Daily Table Tennis Chit Chat

[NextLevel]

I just looked at the video. This is a great video. But part of it is ridiculous and absurb.

He is great at top spin but I have a couple comments:

there are only two types of top spins: one is higher arc where you use almost mostly the topsheet to grip the ball so the spin has a high arc to it and a bit slow (tacky Chinese rubber is very good at doing that). two is the hitting through the ball while snap your arm and wrist upward like a sling so you engage the sponge; in that case the topspin has a more linear projectory.

That the first and the third top spin he was referring to.

there is no "second" topspin he was referring to. He was basically driving the ball/smashing the ball in that "second" topspin demonstration. I don't consider that topspin at all. I consider that a drive or smash that you put a little bit of top spin to make sure the ball gets over the net.

With the first type of topspin, where you lightly brush the ball with the top sheet only, it is much much easier to be done using a Chinese rubber.

With the second type of topsin, where you engage the rubber and the top sheet at the same time, that's what all pro's do. That's why their topspin is so powerful when you are trying to block it because you have to deal with two sources of energy that the opponent puts onto the ball: a) the forward momentum and b) the rotational energy.

Finally yeah, in order to do top spin well, you have to be completely relaxed and then burst and sling your body, legs/waist/forehand/wrist in one single moment when you contact the ball. That is the only way to get a quality top spin. You cannot be stiff and just "hit/brush" the ball hard. Instead you need to use your body like a sling.

Also once you commit to an angle for your blade, you commit to that angle; there should be no going back. Balls are coming at you fast. Why would you change your bat angle in the middle of your motion.

The instructor is saying, to make your topspin better, don't forget to change the angle in the middle of it and "cover" the ball so you have a longer dwell time. For 99% of us mere mortals out there, that is not really possible and really not reasonable. People are using Super Viscaria with Dignics on both sides. You really think there is any dwell time for you to "cover" the ball and let the ball "stay on the blade" longer? no, the ball was already slung out of the blade by then. Plus, like I said, when you do a topspin (whether the incoming ball has topspin, no spin or backspin), when you mentally assess the type and the amount of incoming spin, you have to adjust your bat angle and be 100% committed to it. The ball will be there in a split second (or less!). Changing your bat angle in the middle of your motion "to cover the ball" is the worst thing you can do your development as a player.

Pedagogy is not reality. In fact, many of the things he is expressing are many of the things I feel when I play my own topspin. Are they literally true? Probably not. But are they communicating his technique how he thinks about and feels it so that someone else can replicate it? I would argue yes. It is okay if you disagree. But a common issue with communication is when someone listening tries to take someone communicating so literally that they fail to understand their intent is to teach, not to get a PHD in Physics.

So please, try to understand and empathize with what he is saying (I am assuming you have hit sufficiently high level forehands to critique him insightfully). What he is saying is that he pronates his salute at contact (or possibly throughout the stroke) and swings through a curved path that shapes the ball. People who have this technique will know what he is saying. Unfortunately, people who don't and focus on how he expresses himself will miss the point entirely. And this is not a bad thing as long as one realizes that in teaching and learning, one should never assume that the way one communicates it is the only way others can understand it. Let's just say that I am convinced based on my experience with the stroke that his instruction will work for some people even if it doesnt work for you.

.

 

[JJ Ng]

Pedagogy is not reality. In fact, many of the things he is expressing are many of the things I feel when I play my own topspin. Are they literally true? Probably not. But are they communicating his technique how he thinks about and feels it so that someone else can replicate it? I would argue yes. It is okay if you disagree. But a common issue with communication is when someone listening tries to take someone communicating so literally that they fail to understand their intent is to teach, not to get a PHD in Physics.

So please, try to understand and empathize with what he is saying (I am assuming you have hit sufficiently high level forehands to critique him insightfully). What he is saying is that he pronates his salute at contact (or possibly throughout the stroke) and swings through a curved path that shapes the ball. People who have this technique will know what he is saying. Unfortunately, people who don't and focus on how he expresses himself will miss the point entirely. And this is not a bad thing as long as one realizes that in teaching and learning, one should never assume that the way one communicates it is the only way others can understand it. Let's just say that I am convinced based on my experience with the stroke that his instruction will work for some people even if it doesnt work for you.

.

I understand your point.

I am merely pointing out that for most people learning table tennis in a club setting, a couple of the things that he mentioned in the video can be skipped completely. Would you agree that his second "topspin" is basically a drive/smash except with a slight topspin brush so the ball would go over the net with a good clearance?

What I have noticed on this forum is that people are obsessed about what "exactly" equipment Timo Boll or Xu Xin is using. People are obsessed how to play their forehand like Ma Long or Fan Zhendong.

I am merely trying to bring people back to Earth a bit because simplicity will actually make them progress faster and become a more confident player.

Pro's equipment is too fast for an average table tennis player in a club. Trying to immitate Ma Long's or Fan Zhendong's forehand while you work a 40-50 hour a week job and go to the club twice a week to "play" (or fool around) for 2 hours is a futile exercise.

Instead, let us focus on the simple technique (such as once you commit to an angle to impart your topspin once you assess the incoming ball's spin rotation, and stick with that angle throughout your stroke) will let the players progress faster and enjoy the sport more.

That's all I am trying to do. If you want to watch the video, learn everything it says, and practice five days a week 4-5 hour seach day so you are on the way to 2500 rated USATT player, then you can do that. I just want to be clear that most people are not going there and will probably never get there. Let us make the game fun and simple, and not overcomplicate it. That's all.

By the way Seth Pech at PechPong TT on YouTube put out a video where he broke 2500! Congrats!!! But you can also see that Seth breath and live ping pong every day. Good for him! He deserves it.

 

[NextLevel]

Blahness,

1. Thanks, a lot! This post makes sense. Going back to GM's previous post stating that he heard of coaches who said you don't need to topspin until 2,000 levels, your post addresses this matter precisely, I think.

2. Long time ago when I just started coaching, I too was looping by brushing thinly because that is my amateur way of understanding loop. I was immediately corrected by my coach. He says something along the lines of, " Gozo, no brush too much, ball come to me slow and no power, I want you to hit through the ball, do not give me girlie spin " That is why my FH now is more drive oriented and not brush-looping.

3. I guess this is their pedagogical approach to learning. You learn to flat-hit first, then drive and after you are comfortable with it, then progress to loop-kill. I am now somewhere in-between fast drive / loop-kill level or rather in the beginning stage of learning to loop-kill.

4. Perhaps it is a different pedagogical approach to learning, the western hemisphere way is to learn spin all the way from the beginning to the end. Whereas the eastern hemisphere is to learn how to have strong contact first, then learn spin at a later / advance stage.

5. Now I see more clearly the approach my coach is taking.

You are confusing a few things. I remember when an Iranians high level player told me that I don't spin the ball (I was already around USATT 2000 at this time) and I felt I did. And his main point was that I didn't play slow heavy topspin loops and had a drive spin game. Because in his words, "Everyone spins the ball. Even the pips hitters." So we at least agreed on something.

When someone tells you to play with spin, one usual and limited interpretation is that you believe they want you to play with heavy spin all the time. The reality is that you need to learn to be able to play with spin to give yourself options under pressure based on how you read the ball. If you know how to spin, you can increase your arc if you need safety or flatten it out when you do not. And you can meas up the timing of some players with some shots.

So don't confuse the focus on spin with the idea that you need to brush the ball slowly forever in order to play. The goal of playing with spin is to give yourself options to hit the ball. Of course, spin by itself can be a weapon against certain players and this can be very important as well. But improving your spin level is not the same thing as brushing the ball slowly, it is about develop an advanced approach to timing and hitting the ball that gives you options to play more aggressively in tight situations and being able to reliably hit the ball under pressure even when your timing is off. This is true no matter what hemisphere you are in. In fact most of the people who are counseling you to spin hit heavier and faster balls than you do, they can see that you would have no chance against a certain level of player because you haven't built the tools to handle the spin from that level of player.

 

[NextLevel]

I understand your point.

I am merely pointing out that for most people learning table tennis in a club setting, a couple of the things that he mentioned in the video can be skipped completely. Would you agree that his second "topspin" is basically a drive/smash except with a slight topspin brush so the ball would go over the net with a good clearance?

What I have noticed on this forum is that people are obsessed about what "exactly" equipment Timo Boll or Xu Xin is using. People are obsessed how to play their forehand like Ma Long or Fan Zhendong.

I am merely trying to bring people back to Earth a bit because simplicity will actually make them progress faster and become a more confident player.

Pro's equipment is too fast for an average table tennis player in a club. Trying to immitate Ma Long's or Fan Zhendong's forehand while you work a 40-50 hour a week job and go to the club twice a week to "play" (or fool around) for 2 hours is a futile exercise.

Instead, let us focus on the simple technique (such as once you commit to an angle to impart your topspin once you assess the incoming ball's spin rotation, and stick with that angle throughout your stroke) will let the players progress faster and enjoy the sport more.

That's all I am trying to do. If you want to watch the video, learn everything it says, and practice five days a week 4-5 hour seach day so you are on the way to 2500 rated USATT player, then you can do that. I just want to be clear that most people are not going there and will probably never get there. Let us make the game fun and simple, and not overcomplicate it. That's all.

By the way Seth Pech at PechPong TT on YouTube put out a video where he broke 2500! Congrats!!! But you can also see that Seth breath and live ping pong every day. Good for him! He deserves it.

I understand the point you are trying to make about the second topspin but I think it is precisely the kind of topspin I played for a long time before I rebuilt my forehand technique. Which is why I am pointing out that pedagogy is not the same thing as reality. For example, I would argue that most of Gozo's topspins especially in matches, could easily go into category 2. I might even play more category 2 topspins now than I admit to. But since I have had enough gpod players tell me that my issues are not primarily stroke technique, I will leave it at that.

While I also understand your feelings about obsession with equipment, I am also an EJ and as Joao Geraldo showed on TTD youtube, there are very good players who also enjoy EJing, though not with the same delusions some EJs entertain when they test stuff.

Since you feel strongly about your ability to broadly counsel people on how best to improve, what is your history with table tennis? Including yourself, what is the highest level player you have mentored or developed?

 

[Richie]

I have been on some interesting parts of the spectrum when it comes to spin. First two or so years I played with a racket that couldn't produce spin because it had no grip.
So I played flat or unorthodox shots a lot, like this:

But after that I was definitely in the category of brushing forever with no other options. Everyone said to brush, that spin was important. I was then known as a very spinny player and sometimes caused some upsets against junior players. But my improvement stopped for some time at that point.
One part of it was lack of technique, VERY arm oriented style of play, which couldn't sustain playing like I did and to consistently win points for very long. And the other part is that it's quite hard to always brush the ball thinly.
For example, the opening here at 0.37:

I did this ALL the time. And I had no clue until much later how much work there was to be done technically. As you can see, one of my teammates in this clip has really nice technique. He was a talented junior, but I was blind to all of that at the time.

My technique isn't perfect now, but I can do more things than I used to. Though I do still spin more I think than hit hard and I think that suits me better. But I have more of a drive type style than I did in the second clip.

These multiballclips don't represent how I can actually play in a match, but they show, given some circumstances that I can move on some ends of the spectrum between hard contact and thin contact.
FH example, thin contact at 1.26:

BH:

As I get more inconsistent I brush more, but I have other videos that show it better. I never hit backhands like these in matches. But it was fun to do here, it felt good. I think it's because I once saw Geraldo do multiball live and couldn't believe my eyes. But it is a bit misleading, because there is so much that has to line up to be able to play like that consistently.

Spinning with thinner contact is good when you're out of position and have to "feel" the ball back into play. But otherwise, if your footwork is on point and you've executed the technique well I think it's easier to have a more balanced contact.

 

[turbozed]

I just looked at the video. This is a great video. But part of it is ridiculous and absurb.
...

The instructor is saying, to make your topspin better, don't forget to change the angle in the middle of it and "cover" the ball so you have a longer dwell time. For 99% of us mere mortals out there, that is not really possible and really not reasonable. People are using Super Viscaria with Dignics on both sides. You really think there is any dwell time for you to "cover" the ball and let the ball "stay on the blade" longer? no, the ball was already slung out of the blade by then. Plus, like I said, when you do a topspin (whether the incoming ball has topspin, no spin or backspin), when you mentally assess the type and the amount of incoming spin, you have to adjust your bat angle and be 100% committed to it. The ball will be there in a split second (or less!). Changing your bat angle in the middle of your motion "to cover the ball" is the worst thing you can do your development as a player.

Incidentally, in the two videos I posted in this thread here https://www.tabletennisdaily.com/fo...tacky-and-non-tacky-rubbers.28713/post-403158 , both coaches do mention that the advanced "type 3" FH is hard to achieve with bouncy tension rubber because the ball the ball will just fly off the racket. They argue that tacky Chinese style rubber and a specific technique is required to get the amount of contact time necessary to hit through the ball and apply the correct stroke. Part of it is very heavy contact such that the hard sponge is engaged fully. Coach Meng says to create a "car crash." Coach Hirata says that the ball needs to "bite into" the rubber. Both describe the same brushing motion in the WRM video above.

All three guys seem to know what they're talking about, and the ball quality from their FH backs up their claims. There are a lot of beginners in China using very hard and tacky rubber learning to use this sort of heavy brush technique while developing. In the Coach Meng video you can see him demonstrate the heavy brush in beginner and intermediate style strokes. He describes a progression where the heavy brush is applied in slower strokes. Presumably, once the player has developed a good feel for this on lower speed/impact shots, he can then use it on the fast FH drive on contact.

 

[Gozo Aruna]

BH:

Richie,

What a coincidence I was doing these type of drills in my coaching session today for both FH & BH.
Richie, there is one more drill I did that is not shown in your YT and that is a short underspin and I sort of have to move in and FH flick / quick-loop ( 快 带 向 冲 ) over the ball. The key to this stroke is to take the ball as early ( position 1 ) as possible and use wrist motion to get the ball over.

So the drill is a short serve underspin, then a long underspin. Darn it, it is tiring as H3LL!

 

[Richie]

Richie,

What a coincidence I was doing these type of drills in my coaching session today for both FH & BH.
Richie, there is one more drill I did that is not shown in your YT and that is a short underspin and I sort of have to move in and FH flick / quick-loop ( 快 带 向 冲 ) over the ball. The key to this stroke is to take the ball as early ( position 1 ) as possible and use wrist motion to get the ball over.

So the drill is a short serve underspin, then a long underspin. Darn it, it is tiring as H3LL!

I can probably count on one or two hands the amount of time I've practiced FH flip. Because the type of ball I'd FH flip is one where my opponent would misread the serve and pop the ball up slightly. And in a drill they would know what's happening. Hard to "accidentally" pop up the ball. So it always felt strange to drill.

Also been difficult to nail the FH flip technique, my version is more of shoving the ball at my opponent lol. Or trying to push short and then get ready to open with spin.. or push long and get ready to counter.
It is a big weakness of mine that I can't attack over the table well.

 

[NextLevel]

For example, the opening here at 0.37:

Looks like this video is private, Rich.

 

[Gozo Aruna]

I can probably count on one or two hands the amount of time I've practiced FH flip. Because the type of ball I'd FH flip is one where my opponent would misread the serve and pop the ball up slightly. And in a drill they would know what's happening. Hard to "accidentally" pop up the ball. So it always felt strange to drill.

Also been difficult to nail the FH flip technique, my version is more of shoving the ball at my opponent lol. Or trying to push short and then get ready to open with spin.. or push long and get ready to counter.
It is a big weakness of mine that I can't attack over the table well.

It is definitely not an easy drill as I personally struggle with it too; but H3LL it is part of the program / syllabus. It's like College Level maths; you hate Calculus but hey! You still have to do it.

NB: I know some people love Calculus for example our residence Monsieur Engineer Par Excellency.

 

[JJ Ng]

Incidentally, in the two videos I posted in this thread here https://www.tabletennisdaily.com/fo...tacky-and-non-tacky-rubbers.28713/post-403158 , both coaches do mention that the advanced "type 3" FH is hard to achieve with bouncy tension rubber because the ball the ball will just fly off the racket. They argue that tacky Chinese style rubber and a specific technique is required to get the amount of contact time necessary to hit through the ball and apply the correct stroke. Part of it is very heavy contact such that the hard sponge is engaged fully. Coach Meng says to create a "car crash." Coach Hirata says that the ball needs to "bite into" the rubber. Both describe the same brushing motion in the WRM video above.

All three guys seem to know what they're talking about, and the ball quality from their FH backs up their claims. There are a lot of beginners in China using very hard and tacky rubber learning to use this sort of heavy brush technique while developing. In the Coach Meng video you can see him demonstrate the heavy brush in beginner and intermediate style strokes. He describes a progression where the heavy brush is applied in slower strokes. Presumably, once the player has developed a good feel for this on lower speed/impact shots, he can then use it on the fast FH drive on contact.

Got it! Maybe that's why even in European players, Tenergy 05 hard and Dignics 09c are becoming more and more popular.

 

[Der_Echte]

Sometimes I surprised myself when I do power hit against backspin ball and the ball goes over at speed of Mach 2.5.

Sometimes I surprised myself when I do power hit against backspin ball and the ball goes into the net at at speed of Mach 2.5.

Then I thought to myself, what is the difference, what is the cause that sometime it is like this and sometime is is like that.

Then it occured to me, if I flat hit with all my might with shoulder power, it goes into the net at speed of Mach 2.5

whereas if I manage to hit it whippy like with power from my waist rotation, the ball clears the net with 2.5cm clearance height at speed of Mach 2.5.

This is the reason, sometimes why it is like this and sometimes it is like that.

I suppose in the latter scenario there is topspin from the body mechanics without me realising it.

Sometimes it is simply that you saw the ball, got into or were in good position, allowed the ball to come into effective strike zone, used good leverage with a firming of grip at impact.

Under those conditions, many a ball go in and makes you wonder why it did.

The position/leverage with that firming kill any spin, add your own big spin, and add a lot of pace to the shot. There are many valid physics reasons why this is so... but none of that matters as it is impractical to be consciously thinking in a point and try to calculate all that stuff.

It comes down to seeing the opponent's impact, immediately discerning it, quickly deciding what shot to play... you do that subconsciously and you do the rest subconsciously and you end up making shots and plays.

 

[SleepyMaster]

Just for your fun, guys. I love TT it can be so much of it

 

[SleepyMaster]

And for the robot training I’m with team “more life coaching and playing - less robo”, but if there no ability to train at all - robo friend is much better that nothing

 

[NextLevel]

I can probably count on one or two hands the amount of time I've practiced FH flip. Because the type of ball I'd FH flip is one where my opponent would misread the serve and pop the ball up slightly. And in a drill they would know what's happening. Hard to "accidentally" pop up the ball. So it always felt strange to drill.

Also been difficult to nail the FH flip technique, my version is more of shoving the ball at my opponent lol. Or trying to push short and then get ready to open with spin.. or push long and get ready to counter.
It is a big weakness of mine that I can't attack over the table well.

I have a strong technical forehand flick, if is actually a relatively spinny one. My big problems are my right knee and my ability to read serve spin. Will try to drill it back so I can use it again. My problem is still have to make my movement less of an issue

 

[NextLevel]

I can probably count on one or two hands the amount of time I've practiced FH flip. Because the type of ball I'd FH flip is one where my opponent would misread the serve and pop the ball up slightly. And in a drill they would know what's happening. Hard to "accidentally" pop up the ball. So it always felt strange to drill.

Also been difficult to nail the FH flip technique, my version is more of shoving the ball at my opponent lol. Or trying to push short and then get ready to open with spin.. or push long and get ready to counter.
It is a big weakness of mine that I can't attack over the table well.

if someone served short topspin to your forehand, would you still push it?

 

[blahness]

I can probably count on one or two hands the amount of time I've practiced FH flip. Because the type of ball I'd FH flip is one where my opponent would misread the serve and pop the ball up slightly. And in a drill they would know what's happening. Hard to "accidentally" pop up the ball. So it always felt strange to drill.

Also been difficult to nail the FH flip technique, my version is more of shoving the ball at my opponent lol. Or trying to push short and then get ready to open with spin.. or push long and get ready to counter.
It is a big weakness of mine that I can't attack over the table well.

I hate the FH flip too, but everyone and their dog in the TT world knows that FH short is a weakness for shakehand players so they will serve short FH all the time if they smell this weakness and if there's no FH flip, the varied no spin and sidetopspin serves will be a nightmare (especially the reverse pendulum variety).

For me, FH flick is incredibly hard to do too if you want to put topspin on it. But imo FH flick doesn't produce the type of strong topspin that will give ppl trouble anyway unlike the BH chiquita. The few times I did it, it was just blasted back at me (ouch!) meaning it just didn't trouble my opponents that much. The problem is that mild topspin is the easiest ball to face - it's exactly the spin that ppl do fast countering against.

So my recent attempts at developing a deadlier FH flick have focused on nontopspin variants. My fav version of the FH flick is the fade sidespin version (which produces the same sidespin as a FH pendulum serve) which I find is the easiest to control. There's also a windshield wiper version which can produce sidetopspin or sideunderspin depending on how you contact the ball, and there is a hook version (literally just hooking the ball wide and fast) which I find very useful against standard FH pendulum.

 

[NextLevel]

I hate the FH flip too, but everyone and their dog in the TT world knows that FH short is a weakness for shakehand players so they will serve short FH all the time if they smell this weakness and if there's no FH flip, the varied no spin and sidetopspin serves will be a nightmare (especially the reverse pendulum variety).

For me, FH flick is incredibly hard to do too if you want to put topspin on it. But imo FH flick doesn't produce the type of strong topspin that will give ppl trouble anyway unlike the BH chiquita. The few times I did it, it was just blasted back at me (ouch!) meaning it just didn't trouble my opponents that much. The problem is that mild topspin is the easiest ball to face - it's exactly the spin that ppl do fast countering against.

So my recent attempts at developing a deadlier FH flick have focused on nontopspin variants. My fav version of the FH flick is the fade sidespin version (which produces the same sidespin as a FH pendulum serve) which I find is the easiest to control. There's also a windshield wiper version which can produce sidetopspin or sideunderspin depending on how you contact the ball, and there is a hook version (literally just hooking the ball wide and fast) which I find very useful against standard FH pendulum.

The key to the flick is having a good counterhit. It's essentially the same stroke with varying degrees of pronation. The problem is really getting in and out and staying low to the ball. I am starting out with short push practice for in and out footwork and building it out from there. Likely to fail again. But I need to build put stuff including the sideswiped you talked about. But I have really powerful snapping motions so I really just need practice.

 

[NextLevel]

I have decided to revisit my forehand arm usage in light of the recent forehand discussions. My forehand has multiple personality disorder between powerful hit and thin brush. Part of it is driven by arthritis as I really do want to focus on body usage and pronation with thicker contact as opposed to thin brush but doing so consistently has been a challenge because arthritis has hit my shoulders really badly. That said, I was lucky to see some videos on the benefits of the shoulder hang and I have been doing this to help pull my shoulders back into place to reduce the effects of sitting all say behind a computer as well as autoimmune issues. Things seem to be getting better as I can finally attempt pullups with far less pain than 2 months ago.

So with that, I am going to go to making the pronating thick hit my base topspin stroke. It just makes close to the table play easier for me to connect with my away from the table game. It isn't my spinniest forehand but it is my technically soundest and easiest for me to control. Sometimes you have to stop acting like Ma Long and just do what works for you.

 

[Gozo Aruna]

Just for your fun, guys. I love TT it can be so much of it

There is something strange: Your topspin stroke is so upwards and bat angle is so open and yet your ball land inside the table. If I do that my ball will overshoot the table. I have to literally close my bat almost parallel to the table to get the ball to land on the table.

There is something strange going on here.