This user has no status.
This user has no status.
How do you learn best?
- Thread starter Tyce
- Start date
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Active Member
Interesting story @Tyce
I think its down to personal preference and feel, but also someones current envoirement.
Lets say an absolute beginner plays with a Viscaria and Dignics 05 on both sides. Even though most people consider it to be a way too fast setup for him, eventually he will get used to the speed of the racket and be able to somewhat handle it. And in his current envoirement he only plays against people that are beginners as well, or slightly above his level. He will probably find that he performs better with the fast racket, then a slower racket. Because now it takes him less effort to create more speed and spin, and the big sweetspot of the outer carbon blade will make the slight misshits he will often have not that apparent. So this setup will make him feel like he is much better in his current envoirement, but he wont learn much.
Now lets say this beginner will play someone that has been playing for a few years now that has a decent serve and attacking game. This beginner will now struggle to keep the ball on the table. His fast setup will react strongly to the opponents spin and he will find himself very limited in what he can do to get a point. So now he will benefit from a slower setup so he can learn maybe learn to push, block and spin the ball better: a Primorac Off- with Glayzer (or Rozena) on both sides. This might still be considered too fast for his level, but he has been using one of the fastest setups possible, so this will be slow enough for him. Now he can start learning the aspects of the game that he previously didn’t encounter at beginner level.
Now here is that catch (at least in my opinion): Most people in this situation would have the goal to improve their technique so they can play with their 'previously too-fast-racket'. But once you have efficient technique, you don't need the fast setup to get the desired speed. A good example of this would be the Chinese players. They get drilled from a young age to have the most efficient technique possible, so they use this super slow tacky forehand rubber, and can produce more speed and spin then a beginner (or even advanced amateurs) can with the fastest setup possible.
So my take on it is to find something in between. Unless you are a semi-pro, it's not realistic to aim for a perfect forehand technique like the Chinese and play with Hurricane 3. I am currently playing with Hurricane 3 myself, and even though I get on with it pretty good atm after a few months of adjustment, I still find myself in these situations where I don't hit the ball in a good enough manner to hit the ball on the table when under pressure in a match. So eventually I might try Dignics 09C, which should be a bit less demanding to play. It might have less potential in terms of spin, serve and short game control then Hurricane, but if its easier to play with and the rubber works good enough, then its going to work better for my personal needs.
And maybe I will even go back to Fastarc G-1, the rubber worked great for me. I wanted to explore the world of tacky forehand rubbers, since they excel in serve, receive and forehand topspin. Which is something my game is based around. I already tried Hybrid K3 which was great, but the durability was a let down. Dignics is of course more expensive, but if the durability is acceptable then I will be content.
I think its down to personal preference and feel, but also someones current envoirement.
Lets say an absolute beginner plays with a Viscaria and Dignics 05 on both sides. Even though most people consider it to be a way too fast setup for him, eventually he will get used to the speed of the racket and be able to somewhat handle it. And in his current envoirement he only plays against people that are beginners as well, or slightly above his level. He will probably find that he performs better with the fast racket, then a slower racket. Because now it takes him less effort to create more speed and spin, and the big sweetspot of the outer carbon blade will make the slight misshits he will often have not that apparent. So this setup will make him feel like he is much better in his current envoirement, but he wont learn much.
Now lets say this beginner will play someone that has been playing for a few years now that has a decent serve and attacking game. This beginner will now struggle to keep the ball on the table. His fast setup will react strongly to the opponents spin and he will find himself very limited in what he can do to get a point. So now he will benefit from a slower setup so he can learn maybe learn to push, block and spin the ball better: a Primorac Off- with Glayzer (or Rozena) on both sides. This might still be considered too fast for his level, but he has been using one of the fastest setups possible, so this will be slow enough for him. Now he can start learning the aspects of the game that he previously didn’t encounter at beginner level.
Now here is that catch (at least in my opinion): Most people in this situation would have the goal to improve their technique so they can play with their 'previously too-fast-racket'. But once you have efficient technique, you don't need the fast setup to get the desired speed. A good example of this would be the Chinese players. They get drilled from a young age to have the most efficient technique possible, so they use this super slow tacky forehand rubber, and can produce more speed and spin then a beginner (or even advanced amateurs) can with the fastest setup possible.
So my take on it is to find something in between. Unless you are a semi-pro, it's not realistic to aim for a perfect forehand technique like the Chinese and play with Hurricane 3. I am currently playing with Hurricane 3 myself, and even though I get on with it pretty good atm after a few months of adjustment, I still find myself in these situations where I don't hit the ball in a good enough manner to hit the ball on the table when under pressure in a match. So eventually I might try Dignics 09C, which should be a bit less demanding to play. It might have less potential in terms of spin, serve and short game control then Hurricane, but if its easier to play with and the rubber works good enough, then its going to work better for my personal needs.
And maybe I will even go back to Fastarc G-1, the rubber worked great for me. I wanted to explore the world of tacky forehand rubbers, since they excel in serve, receive and forehand topspin. Which is something my game is based around. I already tried Hybrid K3 which was great, but the durability was a let down. Dignics is of course more expensive, but if the durability is acceptable then I will be content.
This user has no status.
I agree, it's very much an environmental thing!
If your environment does not help you in learning to play with the setup you have (or change your setup to something they can tech you properly in), then it doesn't matter if you play something too slow, too fast, bouncy, sensitive, dead, or whatever.
...but the advice on forums will generally be to play something slow, no matter what the problem is.
"Help, all my balls fly over the table" -> "Your setup is too fast, get something slower"
"Help, I have no control over my power output" -> "Your setup is too fast, get something slower"
While those might be true sometimes, it's also perfectly possible that someone is trying to compensate for a very slow setup by hitting uncontrollably hard, and doesn't get the proper guidance to improve the effectiveness of their stroke.
On the other hand, you get...
"Help, my attacks are weak" -> "Getting a faster setup is not the answer"
Is that true, though? Not if you simply don't have the environment, resources, feedback required to actually improve your fundamentals. Not if you simply play a VERY slow setup (where you'll benefit a lot from switching to something medium OFF- already). Not if you do well on the direct feedback of a very fussy, fast setup to help you learn proper mechanics.
Not everyone has the same learning methods, again, some do very well on getting literal instructions and copying them, and others need that understanding, that *click*, in order to make things work.
I'm definitely a Clicker. I could have easily drowned in playing my old setup for years without ever understanding how to improve, and quit again.
So I'd say:
"If you have a few years of experience under your belt, but you feel like you're hitting a plateau, do try other setups. You might learn a lot from it. Don't expect them to fix your game, don't expect the gear to be a magical improvement, but feel those differences and nuances and watch how it affects your game. And where it doesn't help."
If your environment does not help you in learning to play with the setup you have (or change your setup to something they can tech you properly in), then it doesn't matter if you play something too slow, too fast, bouncy, sensitive, dead, or whatever.
...but the advice on forums will generally be to play something slow, no matter what the problem is.
"Help, all my balls fly over the table" -> "Your setup is too fast, get something slower"
"Help, I have no control over my power output" -> "Your setup is too fast, get something slower"
While those might be true sometimes, it's also perfectly possible that someone is trying to compensate for a very slow setup by hitting uncontrollably hard, and doesn't get the proper guidance to improve the effectiveness of their stroke.
On the other hand, you get...
"Help, my attacks are weak" -> "Getting a faster setup is not the answer"
Is that true, though? Not if you simply don't have the environment, resources, feedback required to actually improve your fundamentals. Not if you simply play a VERY slow setup (where you'll benefit a lot from switching to something medium OFF- already). Not if you do well on the direct feedback of a very fussy, fast setup to help you learn proper mechanics.
Not everyone has the same learning methods, again, some do very well on getting literal instructions and copying them, and others need that understanding, that *click*, in order to make things work.
I'm definitely a Clicker. I could have easily drowned in playing my old setup for years without ever understanding how to improve, and quit again.
So I'd say:
"If you have a few years of experience under your belt, but you feel like you're hitting a plateau, do try other setups. You might learn a lot from it. Don't expect them to fix your game, don't expect the gear to be a magical improvement, but feel those differences and nuances and watch how it affects your game. And where it doesn't help."
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Member
I am definately on with the physics of the game. Should be given more importance. For example, someone tells me how to loop the ball. I will never be confident in my loops until I learn about the Magnus effect.
Playing against the long pips will scare a lot of players, but learning about the behaviour of a bouncing ball on different surfaces (inverted rubber vs wall for example) can help with your confidence.
Why speed and acceleration is more important than force is another one.
With that said, I wonder how many players on the top 100 world rankings could explain the basic physics involved in table tennis. I bet the majority just plays!
Playing against the long pips will scare a lot of players, but learning about the behaviour of a bouncing ball on different surfaces (inverted rubber vs wall for example) can help with your confidence.
Why speed and acceleration is more important than force is another one.
With that said, I wonder how many players on the top 100 world rankings could explain the basic physics involved in table tennis. I bet the majority just plays!
This user has no status.
I agree. People who learn by rational understanding are probably far less likely to become top players, unless they are savant enough to learn that stuff instantly. It's the need to understand that's holding you back from rapid development.
The average top player is probably much better in the details of their technique, without needing solid arguments why those details work. I imagine they see, adjust, evaluate very well.
The average top player is probably much better in the details of their technique, without needing solid arguments why those details work. I imagine they see, adjust, evaluate very well.
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Member
Maybe this is part of the reason why you need to start early to become world class. Like the 13-year-old french boy that was told it was too late for him to become like Le Brun. The 7-year old will not question their coach, while the 14-year old might question a lot, and not be able to learn fast enough.
Another example is the return of services. I am an extreme example granted, but I cannot understand how I will ever be able to read a service. It all happens to fast for me! It is a blocker for me and harms my development. The kid does not care, after returning x number of serves he knows how to do it. The kid does not have a blocker in their mind and adapt and learn so fast. At least some of them (the ones that love it).
Another example is the return of services. I am an extreme example granted, but I cannot understand how I will ever be able to read a service. It all happens to fast for me! It is a blocker for me and harms my development. The kid does not care, after returning x number of serves he knows how to do it. The kid does not have a blocker in their mind and adapt and learn so fast. At least some of them (the ones that love it).
This user has no status.
Member
I don't think they are so unaware how things works, of course they might not be master in Math and Physics etc.
At least they should know TT ballistics. How the spin reacts on rubber, air, table, as well the body mechanics.
But I believe they play majority of time with muscle memory, many things are studied countless times.
IMO the age thing is not relevant for that, it not exclusive to TT or even sports, it's seen in music, art, language, science etc. Simply how early you start, how good you become.
For example, if you would show up at age of 16-18 to a music school, and say I wanna be a world famous violin player, they wouldn't be interested unless you have exceptional music-ear or rich family
While you can practice the violin for 30-50 even 70 years.
But TT like other sports is demanding for youth which is very limited.
It's also seen in the clubs, some veterans are coming everyday to practice, getting private lessons etc. but dedicated young players are getting 5x times better progress in same time.
At least they should know TT ballistics. How the spin reacts on rubber, air, table, as well the body mechanics.
But I believe they play majority of time with muscle memory, many things are studied countless times.
IMO the age thing is not relevant for that, it not exclusive to TT or even sports, it's seen in music, art, language, science etc. Simply how early you start, how good you become.
For example, if you would show up at age of 16-18 to a music school, and say I wanna be a world famous violin player, they wouldn't be interested unless you have exceptional music-ear or rich family
While you can practice the violin for 30-50 even 70 years.But TT like other sports is demanding for youth which is very limited.
It's also seen in the clubs, some veterans are coming everyday to practice, getting private lessons etc. but dedicated young players are getting 5x times better progress in same time.
Last edited:
This user has no status.
Member
I had never had a real coach. I picked up the game blindly, bought myself a dunlop racket, played here and there everywhere. Picked up some techniques from different people. Worked it out by watching Zhang Jike and Ma Long. Threw myself into more tournament and sparring. Got wrecked everywhere and everytime by people who are better than me, no surprises there.
As I got better, I played better player, and the increased quality of opponents actually improved my game as well. I got used to better quality strokes and balls, making easier against lower-level player, it was so easy. From there, I drew a conclusion that the best way to improve yourself is to throw yourself into many sparring matches and to work on what you are lacking.
As I got better, I played better player, and the increased quality of opponents actually improved my game as well. I got used to better quality strokes and balls, making easier against lower-level player, it was so easy. From there, I drew a conclusion that the best way to improve yourself is to throw yourself into many sparring matches and to work on what you are lacking.
Similar threads
