Is ma long the GOAT ?

[UpSideDownCarl]

It is entertaining to see Bo Jackson getting voted best all the way through. I bet it had more to do with the Bo Diddley Bo Knows advertisements than his career. Don't ge me wrong: he was an amazing talent. But he played only 4 seasons of Pro Football and 9 seasons of Pro Baseball. Deion Sanders played 14 seasons of Pro Football, 9 seasons of Pro Baseball, won 2 Super Bowls and played in a World Series. Why would a guy who never went to any show even win the multisport category against a guy who got rings and played for Titles in both sports? Forget about beating out Jordan, Ali, Babe Ruth, Mays, Gretzky, Oscar Robertson, Joe Lewis....yes, I mentioned people who did not even get on ESPN's "GOAT" list.

Here. I think this should settle everything:

 

[ttmonster]

... if GOAT is not Ma Long , who is Ma Long ? Please tell me ... is he a sheep , is he a cow , is he a camel !!!! I agree that I don't see very well in both my eyes but I can assure you I felt horns and a small tail when I touched Ma Long... not to mention the unmentionables ... so he has to be GOAT !!! PERIOD !!! ... I am completely ignoring that you guys have said he is the GOAT but ... but why did you mention "but" ... but is not welcome ... we don't talk about butts here ... buttheads !!

It is entertaining to see Bo Jackson getting voted best all the way through. I bet it had more to do with the Bo Diddley Bo Knows advertisements than his career. Don't ge me wrong: he was an amazing talent. But he played only 4 seasons of Pro Football and 9 seasons of Pro Baseball. Deion Sanders played 14 seasons of Pro Football, 9 seasons of Pro Baseball, won 2 Super Bowls and played in a World Series. Why would a guy who never went to any show even win the multisport category against a guy who got rings and played for Titles in both sports? Forget about beating out Jordan, Ali, Babe Ruth, Mays, Gretzky, Oscar Robertson, Joe Lewis....yes, I mentioned people who did not even get on ESPN's "GOAT" list.

Here. I think this should settle everything:

 

[ping fun]

What is your source for the above statement? If he only wanted a more suiting bh rubber for the plastic ball he would've stuck with T05. What he gained with H3 was more control which is his entire game. Ma Long simply got better because he practiced more than anyone else and he has the best TT brain in the world. Pretty clear to anyone who gets the sport. The guy is away on hiatus for 6 months injured, 2 months before the WTTC he can't even run. He enters the contest and wipes the table with everyone he plays, both seasoned previous gold winners, CNT team mates, the best player in north and south america and the best player in Europe atm and gets the gold. He mentors Wang Chuqin to doubles gold. The experts all agree that Ma Long is the GOAT, but people here surely know better. It's like talking about TT with Trump

How you know he practiced more and others didnt ?? Did u count the hours or you have a formula that the world in not aware of it . Having grandslam in 445 days and 5 consecutive titles needs more training i guess . So if ma long had more training so what a pity he was watching zjk's achievment every days and was clapping standing up ( london 2012 ) thinking can I be like zjk one day ??? and every one knows that Zjk was and is the backhand king in table tennis as ma long in forehand . As nextlevel told so well in a time that being skillfull in backhand wasnt not every one job , Zjk was killing every one with it , he used banana flick and developed it .

 

[RidTheKid]

The bigger balls add an athletic aspect to the skill needed.

In recent years, Ma Long is unparalleled undoubtedly. But if you'd like to understand Waldner and make a comparison, you better look further back to the 90s.

Personally, I'll say Waldner. With the bigger balls today, tt becomes much less skillful.

 

[RidTheKid]

It's a well known fact coming from coaches and team mates that Ma Long works harder than anyone. It was easier to impart speed and spin with the cell ball. Yes ZJK brought the chiquita to a new level, today many use the same style to open the play. Ma Long has more or less stopped doing that because that means he gets out of position opening up for opponents wide attack on bh. Look at Calderano how many times he rushes to bh flip from fh corner and gets burned in bh corner on next ball. Tactically flawed.

How you know he practiced more and others didnt ?? Did u count the hours or you have a formula that the world in not aware of it . Having grandslam in 445 days and 5 consecutive titles needs more training i guess . So if ma long had more training so what a pity he was watching zjk's achievment every days and was clapping standing up ( london 2012 ) thinking can I be like zjk one day ??? and every one knows that Zjk was and is the backhand king in table tennis as ma long in forehand . As nextlevel told so well in a time that being skillfull in backhand wasnt not every one job , Zjk was killing every one with it , he used banana flick and developed it .

 

[zeio]

Let zeio answer. It is not an irrelevant question and not difficult to answer no matter he is ZJK fan or not.

LGL said ML is more talented than WH and ZJK back in 2012. You don't have to agree with LGL because there is no absolute measurement for talent. And "Fans are misinformed".

 

[yoass]

Can't believe I'm seeing people actually proposing that the veracity of a fact can be decided by means of a popularity contest.

C'mon folks, that's a well-known fallacy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum.

In this case it's even an "argumentum ad populum" with regards to a https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loaded_question.

Stacking two misconceptions on top of one another don't make a right.

 

[Richie]

It would be interesting to hear people's thoughts on what "greatest" means to them. What do people think? What's the most important factor for a player to be the greatest?

If we changed it to most dominant player of all time who are the other contenders than ML? I don't know this btw, I don't know enough TT but I would like to hear from others who do.

 

[zeio]

Can't believe I'm seeing people actually proposing that the veracity of a fact can be decided by means of a popularity contest.

C'mon folks, that's a well-known fallacy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum.

In this case it's even an "argumentum ad populum" with regards to a https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loaded_question.

Stacking two misconceptions on top of one another don't make a right.

But this is coming from an oldie who has lived through political hardships(with some cheating mixed in) more than I've had hot dinners. Oops, that's appeal to tradition. BTW, is there an American version for this saying?

 

[yoass]

But this is coming from an oldie who has lived through political hardships(with some cheating mixed in) more than I've had hot dinners. Oops, that's appeal to tradition. BTW, is there an American version for this saying?

"Y'all don't git to vote whether it rains or not. If yer gettin' wet it's rainin', no matter the vote."

 

[UpSideDownCarl]

It would be interesting to hear people's thoughts on what "greatest" means to them. What do people think? What's the most important factor for a player to be the greatest?

If we changed it to most dominant player of all time who are the other contenders than ML? I don't know this btw, I don't know enough TT but I would like to hear from others who do.

If it is most dominant than it would have to be Victor Barna. Nobody could touch him from 1929-1948.

 

[NextLevel]

It's a well known fact coming from coaches and team mates that Ma Long works harder than anyone. It was easier to impart speed and spin with the cell ball. Yes ZJK brought the chiquita to a new level, today many use the same style to open the play. Ma Long has more or less stopped doing that because that means he gets out of position opening up for opponents wide attack on bh. Look at Calderano how many times he rushes to bh flip from fh corner and gets burned in bh corner on next ball. Tactically flawed.

Yes it was easier to impart spin which made the technique for adjusting to serves and opening attacks more challenging. Hence many players who struggled to counter opening flips or attacks with the older ball started going it more easily after the ball change. Courtesy of the plastic ball. Like I said, the lower spin made the Chiquita easier to play but also made the Chiquita easier to counter.

 

[RidTheKid]

Ma Long was world no 1 for longer and even more dominant during the cell ball era.

Yes it was easier to impart spin which made the technique for adjusting to serves and opening attacks more challenging. Hence many players who struggled to counter opening flips or attacks with the older ball started going it more easily after the ball change. Courtesy of the plastic ball. Like I said, the lower spin made the Chiquita easier to play but also made the Chiquita easier to counter.

 

[UpSideDownCarl]

Ma Long was world no 1 for longer and even more dominant during the cell ball era.

Yeah, and the point NL has made over and over and over and over is, that even though he thinks that ML is the best ever, the fact that in the cell ball era, when ML was king of the little tournament, short game, tricky spin, jedi mind tricks, seemed to work on him; and they worked on the world's biggest platform when it counted. WTTC 2009, 2011, 2013.

Back then, when spin meant a lot more, Wang Hao was doing something to make ML question himself. In TT and in any racket sport, it is not just what you can do but what your opponent will allow you to do. And in those matches, WH actually kept ML from doing what he wanted by spin and short game and defeated ML tactically. So many ML fans say it was simply nerves. The nerves came after ML could not do what he would normally do vs WH. The short game and the tactics that exposed ML's weaknesses in those matches came first.

Without that, nobody would even question how good ML is. And NL still isn't questioning how good ML is. Nor am I. He is just saying, that with the amount of spin that is no longer there with the new larger ball with dramatically reduced spin, ML has come into his own. And as a result, some do question things about his play. But you have to understand the game and the effect of spin on how people play to understand. If you have ever played someone and thought, why can't I make my shots. Why can't I get the darn ball on the table and do what I always do, there is a large change that what is happening is that the opponent is doing more than meets the eye to keep you from doing what you want. If you don't understand that, it is hard to talk about best ever in TT.

And if ML had handled the willy short game and the jedi mind tricks back in 2011 when he really should have been able to, there wouldn't even be a discussion.

But it is interesting how long you can go without even trying to understand what NL is saying.

And if you were not consistently misunderstanding and arguing without even knowing what you were arguing about, I probably would not have posted the comedy remarks because it obviously makes not sense to have a discussion about this with you because you can't seem to take in anything except that anyone who does not completely and fully agree with you must be wrong and must think something they don't even think.

If that was not the case, this thread might be only 3 or 4 pages long.

 

[UpSideDownCarl]

And BTW: part of what distinguished ZJK's over the table BH loop was spin, spin variation and speed variation. If you don't know what you are looking at FZD's BH flip looks much prettier than ZJK's ever did. They are darts. They go much faster. He gets better angles. And yet ZJK would flip right at ML and one ball would shoot up and off to the side and the next would fall to the table.

I have lots of reasons to feel that ML is a better overall player than ZJK. First and foremost is his attitude. ZJK had a horrible attitude and only played like it mattered when he wanted to. I don't want to diminish what he achieved either. He is the only guy I know of who was kicked off the CNT team in that time when he most needed to train to develop the skills to improve. And when the let him back on the team, it was obvious his skills were way behind. But the speed with which he caught up was still impressive. But he still never sustained a level of play. He peaked for the big tournaments and played mediocre for the little tournaments.

So, like Reggie Jackson vs Dave Winfield. Reggie Jackson got called Mr October because of how his batting average and all his stats skyrocketed in the MLB playoffs and world series. He hit 3 home runs in one game, off 3 consecutive pitches. 3 pitches. 3 home runs. Dave Winfield played great day in day out. Amazing player. But he never played as well in the playoffs.

But ML did break out of that in the poly ball era.

 

[RidTheKid]

What you are talking about is ML's mental toughness in the biggest tournaments, which was shaky and it cost him. Presently he has learned how to handle it. It has nothing to do with the ball. ML has beaten both WH and ZJK consistently during the cell era. Same ball in small and big tournaments, different mental pressure.

You are giving the ball the center stage which is strange when we talk about the human psyche.

Yeah, and the point NL has made over and over and over and over is, that even though he thinks that ML is the best ever, the fact that in the cell ball era, when ML was king of the little tournament, short game, tricky spin, jedi mind tricks, seemed to work on him; and they worked on the world's biggest platform when it counted. WTTC 2009, 2011, 2013.

Back then, when spin meant a lot more, Wang Hao was doing something to make ML question himself. In TT and in any racket sport, it is not just what you can do but what your opponent will allow you to do. And in those matches, WH actually kept ML from doing what he wanted by spin and short game and defeated ML tactically. So many ML fans say it was simply nerves. The nerves came after ML could not do what he would normally do vs WH. The short game and the tactics that exposed ML's weaknesses in those matches came first.

Without that, nobody would even question how good ML is. And NL still isn't questioning how good ML is. He is just saying, that with the amount of spin that is no longer there with the new larger ball with dramatically reduced spin, ML has come into his own. And as a result, some do question things about his play. But you have to understand the game and the effect of spin on how people play to understand. If you have ever played someone and thought, why can't I make my shots. Why can't I get the darn ball on the table and do what I always do, there is a large change that what is happening is that the opponent is doing more than meets the eye to keep you from doing what you want. If you don't understand that, it is hard to talk about best ever in TT.

And if ML had handled the willy short game and the jedi mind tricks back in 2011 when he really should have been able to, there wouldn't even be a discussion.

But it is interesting how long you can go without even trying to understand what NL is saying.

 

[UpSideDownCarl]

What you are talking about is ML's mental toughness in the biggest tournaments, which was shaky and it cost him. Presently he has learned how to handle it. It has nothing to do with the ball. ML has beaten both WH and ZJK consistently during the cell era. Same ball in small and big tournaments, different mental pressure.

You are giving the ball the center stage which is strange when we talk about the human psyche.

See, to me, this just shows me that you don't really understand certain things about the game. Which makes it pointless to even have a discussion. You don't know what you don't know. And so you can't understand any of the subtle information that NL has presented.

Why bother.

That is the sound of one hand clapping. One person arguing over and over without even being able to acknowledge that he may not be able to comprehend what has been said to him.

 

[RidTheKid]

Continued:

Wang Hao asked ML after the 2013 WTTC match if he was injured, wtf has that got to with what kind of ball they are using. WH recognized ML wasn't up to his usual standards. It doesn't take a Sherlock to connect the dots this ML loss had to do with mental block, ML tensed up. For more references about mental block watch Harimoto against An Jaehuyn and the interview afterwards where he cried and explained what can happen if you get nervous being the favorite to win.

 

[UpSideDownCarl]

Continued:

Wang Hao asked ML after the 2013 WTTC match if he was injured, wtf has that got to with what kind of ball they are using. WH recognized ML wasn't up to his usual standards. It doesn't take a Sherlock to connect the dots this ML loss had to do with mental block, ML tensed up. For more references about mental block watch Harimoto against An Jaehuyn and the interview afterwards where he cried and explained what can happen if you get nervous being the favorite to win.

There is no point discussing this subject with someone who doesn't understand the game well enough to know how spin can impact an opponent, who does not understand how an opponent can take away your strengths.

Someone who views the game simply as a fan, who does not understand the subtleties of the game can miss a lot of the real action and tactics of the game. Table tennis is a subtle sport.

 

[RidTheKid]

What makes you so sure you're right? Can you back it up with actual sources or keep guessing?

I understand what you and NL are saying but I give it zero value. Food for thought: If you use same ball in all tournaments and your opponent who've beat you in smaller tournaments seem to play much worse in this big tournament, do you think it's because of the ball or nerves?

See, to me, this just shows me that you don't really understand certain things about the game. Which makes it pointless to even have a discussion. You don't know what you don't know. And so you can't understand any of the subtle information that NL has presented.

Why bother.

That is the sound of one hand clapping. One person arguing over and over without even being able to acknowledge that he may not be able to comprehend what has been said to him.