Looping

[dingyibvs]

I agree if you want a top grade loop but in the end it doesn't matter what the body does. It is what the paddle is doing when it hits the ball. The end result should be an arc which has a much tighter radius that one due to gravity alone.

So far, everyone has ignored this.

No one's ignoring it. The whole point is that what your body does greatly affects what your paddle is doing when it hits the ball.

 

[Draycott old man]

I'm no expert,but my favourite shot is my brush loop,where the bat angle and the timing, being in the right position, being relaxed and then snapping through your shot with only the slightest contact on the ball,and watching the shock of your opponent when there shot flies long as there is massive amounts of spin on the ball!! You know when you have got it right,it an amazing feeling!!! But it doesn't happen that often as it's so difficult to get everything right at the same time!!!

 

[tabletennisdaily1]

>Now we are getting to the heart of the matter. What is the definition of a loop. Is any boll with top spin a loop? I don't think so. Is an ball that is hit when there is a light of sight trajectory a loop? I don't think so.

>If you know what a loop is then tell us. The Chinese call a loop "la qiu" which means pull ball. Basically they mean dragging the ball over the net with the friction of the rubber while brushing.

A punch is a punch, a topspin drive is a topspin drive, and a loop is a loop (or simply "topspin" in european english). Yes, la qiu is the feeling you have during a loop (btw the less descriptive equivalent english term is "brush") I think any decent player understands the difference and uses the terminology accordingly, it is a bit arrogant to assume not.

>I agree if you want a top grade loop but in the end it doesn't matter what the body does. It is what the paddle is doing when it hits the ball. The end result should be an arc which has a much tighter radius that one due to gravity alone.

>So far, everyone has ignored this.

What? It does matter what the body does, because the body influences what your paddle is doing when it hits the ball. Unless you are desire to get a "low grade" loop? I could only understand that this is desired if you are old and immobile or physically handicapped.

Everyone has ignored what again?

 

[tabletennisdaily1]

>Also, no one has address the radius of the arc of the loop yet. r=v^2/a.
It is clear that velocity has much more effect on the radius of the loop than the acceleration due to gravity or the Magnus effect.

>Why is everyone ignoring this?

Yes r is proportional to v^2, this is common knowledge to anyone who has taken a basic physics course.

If you hit the ball less it will arc more. Regardless of how hard you hit the ball you still want to apply as much topspin as possible. Whether you do the slow spinny loop Timo was doing in the video, or a normal loop. For either stroke, the topspin you apply is significant to arcing and thus controlling the ball.

Nobody is ignoring this. It is just so obvious that there is no need mention it unless explicitly discussed about.

 

[Der_Echte]

I just LOVE the argument/counterpoint discussion GEEK-OUT over TT stuff. This is truly the bain of free speech.

Still, in real life, it is about making spin to win and placing the ball where they are not or where do not expect it. An art and science totally worth discussing too.

Some day real soon in your neighborhood it is gunna get real, even LDM7 will be armed enough to make you all eat it for focusing on stuff the ball isn't doing.

 

[Richie]

From the video clip, Timo seems to be using this type of shot pretty close to the table, not just when he's away from the table and the ball has already passed it's "top of the bounce" point. What interests me about this is that it seems to contradict the basic principle about taking the ball at the top of the bounce or even just before it reaches top of the bounce when at the table. Perhaps I'm misunderstanding this, but is the suggestion being made here that when playing "at the table" its still OK to let the ball drop lower rather than taking it early? To what extent is Timo's style of play a relic of the celluloid ball era and a little outdated in the plastic ball era?

As we see, what we believe to be basic principles really aren't basic principles at all. It's tough, because it's very easy to interpret a lot of advice as absolute. I still do it, even though I know it's dangerous

I'd say this skill in particular, taking the ball later, is relatively easier to do than taking it straight off the bounce as then you need to be quicker. At the lower levels, if you can consistently load the ball with spin, even if it's high, will get you a ton of points. At the higher levels the height becomes more of an issue as better players are typically quite good at countering.

If one of the best players in the world is doing it, then I'd think it's quite ok to do it at a much lower level. Whether you can execute it well and whether it's worth it for each player is a different question. But it can't be a basic principle if the best players in the world are doing it. More skills in the toolbox isn't bad. But it is difficult to have everything and some of them are more optimal in some situations than others.

 

[brokenball]

>Also, no one has address the radius of the arc of the loop yet. r=v^2/a.
It is clear that velocity has much more effect on the radius of the loop than the acceleration due to gravity or the Magnus effect.

>Why is everyone ignoring this?

Yes r is proportional to v^2, this is common knowledge to anyone who has taken a basic physics course.

Most here have not taken a physics course so it isn't common knowledge. Even if they had, the older people have probably forgotten.

If you hit the ball less it will arc more.

Yes, if you "hit the ball less it will arc more" but the Magnus effect is also less. Balls will arc due to gravity alone. Also, the Magnus effect is proportional to the speed x spin. "Hitting the ball less" will result in in a lower Magnus effect and reduce the acceleration towards the center of the arc.

So now, what is the definition of a loop?
It can't be that the ball simply arcs because that can be due to gravity alone.
It can't be that a ball simply is hit with top spin.
A ball hit with top spin but has flat trajectory is definitely not looping.
If you brush the ball too thinly it wont have enough speed. Again, the Magnus effect will be low due to a lack of speed.
The Timo Boll and William Henzel were definitely looping in my opinion. I can see the arc on the ball in the Henzel video and it isn't due to gravity alone.

So I know it when I see it but I don't have a definition except that the arc of the ball has a significantly tighter radius due to the Magnus effect. It is clear that in both video the ball would simply sail off the end of the table without the Magnus effect because they must hit the ball up to get it over the net.

 

[Zwill]

From the video clip, Timo seems to be using this type of shot pretty close to the table, not just when he's away from the table and the ball has already passed it's "top of the bounce" point. What interests me about this is that it seems to contradict the basic principle about taking the ball at the top of the bounce or even just before it reaches top of the bounce when at the table. Perhaps I'm misunderstanding this, but is the suggestion being made here that when playing "at the table" its still OK to let the ball drop lower rather than taking it early? To what extent is Timo's style of play a relic of the celluloid ball era and a little outdated in the plastic ball era?

It's an ancient relic of the 38mm ball era and from Europe. Many older coaches still teach to load the ball as much as possible as an opening loop and it's not a bad thing either, just it is really old style. However it's not possible to make such spin with the 40+ plastic ball as with a 38mm cell ball. So while it's difficult to counter a 38mm ball that is fully loaded, it is much easier to do so with a 40+ ball.
Some habits die hard especially if you learned them when you were a kid, and Timo was a kid in the 38mm era.


There are some hits that have a flat trajectory for a pretty long distance but just right before the end of the table the ball turns downwards.
I love that shot since it confuses many players that the ball is goring long. I'm sure the air resistance, the gravity and the magnus effect is the cause of it but it is still very interesting that as the ball slows down at a certain speed it just turns downwards very sharply.

 

[Dominikk85]

I think what is defined as a loop is kinda a bit arbitrary. Really any topspin shot will have some component of rotation and translation of the ball (otherwise the ball would just spin in place and not move forward at all, so a "pure brush" isnt really be possible or it would never move forward at all.What's different is the ratio of rotation to translation and at some point you have to make an arbitrary cutoff on which you call it a loop and when you call it a drive.

But for coaching and analysis purposes of course it does make sense to differentiate between a loop and a hit/drive even though in reality there always will be some kind of topspin and some element of hitting through and most experienced players and coaches will see what is a loop and what is a hit but there never can be an exact definition of it unless you use advanced technology.

In baseball there is a pitcher called Trevor Bauer (who later got infamous for some pretty bad stuff he did) who created a stat called bauer unit which is a relationship of spin rate to ball velocity (basically just RPM/velocity) so maybe you could make a hard definition of when it's really a loop (still arbitrary of course) but you need equipment that costs 10k bucks or so for this.

 

[Draycott old man]

I hadn't watched the Timo video as I thought it would be miles from the way I play the shot,but I'm not as far away as I thought!!! I actually let the ball drop lower ,but as been mentioned the shot isn't as effective with the 40mm ball.not really bothered what you call the shot,it's amazing that the Revolution's on the ball will be different every time and how we as table tennis players learn how to get the right bat angle and tension right when returning any topspin shot !!! Brilliant I think we should give ourselves a pat on the back lol 😂😁😂

 

[tabletennisdaily1]

From the video clip, Timo seems to be using this type of shot pretty close to the table, not just when he's away from the table and the ball has already passed it's "top of the bounce" point. What interests me about this is that it seems to contradict the basic principle about taking the ball at the top of the bounce or even just before it reaches top of the bounce when at the table. Perhaps I'm misunderstanding this, but is the suggestion being made here that when playing "at the table" its still OK to let the ball drop lower rather than taking it early? To what extent is Timo's style of play a relic of the celluloid ball era and a little outdated in the plastic ball era?

I think this is a special shot to change things up and trick the opponent. The lower contact allows a super spinny short topspin ball right over the net which is very difficult to return (both repositioning the feet and dealing with the spin).

 

[tabletennisdaily1]

Yes, if you "hit the ball less it will arc more" but the Magnus effect is also less. Balls will arc due to gravity alone. Also, the Magnus effect is proportional to the speed x spin. "Hitting the ball less" will result in in a lower Magnus effect and reduce the acceleration towards the center of the arc.

Just to clarify, when I refer to "hit" I refer to influencing the balls exit velocity. When I refer to 'spin' is the rotation applied to the the ball.

In practice, the Magnus effect is experienced purely due to how much brush you apply to the ball, hitting the ball has no noticeable impact on imparting spin during play. If you brush more, you get a more arc. If you brush less, you get less arc.

So now, what is the definition of a loop?

You asked that previously and I answered this already. It is primarily "la qiu" feeling over the ball, as opposed to a close blade topspin drive.
Loop: 80% brush, 20% hit
Topspin drive 90% hit 10% brush

It can't be that the ball simply arcs because that can be due to gravity alone.
It can't be that a ball simply is hit with top spin.
A ball hit with top spin but has flat trajectory is definitely not looping.

Yes, as I said in my previous comment already, there is a difference between a topspin drive and loop.

If you brush the ball too thinly it wont have enough speed. Again, the Magnus effect will be low due to a lack of speed.

Obviously you have a small bit of hit in a loop, first of all to give you a decent probability of contacting the ball at all, second of all to give the ball direction. The Magnus effect will not be low due to lack of hit speed, the effect is directly related to how much brush you apply to the ball.

 

[tabletennisdaily1]

I think what is defined as a loop is kinda a bit arbitrary. Really any topspin shot will have some component of rotation and translation of the ball (otherwise the ball would just spin in place and not move forward at all, so a "pure brush" isnt really be possible or it would never move forward at all.What's different is the ratio of rotation to translation and at some point you have to make an arbitrary cutoff on which you call it a loop and when you call it a drive.

Yes, good points Dominikk.

 

[ttarc]

It's an ancient relic of the 38mm ball era and from Europe. Many older coaches still teach to load the ball as much as possible as an opening loop and it's not a bad thing either, just it is really old style. However it's not possible to make such spin with the 40+ plastic ball as with a 38mm cell ball. So while it's difficult to counter a 38mm ball that is fully loaded, it is much easier to do so with a 40+ ball.
Some habits die hard especially if you learned them when you were a kid, and Timo was a kid in the 38mm era.


There are some hits that have a flat trajectory for a pretty long distance but just right before the end of the table the ball turns downwards.
I love that shot since it confuses many players that the ball is goring long. I'm sure the air resistance, the gravity and the magnus effect is the cause of it but it is still very interesting that as the ball slows down at a certain speed it just turns downwards very sharply.

I love these "loaded" openings... if they land not too close to the net i.e. one has to counter (loop) or block over the table or below the table which can be tricky one has just to adjust racket angle and aim for one or two ball diameters over the net and hit through the spin... 38 mm time... much harder to do if one used speed glued grippy rubbers which I didn't

p.s. I'm not sure (didn't calculate nor measured it) if it's really impossible to get the same spin with todays 40+ balls as with the 38 mm balls. It will definitely require more effort but impossible?

 

[dingyibvs]

I love these "loaded" openings... if they land not too close to the net i.e. one has to counter (loop) or block over the table or below the table which can be tricky one has just to adjust racket angle and aim for one or two ball diameters over the net and hit through the spin... 38 mm time... much harder to do if one used speed glued grippy rubbers which I didn't

p.s. I'm not sure (didn't calculate nor measured it) if it's really impossible to get the same spin with todays 40+ balls as with the 38 mm balls. It will definitely require more effort but impossible?

I think I read somewhere that the average pro's spin speed went from about 8000rpm to 7000rpm due to the changes on topspins. I'm not sure how accurate it is though. Fang Bo's club channel had a speed/spin measurement device. On full on loop drives against backspin, he and his ex-CNT buddies average in the 120 rps range, which comes out to about 7200rpm, but they can top 130 which is the limit of the machine. That would come out to be 7800+ rpm.

 

[latej]

p.s. I'm not sure (didn't calculate nor measured it) if it's really impossible to get the same spin with todays 40+ balls as with the 38 mm balls. It will definitely require more effort but impossible?[/p]

Radius 40mm is cca 5,3% more than 38mm. The circumference is linearly dependent on radius. In order to have the same angular speed, the surface speed will have to increase, and since surface speed is just circumference per second, the surface speed will only increase linearly, i.e. 5,3% more too. To induce it, the part of your motion, which induces spin (the other part induces speed), will have to be 5,3% faster.

Given how athletic the top players now are, I mean sorry, given how we all are now much more athletic, and how much more we understand how to transfer the power in bio-mechanically native and elegant way, I think not only is 5,3% doable, I think it has been long surpassed

OK, forget that BS. I just wanted to say, that I love when the ball drops under the opponents racquet, due to the spin.

What's really going to bake your/mine noodle later on is ... would we still be able to handle the 38mm ball now, given our "upgrades" ? ... if I hadn't said anything?

 

[Zwill]

I dunno guys, I have some old 40 cell balls laying around and when I get a new sheet of rubber I do the good old spin test with both plastic and that old ball, and every time the ball lands on my nails the old cell ball spins noticeably longer. I would think an 38 cell ball would spin even longer than the 40 one. Okay, maybe the plastic ball has higher friction on my nails than the old cell ball, but I actually use very worn shiny balls for this. But hey, it's not a scientific measurement.

p.s. I'm not sure (didn't calculate nor measured it) if it's really impossible to get the same spin with todays 40+ balls as with the 38 mm balls. It will definitely require more effort but impossible?

For the same person with "normal" equipment, I think it's impossible. Sure one can get a racket with an abnormally long handle, that could spice up things. Some say good old Jónyer used to use a longer handled racket to be able to create even higher spin by holding the handle on the back and creating a longer "arm".

Given how athletic the top players now are, I mean sorry, given how we all are now much more athletic, and how much more we understand how to transfer the power in bio-mechanically native and elegant way, I think not only is 5,3% doable, I think it has been long surpassed

Fast food chains would argue with you, Sir. 🐷

OK, forget that BS. I just wanted to say, that I love when the ball drops under the opponents racquet, due to the spin.

Yes, high spin kicks the ball in the direction of the spin and makes the ball bounce lower. The table is also very important!

What's really going to bake your/mine noodle later on is ... would we still be able to handle the 38mm ball now, given our "upgrades" ? ... if I hadn't said anything?

Well, I think our hard rubber upgrades would be a downgrade with that ball. Maybe return to Globe 999 or 729 super fx? (Dunno what was hot in that time, Tackifire, Sriver, Bryce?)

 

[Dominikk85]

I hadn't watched the Timo video as I thought it would be miles from the way I play the shot,but I'm not as far away as I thought!!! I actually let the ball drop lower ,but as been mentioned the shot isn't as effective with the 40mm ball.not really bothered what you call the shot,it's amazing that the Revolution's on the ball will be different every time and how we as table tennis players learn how to get the right bat angle and tension right when returning any topspin shot !!! Brilliant I think we should give ourselves a pat on the back lol 😂😁😂

I think timo also mentioned somewhere that he doesn't use those slow loops as much as he used to and now hits more close to table fast loops.

 

[brokenball]

I have 3 38mm balls. I think they are Halex 3 stars from my college days. They are 50 years old. I have played with them but not too much because i don't want to break them. #37 and #38 are correct but people are adaptable and I don't think the new rubbers are that fast. There is a limit to how fast/high the coefficient of restitution can be.

#36, I have a Butterfly video of a chopper and looper were the chopper hits the ball with a spin of 137 rev/sec. The loop is really looping because you can see him "la qiu" or pull ball with his strokes.

#34, yes, any definition would be arbitrary but we have not defined optimal spin to speed so we don't know what fraction of optimal is still a loop. The other problem is that we can't measure accurately with our eyes.I still say that most people on this forum only think they are looping because the Magnus effect is small and the arc is small because they hit the ball too fast.

 

[Lazer]

I have 3 38mm balls. I think they are Halex 3 stars from my college days. They are 50 years old. I have played with them but not too much because i don't want to break them. #37 and #38 are correct but people are adaptable and I don't think the new rubbers are that fast. There is a limit to how fast/high the coefficient of restitution can be.

#36, I have a Butterfly video of a chopper and looper were the chopper hits the ball with a spin of 137 rev/sec. The loop is really looping because you can see him "la qiu" or pull ball with his strokes.

#34, yes, any definition would be arbitrary but we have not defined optimal spin to speed so we don't know what fraction of optimal is still a loop. The other problem is that we can't measure accurately with our eyes.I still say that most people on this forum only think they are looping because the Magnus effect is small and the arc is small because they hit the ball too fast.

You can still buy 38mm *** from tabletennis11.

Cheers
L-zr