing their experience now to back when the ball was 40mm celluloid? Clearly, this does not really matter. I am just curious.

" No friend, I did not play with 38mm ball ever. I gather these opinions from interacting with people in this forum plus with my club veteran players. The club veteran players who tried my bat said it themselves, the 9mm ( DS90 ) seems adequate for the old balls but weak for larger current ball. Those were their opinion.

2) Can you feel the 0.5mm thickness difference in your hand? Even though that is small, that difference also may make certain actions while holding the racket easier.

" Perhaps, the greatest difference I feel is the feeling of explosiveness. The 10.5mm really has that extra oommph! and perhaps that tend to make me want to flat hit it. I mean, the ball just shoots out like rocket. I don't have to do much. Brute force wins. This 10mm, even though is only 0.5mm, lack this feeling and hence I am more psychologically tend to be more conservative and brush the ball more, perhaps as a form of insurance. It is all mental actually. "

3) Does that slight bit thinner make the blade feel like you can manipulate the racket more freely while playing?

" I am not sure what your definition of manipulate means. For me, I do not manipulate the racket. My strokes are very basic. FH & BH drive. FH & BH open-ups. Serve & receive. Cut / push balls. I do not or unable to do those fancy tutti-frutti kind of strokes such as: Chiquita, Strawberry, FH flicks nor BH flicks. This is also in-line with what my coach expectation of me, just stick with basic and do them well, no need learn fancy stuff. You do these basic stuff very well, you already better 110% of amateur player - His words. " Hence for me, in terms of manipulation, whether is 10mm or 10.5mm, it makes no difference to me. I hope I have answered you query.

 

[JeffM]

I'll be heading to the city for a week, and I hope that I will be able to get my skills polished up for a bit with good practice partners etc. Not sure if that is going to hold until the comp as the comp will be 9 days after my last possible session in the city and I just simply cannot play any tt after leaving the city until the comp day due to work schedule clashes. But it is what it is. Hopefully I can have a proper warm up on the day. But I really cannot take anything for granted here.

No TT for me today as expected as there is no TT on Thursday down here PERIOD

But following on my last post:

It is truly exciting to plan a week of tt activity! Going back to the city for a week for me currently is like a child going to a playground and getting to play whatever I want!

So far, I have planned to play at a social session at the state centre (where the player level is higher than me) on Sunday, and then a 2 hour session with the state coach (I had some lessons with him maybe 8 yrs ago).

I plan on getting 2 additional sessions in for the remaining week up to the Sunday.

 

[UpSideDownCarl]

1) You talk about the 40+ era. Did you play in the 40mm celluloid era to be able to compare? Or are you just repeating something you heard others say because they were comparing their experience now to back when the ball was 40mm celluloid? Clearly, this does not really matter. I am just curious.

" No friend, I did not play with 38mm ball ever. I gather these opinions from interacting with people in this forum plus with my club veteran players. The club veteran players who tried my bat said it themselves, the 9mm ( DS90 ) seems adequate for the old balls but weak for larger current ball. Those were their opinion.

2) Can you feel the 0.5mm thickness difference in your hand? Even though that is small, that difference also may make certain actions while holding the racket easier.

" Perhaps, the greatest difference I feel is the feeling of explosiveness. The 10.5mm really has that extra oommph! and perhaps that tend to make me want to flat hit it. I mean, the ball just shoots out like rocket. I don't have to do much. Brute force wins. This 10mm, even though is only 0.5mm, lack this feeling and hence I am more psychologically tend to be more conservative and brush the ball more, perhaps as a form of insurance. It is all mental actually. "

3) Does that slight bit thinner make the blade feel like you can manipulate the racket more freely while playing?

" I am not sure what your definition of manipulate means. For me, I do not manipulate the racket. My strokes are very basic. FH & BH drive. FH & BH open-ups. Serve & receive. Cut / push balls. I do not or unable to do those fancy tutti-frutti kind of strokes such as: Chiquita, Strawberry, FH flicks nor BH flicks. This is also in-line with what my coach expectation of me, just stick with basic and do them well, no need learn fancy stuff. You do these basic stuff very well, you already better 110% of amateur player - His words. " Hence for me, in terms of manipulation, whether is 10mm or 10.5mm, it makes no difference to me. I hope I have answered you query.

Not 38mm ball. 40mm celluloid ball. Before 2014 we used the 40mm celluloid ball. Now we are using 40+ Poly ball. If you did not play when people used the previous ball (40mm celluloid ball) then you talking about equipment for the 40+ era seems a bit odd because you did not have to make that adjustment from 40mm to 40+ which is why it sounds like you are just repeating something you heard without understanding what it means.

When you do a BH topspin shot, do you try and turn the blade face down so the blade face is closed for topspin so you can spin over the ball?

When you do a BH push, do you turn the blade so the blade face is open and facing up for the push so the blade face is under the ball?

When you do a FH topspin shot, do you turn the blade face down so it is closed so you can spin over the ball to do the shot?

When you do a FH push, do you turn the blade face up so the blade face is open so the blade face can be under the ball for the push?

If you do any of the above, you are manipulating the blade in your hand while you are adjusting to different shots. There are other adjustments like for a fade or a hook shot that you may not be making. But, the ones above you probably are. So, if you are doing them, some of that requires movement of your wrist and is dependent on how you are holding the blade. Any of those adjustments listed above for opening or closing the racket would be easier with a thinner blade. It is too bad you can't feel this.

 

[Gozo Zyreruna]

Not 38mm ball. 40mm celluloid ball. Before 2014 we used the 40mm celluloid ball. Now we are using 40+ Poly ball. If you did not play when people used the previous ball (40mm celluloid ball) then you talking about equipment for the 40+ era seems a bit odd because you did not have to make that adjustment from 40mm to 40+ which is why it sounds like you are just repeating something you heard without understanding what it means.

1. I have not played with 40mm celluloid ball. I was not into TT at that time. Yes, like I said in my earlier post, I obtained these knowledges from interaction with veteran players be it online and offline.

When you do a BH topspin shot, do you try and turn the blade face down so the blade face is closed for topspin so you can spin over the ball?

Yes.

When you do a BH push, do you turn the blade so the blade face is open and facing up for the push so the blade face is under the ball?

Yes.

When you do a FH topspin shot, do you turn the blade face down so it is closed so you can spin over the ball to do the shot?

Yes.

When you do a FH push, do you turn the blade face up so the blade face is open so the blade face can be under the ball for the push?

Yes.

If you do any of the above, you are manipulating the blade in your hand while you are adjusting to different shots. There are other adjustments like for a fade or a hook shot that you may not be making. But, the ones above you probably are. So, if you are doing them, some of that requires movement of your wrist and is dependent on how you are holding the blade. Any of those adjustments listed above for opening or closing the racket would be easier with a thinner blade. It is too bad you can't feel this.

Oh I see. Thanks for your clarification. It seems I do these manipulations without much conscious thoughts, I just do it. Truth be told, I do all these because of my coach guidance. He did tell me to close my bat angle, adjust my bat angle this way or that way etc. I am like a blank white paper. I did not know how to play proper TT prior ( Was a typical recreational / garage type player with rubbish techniques prior ).

 

[JeffM]

Now that I am going to have 4 sessions of proper hitting next week, would that change the consensus to not renew my rubbers until after the comp?

 

[Gozo Zyreruna]

JeffM,

new rubber ( if same as old one e.g., strip away old T05 and replace with a fresh sheet of T05 ) will give a huge confidence boost for me.

If change to a completely different rubber; then it is a no-no.

 

[NextLevel]

Now that I am going to have 4 sessions of proper hitting next week, would that change the consensus to not renew my rubbers until after the comp?

As long as you feel you will have enough time to break it in, go ahead. I learned over time to force myself to stop giving a lick about my equipment unless the glue job was do bad that the rubber was coming off. Because once I started the match, all I wanted to do was focus on the match. So as long as you can do whatever it takes to keep your focus on the match, either is fine. If keeping your current equipment keeps you focused, do that. If changing the rubber keeps you focused, do that. Ultimately your focus on the match as long as the equipment is decent is the most important thing. The risk of changing is that if you do not feel that your technique is suited to the rubber no matter the rubber condition, it will raise questions with your shots. I keep the same rubber all the time and never care, I give myself 2‐6 months to change (my rubber is not that expensive IMHO and I can turn the bat over to get good results when the forehand is dead if I want to use both sides longer). The issue for you is that you are changing after the rubber is much deader, which has more risk. You have to decide and commit and forget about it. But it seems you continue to ask the question which makes me suspect it will bug you at the wrong time when the goal should be to eliminate the question from your mind when you play.

 

[UpSideDownCarl]

Oh I see. Thanks for your clarification. It seems I do these manipulations without much conscious thoughts, I just do it. Truth be told, I do all these because of my coach guidance. He did tell me to close my bat angle, adjust my bat angle this way or that way etc. I am like a blank white paper. I did not know how to play proper TT prior ( Was a typical recreational / garage type player with rubbish techniques prior ).

So, now, just testing, find a blade that is 5 ply or 7 ply that is shakehand, (maybe one of your club mates rackets) and take your 10.5mm racket and do the actions of closing the racket for BH and FH and opening the racket for BH and FH, like you are going to take a stroke.

Then grab the thinner racket, ideally the blade is less than 7mm thick, and try the same actions and see if it feels easier to open and close the racket with a thinner blade. Test, compare, go back and forth. See how each feels.

You will be used to the 10.5mm thick blade so the thinner blade will feel very very thin. But see if it is easier to do those movements with one blade or the other for you.

If you try and you compare, you will be able to tell if one of the two blades makes it easier to transition from one stroke to the next.

 

[Gozo Zyreruna]

So, now, just testing, find a blade that is 5 ply or 7 ply that is shakehand, (maybe one of your club mates rackets) and take your 10.5mm racket and do the actions of closing the racket for BH and FH and opening the racket for BH and FH, like you are going to take a stroke.

Then grab the thinner racket, ideally the blade is less than 7mm thick, and try the same actions and see if it feels easier to open and close the racket with a thinner blade. Test, compare, go back and forth. See how each feels.

You will be used to the 10.5mm thick blade so the thinner blade will feel very very thin. But see if it is easier to do those movements with one blade or the other for you.

If you try and you compare, you will be able to tell if one of the two blades makes it easier to transition from one stroke to the next.

OK, will try for experiment sake, however not this week coz' I do not want to mess with my hand-feelings too much just before a tourney. Next week will perform this experiment. I have a Long V lying in my drawer collecting dust, maybe is time to bring her out for some sunlight.

 

[NextLevel]

OK, will try for experimenting sake, however not this week, cause I do not want to mess with my hand-feelings too much just before a tourney. Next week will perform this experiment. I have a Long V lying in my drawer collecting dust, maybe is time to bring her out for some sunlight.

Long V to me felt like a wooden racket without any serious carbon upside - obviously opinions and quality of rackets differ. Your views will be interesting.

 

[NextLevel]

So company after event at SPIN bar, had company ping pong tournament, but was allowed to use my personal racket. Since the word had gotten round that I had a national ranking (that is how rumors work) and that my playing level was way above everyone else, I played with the racket though I would probably have done reasonably well using the crappy premade but would have needed more practice and would not have lived up to the hype.

Sometimes people need to see the amount of spin on a table tennis ball to understand why the tournament game is so different and if you don't show them, they won't see why they should be humble. But I can also see how ping pong or even placing spin limits on inverted rackets might support a more athletic and user/public friendly game even if it doesnt produce revenue for Butterfly and ESN. People have fun hitting the ball and spin generated by fast equipment can take the fun out of it even if it introduces a fun of its own. In fact my experience at the event will inspire me to look a bit more into hard bat play and to see what the limits of my technique are with my knees etc.

Met some people I hadn't seen in a while at SPIN as well, people I used to hit with or coach when I lived in Philly. One coworker reminded me I used to watch TT videos at the office lol. Not good... oh well. 12 years of obsessive study can do that, though maybe it was more obsessive in the first 6 and tapered off with marriage and family life and more physical issues.

 

[NextLevel]

OK, will try for experimenting sake, however not this week, cause I do not want to mess with my hand-feelings too much just before a tourney. Next week will perform this experiment. I have a Long V lying in my drawer collecting dust, maybe is time to bring her out for some sunlight.

Probably shouldn't be responding to the same post twice, but Carl is making what I think is a good point and I want to make some subtle points about it.

To make an all wood blade faster, you need to play with the outer wood plies to increase the rebound and the thickness of the inner plies. However thickness usually means more weight to introduce stiffness. Also, thickness makes it harder for people to feel they are shaping the ball. If you have ever played with a less spinny/grippy racket like a premade or a low sponge racket, you will see that to generate spin, you need to catch and follow the shape of the ball more carefully, you don't have the grip, elasticity and the resulting dwell time to just hit the ball with a fast stroke and reliably catch it.

Stiffness gives the blade better rebound, but stiffness also means heavier blade head as it means more wood for thickness. So the solution is composites, where materials are with better rebound and stiffness properties than wood (carbon and carbon composites) are used to create better blades. Note that there is a regulation that currently says blades have to be 85% wood, but it is likely this regulation will go away at some point as manufacturers need a way to sell new things. The regulation limits what can be done with non-wooden composites so it influences how they are used. The regulation also doesnt allow composite or non-wooden outer plies, currently strict about single outer ply, it will be very interesting to see what people come up with non-wooden materials are allowed for outer plies.

Long story short, the composites are used to make thinner blades stiffer ao you don't have to use a one-ply Hinoki to get speed. They also keep the weight of the blade down relative to the speed. Some find them too fast or lacking in feeling and I think that there is some truth in this, but that the racket manufacturers have tried to create things that work for players.

I consider most looping blades to be below 6mm thickness. Obviously there are exceptions and some would go higher to 7mm, and some might think j am making this all up. And there is inner carbon vs outer carbon. But think of making a ball roll - is it easier to make ball roll with thinner blade or a thicker blade? It is for easier with a thinner blade, and also a thinner handle, I feel I can follow the shape of the ball more intuitively when I feel I am slicing it. Thickness makes me feel more like I am hitting into the ball.

I am speaking in the last paragraph for myself. I feel that being able to easily follow the shape of the ball with fast swings is critical for high level table tennis to produce and adapt to spins. As you get more advanced, having the right equipment to do this is more important, but there are many roads to Rome. And Rome as a city wasn't built in a day either. I like the fact that your path is not conventional. Just laying out the conventional wisdom.

Even stylistically, I have seen people build out their games in different ways. Some start as hitters/blockers and transition to topspin. Some start as lobbers and then later learn the close to the game. Long story short, Gozo, you have a lot of TT ahead of you, a lot of these comments and insights are just things that you can consider with your coach at any time you choose to. At some point the ability to use the wrist and fingers to get easy action will be key. But every change in TT takes time and I would be lying if I said I never hit with a thick blade, Carl is just explaining to you why most shakehand players consider thinner blades better.

PS. in fact I think the video from 2012 I posted has me using a balsa blade, a not so fast one but still much thicker than most looping blades

 

[UpSideDownCarl]

Long V to me felt like a wooden racket without any serious carbon upside - obviously opinions and quality of rackets differ. Your views will be interesting.

Just to be clear though, as a start, I am not even asking him to hit with the racket. I am just asking him to see if it is easier to hold and adjust to different angles like closed BH, open BH, closed FH open FH with the thinner racket and compare to how things like that feel in comparison to when he tries the same thing with the 10.5mm one ply.

But, if he does try on the table, well, that is good too. I just want him to test if there is any difference in how things feel in making the hand and wrist movements you would with a thinner racket instead of the very thick racket he is currently using.

 

[Gozo Zyreruna]

Just to be clear though, as a start, I am not even asking him to hit with the racket. I am just asking him to see if it is easier to hold and adjust to different angles like closed BH, open BH, closed FH open FH with the thinner racket and compare to how things like that feel in comparison to when he tries the same thing with the 10.5mm one ply.

But, if he does try on the table, well, that is good too. I just want him to test if there is any difference in how things feel in making the hand and wrist movements you would with a thinner racket instead of the very thick racket he is currently using.

Aww Jeez Carl,

You asking me to just hold my bat and do stuff to it but not play with it? That is so platonic.

I don't do platonic!

 

[NextLevel]

Aww Jeez Carl,

You asking me to just hold my bat and do stuff to it but not play with it? That is so platonic.

I don't do platonic!

Hmmm... shadow training is not valuable to you?

 

[UpSideDownCarl]

Aww Jeez Carl,

You asking me to just hold my bat and do stuff to it but not play with it? That is so platonic.

I don't do platonic!

Since you really like what you use and seem to be addicted to the speed it gives you, to start, I am happy if you try to feel what the advantages and/or disadvantages of a blade that is almost 2x as thick as a normal thickness blade.

If you feel that, it is at least a start. Even though I doubt you will change your equipment since your racket is doing enough of the work so that you don't realize what the benefit of you learning the advantages of improving your timing, your quality of contact, your depth of contact and the bias of the blade face as you make contact.

One step at a time. See if you can observe how the 10.5mm blade feels making those adjustments to racket position and how it feels to do that with a blade that is less than 7mm thick.

Feeling a medium speed blade (off-) and using that for 6 months.....I am confident that would help you improve. I am also confident that if you did that, and did not touch anything else for those 6 months, when you tried your current blade you would wonder if you had been insane to use it. But I don't think you are going to try that experiment.