Guess the Rating

[NextLevel]

Pretend you don't know my USATT rating and assume that my opponent's USATT rating is not public info.

Can you guess the ratings and give specific reasons why you give the players the ratings you would give them if possible?

Thanks.

 

[Archosaurus]

Taking into account only consistency, alternating 1600 - 1800 for you and him.

Most mistakes here appear to be from trying to play too hard and not having the right balance of pressure and percentage down and instead playing too technical or forceful shots when they are not necessary.

I did not analyze the individual techniques or strategy very much, only the overall play and how the points are made. I do not sense forced mistakes dominating the play, instead I mostly see unforced mistakes.

My basis for my claims is that when you or him scored a point, it was generally made with level appropriate, calm play with sound techniques that are not "trying too hard".

Examples:

1:45. He serves, you do a backhand push to a fairly appropriate area of the table, and he slams it into the net. You win with calm play.

1:53. Essentially the same thing but it happens to you. You serve, he pushes it to an appropriate area of the table, and you throw the shot long with a forceful backhand loop.


I have also suffered from the same issues with my game, and I improved absolutely tremendously when I stopped trying to be Mr. Hotshot and instead took it easy and played appropriate shots.

Of course, there is always the chance that you are so much higher level than me and you must attack first to not lose outright, but the consistency does not lie, my friend. Larry Hodges has also spoke about this: seek not to attack first, but to deliver the first meaningful attack that will further your goal. Losing the point outright does not further your goal.

 

[Shuki]

Without knowing you and watching, I would guess a lot lower than what you are. 1500-1600usatt.

It looks like he's trying to play a game that his body can't keep up with anymore with the loops and smashes and should move to more of a blocking game in my opinion. Missing too many easy shots. Older gentleman has a good loop in his power zone but when you push to his wider forehand he's running away from the table so there's a lack of footwork there too, making it seem even more like he's playing the wrong game. he can't get into place and then loop when you go to his forehand, he's always swinging while stepping away from the table.

For you it looks like your forehand is pretty wild and when you hit it, it would be extremely powerful, but you are going pretty long on them, I'm assuming you think his chops are heavier than they are but idk why, you aren't making a mental note and adjusting for the next time he chops to your forehand. Also your rotation is more of a back twist on the forehand than a transfer of weight, with a lot of arm whip and little footwork for the forehand. I remember you saying theres some medical issue, maybe a bad hip or knee or something, I don't remember exactly. But if that's why you have more of a whip kind of loop stroke then that makes sense. Just looks like too many unforced errors. Your blocks with your forehand when he does a forehand are more like pokes and not going through the ball on them. even before the ball gets to you, you're in poke stance, ready to reach for a ball, this is evident a second time at point starting around 3:13 when he hits the net and your paddle was already up where you thought the ball would go.

Then on the other side, when you two DO hit your shots, they're very strong (low, fast, spinny). So maybe I'm misjudging how much spin is on both sides of the table and that's why there's what seems to be so many unforced errors

 

[UpSideDownCarl]

I love it! Here is another one. What are the levels of these two jokers:

Sent from Deep Space by Abacus

 

[Shuki]

I love it! Here is another one. What are the levels of these two jokers:

Sent from Deep Space by Abacus

By the quality of their shots and ease that they execute. I'd guess pretty damn high, over 2000 for sure. White shirt reminds me of adam bobrow's play.

Either they're very good, or they both suck and play eachother all the time and are that comfortable with eachother's spin that they can do this so naturally. Something tells me the prior is true, white shirt moves feet too well, and the other one has really good form and service return and blah blah blah.


Edit: i'm taking it back before carl reveals their ratings, they're WELL over 2000.

 

[NextLevel]

Hahaha - not sure what Carl is trying to prove here - these are obviously good players even if you don't know who they are. As long as you are not looking at the wrong things.

In my match, someone said the estimate for the players would be 1200 and I wanted to see what others would actually say.

 

[Shuki]

Hahaha - not sure what Carl is trying to prove here - these are obviously good players even if you don't know who they are. As long as you are not looking at the wrong things.

In my match, someone said the estimate for the players would be 1200 and I wanted to see what others would actually say.

oh my bad! I took it as a critique thread rather than just a rating guess.

 

[t95mwp]

More likely 1200.

 

[UpSideDownCarl]

Hahaha - not sure what Carl is trying to prove here - these are obviously good players even if you don't know who they are. As long as you are not looking at the wrong things.

In my match, someone said the estimate for the players would be 1200 and I wanted to see what others would actually say.

Hahaha. I was just clowning around. All of what you say is true. Sorry to hijack. I do love the antics of these two.


Sent from Deep Space by Abacus

 

[Xylit]

Pretend you don't know my USATT rating and assume that my opponent's USATT rating is not public info.

Can you guess the ratings and give specific reasons why you give the players the ratings you would give them if possible?

Thanks.

I don't know your or your opponent's rating. My guess from these three minutes would be something around 1250 TTR (German rating system). You know better how to transform this into USATT than me I guess

 

[UpSideDownCarl]

I think there have been some good observations so far. Lots of big swings going long. Too much spin for 1200. But not too much higher.

One thing I do notice in your video: you guys are both pretty tall and it makes the table look a bit like a mini table.


Sent from Deep Space by Abacus

 

[Archosaurus]

Honestly, if Rich or Felipe played like that against the average 2000 USATT, I think they would brutalize them.



I was looking around and found this.

This video demonstrates my prior points perfectly.

Juan perhaps appears like some kind of godlike 2400, slamming 9000mp/h shots at every opportunity, but honestly, he's playing a pretty conservative, VERY level appropriate game. When he deviates from that game, and goes over his head, his level drops tremendously, though.

2:55 for example

Judging by his rating, I was waiting for him to slam that shot onto the table with precision and power. He completely missed it. He went over his head and lost the point immediately. Few players seem to really appreciate how much you need to drill power shots to make them 95%+ shots and appropriate to play on anything but really sure balls.

The ball after it demonstrates my point perfectly yet again. EDIT* Actually, the one after.* He played quite a soft backhand loop, without some kind of godly amount of spin on it, and won the point with it.

For most people here, that's probably an easy shot with excellent consistency. I could probably hit at least a hundred of those in a row, and probably you can too.

You won't play that shot, though. You'll want to be Kreanga with the big backhand or Ma Long with the big forehand, and proceed to slam the ball into the net or into your opponents face. 75% of your points will come from steady, powerful and spinny shots for your level, but you'll still keep practicing those power shots, thinking that it will benefit you and raise your rating.

I've advised sub 2000 looking people to just slow down and play easier shots with more consistent technique, and they bumped themselves up to at least low 2000's immediately. Not in a stressing match environment, but while playing the sport nonetheless. This concept works all the way up to the pro level, and even the highest level pros mostly play safe, high percentage shots that are just right in the pressure they provide. It's just relative to your level.

It's also the reason why you can get away with serving long for a veeeeery long time, because people simply can't reliably attack anything hard until about 2400 - 2500.

To sum it up, please be modest about your level, and you will attain a higher level. Be un-modest, and be forever low 2000's.

 

[NextLevel]

Archosaurus,

Good to see that the facade is finally fading away.

Cheers,
NL

Honestly, if Rich or Felipe played like that against the average 2000 USATT, I think they would brutalize them.

I was looking around and found this.

This video demonstrates my prior points perfectly.

Juan perhaps appears like some kind of godlike 2400, slamming 9000mp/h shots at every opportunity, but honestly, he's playing a pretty conservative, VERY level appropriate game. When he deviates from that game, and goes over his head, his level drops tremendously, though.

2:55 for example

Judging by his rating, I was waiting for him to slam that shot onto the table with precision and power. He completely missed it. He went over his head and lost the point immediately. Few players seem to really appreciate how much you need to drill power shots to make them 95%+ shots and appropriate to play on anything but really sure balls.

The ball after it demonstrates my point perfectly yet again. EDIT* Actually, the one after.* He played quite a soft backhand loop, without some kind of godly amount of spin on it, and won the point with it.

For most people here, that's probably an easy shot with excellent consistency. I could probably hit at least a hundred of those in a row, and probably you can too.

You won't play that shot, though. You'll want to be Kreanga with the big backhand or Ma Long with the big forehand, and proceed to slam the ball into the net or into your opponents face. 75% of your points will come from steady, powerful and spinny shots for your level, but you'll still keep practicing those power shots, thinking that it will benefit you and raise your rating.

I've advised sub 2000 looking people to just slow down and play easier shots with more consistent technique, and they bumped themselves up to at least low 2000's immediately. Not in a stressing match environment, but while playing the sport nonetheless. This concept works all the way up to the pro level, and even the highest level pros mostly play safe, high percentage shots that are just right in the pressure they provide. It's just relative to your level.

It's also the reason why you can get away with serving long for a veeeeery long time, because people simply can't reliably attack anything hard until about 2400 - 2500.

To sum it up, please be modest about your level, and you will attain a higher level. Be un-modest, and be forever low 2000's.

 

[Archosaurus]

@NL

What facade?

I've been considering these concepts the past few months, and realizing the truth about this has just shown me that my shot selection and technique is "beyond my level", as long as I don't overextend myself. I have seen this in many other people as well, so it has to be an universal concept and many people are simply shooting themselves in the foot by trying to be too macho all the time because they think they have 2800+ technique and footwork. Or maybe they doubt their defensive skills and rallying potency, and want to end the point fast out of fear. I have seen that as well.

You can be macho a little later in the rally when the percentages are far higher and you're farther from the table, and if you have some shots that are just simply beyond your level and you can consistently land them, go for it. My strong counterloops are excellent and I am comfortable looping back even smashes fairly close to the table. Yet I still opt to go for a far more conservative shot 90% of the time, and very often it is enough.

It is true that this Jan Ove Waldner style of play is not good enough to be number 1 anymore, but we must remember that all those top Chinese players have been playing fairly conservative shots most of their career and during their early training. They have spent easily over 10x the time we have spent developing our basic strokes and footwork. They have been doing it for so many years, over a decade, and only then are they good enough to play with such power that is considered far above average to even top 50 ranked professionals.


I've heard of the idea, and I also think so, that the ideal "power", "difficulty", "pressure" or whatever you want for a normally consistent rallying shot is about 75%. That way, you will land most of your shots, and most of your shots will further you winning the point.

Thus, you will most likely win against people of equal or perhaps even slightly higher level.

It seems that most people play shots closer to 90% than 75%.

 

[Tinykin]

That gesture at 1:33 definitely makes NL's opponent 1800+

 

[NextLevel]

I've heard of the idea, and I also think so, that the ideal "power", "difficulty", "pressure" or whatever you want for a normally consistent rallying shot is about 75%. That way, you will land most of your shots, and most of your shots will further you winning the point.

Thus, you will most likely win against people of equal or perhaps even slightly higher level.

It seems that most people play shots closer to 90% than 75%.

Emphasis on when you can.

I believe in taking any and all >51% chances to end the point outright. The less % my opponent is likely to lose to me in a consistency game, the more likely I am to try to play those percentages and end the point there.

I'm not too high level, but people murder me if I just keep looping at them and don't play every return with heart.

You may have been considering these concepts over the past few months, but you were also the person questioning someone's post on Carl's thread where he posted his videos when he wrote that he plays conservatively and tries not to end the point. It's interesting that you couldn't see that he was basically making the same point you were making but with a different emphasis. But now you have been considering it for the past few months.

Hopefully, the video of your 2400 level looping skills will be posted soon, since you are confident enough to point out that being stuck at 2000 is a bad thing.

Looking at the video, and I can post the full match if anyone wants to see it, many of my shots I missed have more to do with misreading the ball and far less to do with playing shots above my head, IMO, when all things are considered. In fact, we both underestimated the quality of each other's pushes - he underestimated my spin and I underestimated his depth and ability to make the push dead. He often got the ball very close to the endline and because I don't move, I didn't react properly. All the shots in that video were level appropriate. I make precisely the same shots on a regular basis. In fact, the issue was why I wasn't making them in that match/game and I wanted to see what people would say.

 

[Rayeez]

@NL

What facade?

I've been considering these concepts the past few months, and realizing the truth about this has just shown me that my shot selection and technique is "beyond my level", as long as I don't overextend myself. I have seen this in many other people as well, so it has to be an universal concept and many people are simply shooting themselves in the foot by trying to be too macho all the time because they think they have 2800+ technique and footwork. Or maybe they doubt their defensive skills and rallying potency, and want to end the point fast out of fear. I have seen that as well.

You can be macho a little later in the rally when the percentages are far higher and you're farther from the table, and if you have some shots that are just simply beyond your level and you can consistently land them, go for it. My strong counterloops are excellent and I am comfortable looping back even smashes fairly close to the table. Yet I still opt to go for a far more conservative shot 90% of the time, and very often it is enough.

It is true that this Jan Ove Waldner style of play is not good enough to be number 1 anymore, but we must remember that all those top Chinese players have been playing fairly conservative shots most of their career and during their early training. They have spent easily over 10x the time we have spent developing our basic strokes and footwork. They have been doing it for so many years, over a decade, and only then are they good enough to play with such power that is considered far above average to even top 50 ranked professionals.


I've heard of the idea, and I also think so, that the ideal "power", "difficulty", "pressure" or whatever you want for a normally consistent rallying shot is about 75%. That way, you will land most of your shots, and most of your shots will further you winning the point.

Thus, you will most likely win against people of equal or perhaps even slightly higher level.

It seems that most people play shots closer to 90% than 75%.

Please, just post a video. You're starting to annoy me. Everything you said means virtually nothing until you post. Once we see you understand technique properly, more people will take you. But for now, you are annoying me, and probably others too.

 

[Archosaurus]

I don't think I ever advocated NOT playing every return well, at any point in time. It's not like conservative shots are inherently bad shots, unless you're competing in a far too high level competition, but in that case, go compete with similarly skilled people and triumph there.

The point I'm trying to make is that a fancy strong loop instead of a regular good loop is not going to end the point outright. It's going to go towards ending the point, sure, but if you miss most of them, then you're really handicapping yourself. Not to mention that by the time you can somewhat consistently land those shots in a rally situation, people can more consistently block them, often with nearly 100% success rate if you just keep hitting in the same spot.

At the same time, you'd be a fool and not kill a ball if you have more than a 51% chance to hit it successfully and immediately end the point. You'd be a great player if instead of killing the ball, you picked a >75% consistency shot that does the same thing. Then you'd nearly always come on top.


I don't think Carl and I were talking about exactly the same thing, but it might just be wording.


I'd have to disagree on the shots being level appropriate. If they were, you would have read the ball and struck it successfully most the time.

There's also nothing wrong with being stuck at 2000, especially because it looks like a good balance of fun and competitiveness and dedication. If you WANT to reach a higher level, though...

 

[kukamonga]

so nextlevel is one of the guys in the first video and his level is 2000US but everybody mistakes him for 1200US?

 

[Archosaurus]

so nextlevel is one of the guys in the first video and his level is 2000US but everybody mistakes him for 1200US?

NextLevel is the darker gentleman.

I don't know who this everybody user is, but I personally would guess his rating to be 1600 - 1800 based on only that short provided video footage.

NL already said why he posted the video and thread.