Do you lose the point if you return the ball but hit your finger bounce to your bat , it means you hit the ball twice. The rule said it is illegal if you don,t do it on purpose . What do you think ?
double hit
- Thread starter jamesmith
- Start date
This user has no status.
Member
As long as the umpire recognizes a single stroke/motion, it is legal, that the ball touches your finger and bat (or e.g. hand/bat for a backhand stroke). This is not considered a double touch.
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
🏆 Top 1% Commenter
Well-Known Member
Well-Known Member
You mean to say "The rule said it is LEGAL if you don,t do it on purpose ?"
As long as it's one stroke it is ok for the ball to hit your finger and bat. Some of my weirdest winners have come from the ball hitting my finger/bat at the same time!
Your question reminded me of this!
Double action but only 1 contact, amazing improvisation from Karlson
Yes you lose the point. Only one contact is allowed. It's OK for the ball to hit your finger and bat at the same time, but not sequentially.
This user has no status.
Member
This is wrong - As pointed out, as long as it is a single motion, there is no such thing as double contact.
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
🏆 Top 1% Commenter
Well-Known Member
Well-Known Member
I don't think thats right....
I believe the rule is that if the ball hits the hand or finger accidentally then it is still a good hit. It was changed at some point, years ago.
Previously if it hit the finger and the bat it was considered a double hit.
This has made things easier because some players would admit to the double hit and others would not and it was almost impossible for umpires to discern.
So if it his finger and paddle in one same stroke I believe it's ok.
Would love to see the written rule though, or hear from an actual umpire.
This user has no status.
Member
Here is the link to the official ITTF URC Advance Rule Exam Preparation.
Take from that document (as similar case):
"When A serves, the ball hits a finger of his racket hand, then his racket, and then
bounces on his court, over the net and on to X’s court."
The correct answer is to take no action
Rule 2.10.1.7 if an opponent deliberately strikes the ball more than once in succession
The double hit was accidental, not deliberate
Take from that document (as similar case):
"When A serves, the ball hits a finger of his racket hand, then his racket, and then
bounces on his court, over the net and on to X’s court."
The correct answer is to take no action
Rule 2.10.1.7 if an opponent deliberately strikes the ball more than once in succession
The double hit was accidental, not deliberate
Last edited:
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
🏆 Top 1% Commenter
Well-Known Member
Well-Known Member
Interesting, I stand corrected then. It seems they did in fact change the rule so it has to be a deliberate double hit.
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
🏆 Top 1% Commenter
Well-Known Member
Well-Known Member
This user has no status.
Member
This is where the single motion comes into play. If you interrupt your current motion and start a new one, this is considered deliberate.
The evident example is the video from Freitas, where he captures a ball out of the air and then smashes it on the other side. Although the ball has no visable second contact on the racket, this would not be allowed, since there are two distinct movements (1. ball capture and 2. ball smashing)
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
🏆 Top 1% Commenter
Well-Known Member
Well-Known Member
This doesn't sound easier, and it also disqualifies Kristian Karlsson's hit...
To make it more "judgable" drop the deliberate part for "visible"...
Cheers
L-zr
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
🏆 Top 1% Commenter
Well-Known Member
Well-Known Member
How could you do a deliberate finger then racket hit?
If you swing for the ball and it happens it's gonna be accidental.
Deliberate would be a double motion which is possibly as difficult as it is easy to spot 😊
Apparently the rule was changed because prior to the change, and when contact with the hand was illegal but very difficult to spot, some players (like yourself) would admit to it but some would not. The rule change levels the playing field
Last edited:
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
🏆 Top 1% Commenter
Well-Known Member
Well-Known Member
Yes, but saying “deliberately” makes this so much more difficult. I think of you said a double hit is illegal period, would be better. Same thing with the 16cm serve rule. It would be enough to say throw up and you need to hit after the ball has passed it’s apex…
Anyway it is what it is…
Cheers
L-zr
This user has no status.
🏆 Top 1% Commenter
Well-Known Member
Well-Known Member
I think the better question to ask would be how someone could deliberately achieve a double hit in one motion. The rule makers seem to think its not possible so anything that's one motion is ipso facto considered not deliberate.
When it is humanly possible to deliberately strike the ball with their finger and racket in one single motion for an advantage in table tennis, then I'm guessing they will revisit the rule.
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
🏆 Top 1% Commenter
Well-Known Member
Well-Known Member
This user has no status.
🏆 Top 1% Commenter
Well-Known Member
Well-Known Member
I guess maybe you can describe a scenario where a player can intentionally hit the ball twice without popping it up in one motion and the hitting it in another.
Because I don't think humans are capable of intentionally hitting the ball twice without it being clearly obvious.
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
🏆 Top 1% Commenter
Well-Known Member
Well-Known Member
I can't see how one motion is questionable at all.
How would you word the rule?
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
🏆 Top 1% Commenter
Well-Known Member
Well-Known Member
I don't think saying deliberate makes it difficult at all. It would be so easy to spot a deliberate double hit because it would involve a double motion.
The old rule was as you are suggesting, double hits were illegal and they were harder to spot and it led to ambiguities and some players confessing to them, some not, even when the ball took weird trajectories cos it had hit hand or finger.
The new rule is better
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
🏆 Top 1% Commenter
Well-Known Member
Well-Known Member
Similar threads
