Daily Table Tennis Chit Chat

[Archosaurus]

This is me transferring badminton footwork terminology to TT. The problem with TT is that the footwork terminology and teaching is just horribly bad. Obviously pros already do it intuitively, but these are not fully developed in the coaching literature at all, but is actually extremely critical.

TT didnt even have split step education until I actually introduced it to this forum. Sad state of affairs indeed.

"Split step" has been a concept since I started playing a decade ago, and I'm sure far before that. I think the idea was borrowed from tennis originally. I would be wary of saying things like you introduced any kind of concept to any field, but sure, let's say re-introduced because I haven't heard it in a while.

One problem I've noticed in (online) TT coaching is that because nobody measures things empirically, often people demonstrate one thing, but are actually doing another. There's no telemetry to call anyone out for their discrepancies so people just keep saying things wildly and come up with all kinds of ideas like "wrapping around the ball" or "hit-brush" to describe feelings which don't translate at all to what's actually being done.

I think a lot of things are also being ignored which probably ought not to be ignored, but I wouldn't have the expertise to say if that's actually a problem. I don't remember who, but there's this one female Chinese coach on bilibili who really goes into detail and talks about all of the common issues and consequences, and she demonstrates the technique isolated one step at a time, correctly and incorrectly and explaining what's the difference.

 

[blahness]

"Split step" has been a concept since I started playing a decade ago, and I'm sure far before that. I think the idea was borrowed from tennis originally. I would be wary of saying things like you introduced any kind of concept to any field, but sure, let's say re-introduced because I haven't heard it in a while.

One problem I've noticed in (online) TT coaching is that because nobody measures things empirically, often people demonstrate one thing, but are actually doing another. There's no telemetry to call anyone out for their discrepancies so people just keep saying things wildly and come up with all kinds of ideas like "wrapping around the ball" or "hit-brush" to describe feelings which don't translate at all to what's actually being done.

I think a lot of things are also being ignored which probably ought not to be ignored, but I wouldn't have the expertise to say if that's actually a problem. I don't remember who, but there's this one female Chinese coach on bilibili who really goes into detail and talks about all of the common issues and consequences, and she demonstrates the technique isolated one step at a time, correctly and incorrectly and explaining what's the difference.

No, literally this concept of split step is basically absent in TT discourse until i repeated brought it up (I know almost all other racquet sports talk about it), but funnily enough all the pros do it. Obviously those who didnt do it were just doing things suboptimally and so wasnt good enough to go pro.

Yes exactly, it is not precise at all, and this is why amateurs get super lost. Even coaches are incredibly imprecise with things here, which really shows how bad sports coaching literature is in table tennis.

Even for eg the use of fingers and forearm supination/pronation to achieve max spin is not really talked about much. Once this is figured out, the spin levels become way, way stronger. Instead, people just talk about using the "wrist", and i bet this is also why people injure their wrists due to improper usage.

Or core bracing to improve power transmission and speed.

Or the role of right hip internal rotation to initiate the FH loop.

Instead, you get like 10001 post about H3 boosting or the minute differences between blades.

With badminton there are extremely precise tutorials on almost every detail of shots lol.

Basically, TT technique tutorials are a huge pile of shit at the moment lol.

 

[Archosaurus]

Based on what I've seen the Chinese ex-CNT coaches talk about serving, their videos are probably the best, but there might be a language barrier going on. They talk about "braking" and "slicing the chest" which are things I've developed myself and noticed that good servers will do, but aren't something I've seen anyone talk about explicitly until recently. I don't believe they actually explain them empirically correctly but the concept of the feeling is correct.

A few coaches also talk about that "braking" feeling on the forehand loop, and I did get visibly more spin when I was trying it out a few weeks ago. Not quite ready for every shot in games, but it's definitely a step forward. I feel it's related to "tensing the hand on contact" and other stuff, but the nifty part is all of that happens automatically if you go for the right feeling. Also stuff that nobody has explicitly described in that way until recently.

 

[blahness]

Based on what I've seen the Chinese ex-CNT coaches talk about serving, their videos are probably the best, but there might be a language barrier going on. They talk about "braking" and "slicing the chest" which are things I've developed myself and noticed that good servers will do, but aren't something I've seen anyone talk about explicitly until recently. I don't believe they actually explain them empirically correctly but the concept of the feeling is correct.

A few coaches also talk about that "braking" feeling on the forehand loop, and I did get visibly more spin when I was trying it out a few weeks ago. Not quite ready for every shot in games, but it's definitely a step forward. I feel it's related to "tensing the hand on contact" and other stuff, but the nifty part is all of that happens automatically if you go for the right feeling. Also stuff that nobody has explicitly described in that way until recently.

This can all be achieved with good finger usage, and by that i dont mean in a vague way, you have to deliberately activate your fingers in a way that contributes to the acceleration of the racket in the intended brushing direction. And this can be different for topspin, serves and pushes and flicks. You even need to figure out exactly which joint of the fingers is applying the intended pressure.

But basically, loose and then tighten (ie activate fingers) is merely the basics.

 

[Archosaurus]

This can all be achieved with good finger usage, and by that i dont mean in a vague way, you have to deliberately activate your fingers in a way that contributes to the acceleration of the racket in the intended brushing direction. And this can be different for topspin, serves and pushes and flicks. You even need to figure out exactly which joint of the fingers is applying the intended pressure.

But basically, loose and then tighten (ie activate fingers) is merely the basics.

Here's where we run into the issue of a lack of framework for describing technique; one guy will say it's about acceleration, and the other guy will say it's about the stiffness of the contact point, another guy will say it's about the stability of the racket angle and so on. One will have the opinion that only the fingers matter, the other will think it's the wrist, the other will say it's the waist and so on.

I see these kind of ideas in fields I'm a SME in and it's really harmful to beginners or even intermediates trying to learn because so much information out there is literally contradictory unless accompanied with more context. Expert opinions often go completely ignored because they don't echo the usual (incorrect) sentiment that tutorial makers and less insightful coaches popularize on the internet, either due to a lack of an empirical basis for statements or because the subject is so difficult to quantify and communicate to beginners because you need to already have expertise to even understand it.