Zhang Jike: "Those who rely primarily on a Backhand system, can not reach the top"

[TTFrenzy]

It started off quite nice, however, now it's funny to watch how people here assess the pros, judge if technique is good or not, judge how something close or far away was, compare skills, throw statements like facts. Kind of an audacity and ego to have, in all honesty. Especially when the experience, skill, training environment as well as achievements are incomparable. It's incredibly unlikely for such accomplished player like Zhang Jike to sprout nonsense, there's really no merit to that, even if taking views/media into account. Not to mention, what he said in the video is incredibly logical, it makes complete sense, it follows tendencies as well. I'd understand if this was kept as "opinionated" thread with hypothetical thoughts/insights, but right now it's just bullshit, straight up. Like, what even is this about, LMAO? Who here is actually qualified/in a position to critique? It's baffling

Totally agree with you.

 

[NextLevel]

I know he was a fantastic player but he never came close to win the olympics, world champs or world cup

He got a silver in 1993. TtFrenzy is closer to the truth than you are. Europe was really tough in the 90s. Wven great players like Korbel, Primorac and Rosskopf were easy to overlook.

 

[NextLevel]

Doesn’t change the fact that he was nowhere near close to becoming a grand slam champion as I stated in the original comment.
Also, newer European generations like Dima as you wrote was much closer to become one by actually winning the World Cup in 2017 and being a double Olympics bronze medallist. I still don’t think he was close to become one as he never performed well at WTTCs but he was definitely much closer.
I only wrote the other comment because you started writing about how great he was but it still doesn’t fit Zhang Jike’s narrative as he was talking about why some players whose forehand is weaker can’t become grand slam champions.

Nah, you are mixing this up. Saive was a beast in the Golde Era of Europe. Dima mostly won stuff when someone else beat the Chinese or the Chinese were injured. He almost never won anything big by eliminating them himself. The point is not that Saive was some juggernaut but that his wra was more competitive for Europe. Many of the guys who played in those days managed to play into their forties because their nation's could not produce talent like them.

 

[Robin0910]

You are making assumptions about players you never witnessed playing in their prime.

You didn't even know he was a world cup and world championship finalist. Yet u assume and compare him with dima.

Dima and every other non chinese player DID NOT consistently beat the chinese like saive did

As for zhang jike, I wrote my opinion. You made a mistake and a misjudgement about jean michel. Accept it and go on with it

I never said any of them consistently beat the Chinese 🤷‍♂️. All i said were that Saive never came close to becoming a grand slam champion and that Dima is a more accomplished worldwide player which are facts. The number of titles doesn‘t lie.
Don’t know why you brought up consistency.

 

[Robin0910]

Nah, you are mixing this up. Saive was a beast in the Golde Era of Europe. Dima mostly won stuff when someone else beat the Chinese or the Chinese were injured. He almost never won anything big by eliminating them himself. The point is not that Saive was some juggernaut but that his wra was more competitive for Europe. Many of the guys who played in those days managed to play into their forties because their nation's could not produce talent like them.

I mean for sure. He had more European titles so the numbers tell us that he was better among the European players at the time but saying Dina’s achievements were based on lucky draws is outrageous. We don’t know whether Saive would’ve achieved the same titles as Dima had he not met any Chinese. He lost to Gatién in both finals of the World Cup 1994 and world champs 1993 so we can’t just assume that.

 

[Robin0910]

He got a silver in 1993. TtFrenzy is closer to the truth than you are. Europe was really tough in the 90s. Wven great players like Korbel, Primorac and Rosskopf were easy to overlook.

Yeah, other people have corrected me on this. I just wanted to emphasise that he was not close to winning the grand slam so he was not a good counter example against Zhang Jike’s thought. (Because originally somebody brought that up about the strong forehand and mediocre backhand narrative)

 

[blahness]

It is quite a funny statement because while it is true (you cant win grand slam with weak FH), no one has a weak FH among the top players. Lin Shidong's FH, while not the most powerful is very consistent, fast and spinny. Harimoto's FH used to suck but it is actually his stronger wing now surpassing his BH. Lin Yun Ju also has a great FH now recently after his new coach changeover. Hugo has a great FH too - look at all the super high quality steparound FH loopkills. WCQ has a great FH too as it is his bread and butter. LJK also has a great FH with lots of power, his problem is with footwork which is tied to his weight. The Korean players all have great FHs. So do the Swedish players.

The weakest FH among the top players is probably Darko Jorgic. Lin Gaoyuan also doesn't have a great FH because he goes around the ball and lifts his elbow.

 

[NextLevel]

It started off quite nice, however, now it's funny to watch how people here assess the pros, judge if technique is good or not, judge how something close or far away was, compare skills, throw statements like facts. Kind of an audacity and ego to have, in all honesty. Especially when everyone's experience, skill, training environment as well as achievements are incomparable, obviously including mine, in comparison to that of CNT. It's incredibly unlikely for such accomplished player like Zhang Jike to sprout nonsense, there's really no merit to that, even if taking views/media into account. Not to mention, what he said in the video is incredibly logical, it makes complete sense, it follows tendencies as well. I'd understand if this was kept as "opinionated" thread with hypothetical thoughts/insights, but right now it's just bullshit, straight up. Like, what even is this about, LMAO? Who here is actually qualified/in a position to critique? It's baffling

Please speak more plainly. You are saying I am wrong to disagree with the shade that Zhang Jike is throwing at Lin Shidong and that Lin lost to Hugo Calderano because Lin is too backhand oriented and if he were more forehand oriented, he would have beaten Hugo?

Let's remember that WLQ once said that left handers were too lazy to ever become world Champions. If I disagree with that logic, is it because I do not know table tennis like WLQ?

The main point that ZJK is broadly making about the importance of forehand forehand building athleticism and it's reliability in rally play or for long tricky balls is traditional table tennis wisdom. But what does this really mean in an era of table tennis where many players have both strong forehands and backhands?

Where ZJK is much more murky is what it means to be a backhand dominated player. Is the issue that LSD doesn't pivot as much? Or is the issue that LSD doesn't have a good forehand? Would anyone argue that LSD in many ways plays like Hugo who just beat the CNT, just not as athletic ally? Is that because Hugo plays more forehands?

When you are age 19, your game still has years of development to go. LSD with his backhand oriented style is now among the top 2 players on the CNT. What about the CNT permits this to happen if the idea that forehand dominated game is the most important thing?

The reality is that most young players will have games that are not balanced. Fan Zhendong also had to balance out his game over time as he got older. ZJK can criticize players because he doesn't have to beat anyone any more. Same with Xu Xin etc. Throwing shade at a player who is young and developing is at best motivational. But anyone who thinks that Lin Shidong is backhand oriented because he is less athletic and unwilling to play forehands can watch thr video and make up their own minds.

 

[NextLevel]

Yeah, other people have corrected me on this. I just wanted to emphasise that he was not close to winning the grand slam so he was not a good counter example against Zhang Jike’s thought. (Because originally somebody brought that up about the strong forehand and mediocre backhand narrative)

None of the grand slam winners other than maybe Waldner and Liu Gupliang had bad/weak backhands. The point being made by Zhang Jike is very trite, it is the classical understanding of table tennis, most footwork is built to introduce the forehand. In Nigeria, almost none of the national team members have good backhands except one or two trained by Portuguese coaches as juniors. They all have old school forehand technique.

The main reason why what ZjK says is roughly true is
1. The forehand has a larger strike zone than the backhand.
2. Most footwork drills are designed to introduce the forehand so forehand dominarion selects for athleticism.

The issue i have is saying this is the reason why LSD lost to Hugo. Is it why WCQ lost to Hugo as well? Hugo had a great tournament. Hugo is very backhand oriented even with his massive forehand. He is the best athlete in table tennis definitely from a strentgh/power and fitness perspective. LSD will find more and more balance to his game as he gets better. Maybe he will find his backhand more reliable than a pivot as he gets more experience. But arguing that his game fell apart because of a backhsnd orientation and inferior athleticism is just ridiculous.

 

[NextLevel]

I mean for sure. He had more European titles so the numbers tell us that he was better among the European players at the time but saying Dina’s achievements were based on lucky draws is outrageous. We don’t know whether Saive would’ve achieved the same titles as Dima had he not met any Chinese. He lost to Gatién in both finals of the World Cup 1994 and world champs 1993 so we can’t just assume that.

Dima struggled to beat Chinese players in his prime compared to Saive in his prime. That is what i am trying to say. Dima's world cup has no Chinese wins. His Olympics bronzes have no Chinese wins. He has no WTTC singles medals. That is all I am saying. Dima is a great player - I am just trying to place your claims in context because of how you are making them as if Saive was not a great player.

 

[Robin0910]

Dima struggled to beat Chinese players in his prime compared to Saive in his prime. That is what i am trying to say. Dima's world cup has no Chinese wins. His Olympics bronzes have no Chinese wins. He has no WTTC singles medals. That is all I am saying. Dima is a great player - I am just trying to place your claims in context because of how you are making them as if Saive was not a great player.

No, I started my first reply with “he was a fantastic player”. I’m just comparing his titles to Dimas to prove my point that Saive was not a more accomplished player than him. Also, for a counter point, the Chinese weren’t as dominating at the time before (prime Kong Linghui and Liu Guoliang) as the Chinese when Dima started his ITTF carrier. When he started the Chinese were stronger than ever and that didn’t change up until last year.

Edit: By the way, Ovtcharov is also not a grand slam champion and I and everyone would rather bet he won’t be and he also has a stronger backhand, mind you…

 

[mcangus]

Saive didn't have a weak backhand in general.He just couldn't block with it near the table but he could destroy any push with it going down the line.
Ovtcharov is a limited player who couldn't beat veterans like Samsonov and Boll for the most part of his career,let alone beat the Chinese.The 90's equivalent would be Mazunov.
Players these days aren't only bh centric they try to take all short balls with their bh which leads to very unnatural movement patterns.On top of that backhand centric players are weaker to balls to their bodies whereas players who pivot can move their body better to avoid getting jammed.
There seems to be a trend among the Chinese of producing chubby backhand players which runs contrary to the physical requirements of the backhand system,namely long limbs to cover the wide forehand and more leverage for swing power and defence.
Wang Chiquin being a lefty will never amount to anything as the Chinese never really mastered the lefty-right hander dynamics.Wang Tao was probably their best lefty of the last 40 years and still suffered alot to Gatien who had the best record against Asians besides Waldner for a while.

 

[Robin0910]

None of the grand slam winners other than maybe Waldner and Liu Gupliang had bad/weak backhands. The point being made by Zhang Jike is very trite, it is the classical understanding of table tennis, most footwork is built to introduce the forehand. In Nigeria, almost none of the national team members have good backhands except one or two trained by Portuguese coaches as juniors. They all have old school forehand technique.

The main reason why what ZjK says is roughly true is
1. The forehand has a larger strike zone than the backhand.
2. Most footwork drills are designed to introduce the forehand so forehand dominarion selects for athleticism.

The issue i have is saying this is the reason why LSD lost to Hugo. Is it why WCQ lost to Hugo as well? Hugo had a great tournament. Hugo is very backhand oriented even with his massive forehand. He is the best athlete in table tennis definitely from a strentgh/power and fitness perspective. LSD will find more and more balance to his game as he gets better. Maybe he will find his backhand more reliable than a pivot as he gets more experience. But arguing that his game fell apart because of a backhsnd orientation and inferior athleticism is just ridiculous.

I know and as the original commenter said who I replied to “Saive’s backhand was mediocre which got better overtime” so it wasn’t always weak. Grand Slam champions backhands are not weak in the modern era but we all know that they still preferred the forehand and they relied on it more.
Ma Long, quite obvious.
Zhang Jike’s backhand was a lot better than Ma Long’s he popularised the banana flick and the reverse pendulum serve which comes back to the backhand but whenever he was away the table or started rallying he relied heavily on his forehand unlike LSD or Hugo. He also stepped around a lot more and his footwork was top notch.
Fan Zhendong relied on his backhand a lot more when he was younger and played a lot more similar to LSD but he realised he needed to rely on his forehand more and improve his footwork, he did that and he became a grand slam champion.

In my first comments I also questioned why he’d include WCQ (although he never named the players, mind you!!!) who has fantastic footwork and forehand.
But his take is generally true and you’ll see it if you analyse every grand slam champion even if only the ones from the modern era. He’s not saying you need to have a weak backhand to become one, he’s saying that you can even become one without a good backhand and players who rely on their backhand too much have generally weaker forehand and footwork which is true.

 

[NextLevel]

No, I started my first reply with “he was a fantastic player”. I’m just comparing his titles to Dimas to prove my point that Saive was not a more accomplished player than him. Also, for a counter point, the Chinese weren’t as dominating at the time before (prime Kong Linghui and Liu Guoliang) as the Chinese when Dima started his ITTF carrier. When he started the Chinese were stronger than ever and that didn’t change up until last year.

Edit: By the way, Ovtcharov is also not a grand slam champion and I and everyone would rather bet he won’t be and he also has a stronger backhand, mind you…

Or Europe was weaker than ever. It goes both ways. The thing is that it is easy after the fact to talk about weak forehand and strong backhand. But there are no backhand orientef players at the top everyone plays with balance.

 

[NextLevel]

I know and as the original commenter said who I replied to “Saive’s backhand was mediocre which got better overtime” so it wasn’t always weak. Grand Slam champions backhands are not weak in the modern era but we all know that they still preferred the forehand and they relied on it more.
Ma Long, quite obvious.
Zhang Jike’s backhand was a lot better than Ma Long’s he popularised the banana flick and the reverse pendulum serve which comes back to the backhand but whenever he was away the table or started rallying he relied heavily on his forehand unlike LSD or Hugo. He also stepped around a lot more and his footwork was top notch.
Fan Zhendong relied on his backhand a lot more when he was younger and played a lot more similar to LSD but he realised he needed to rely on his forehand more and improve his footwork, he did that and he became a grand slam champion.

In my first comments I also questioned why he’d include WCQ (although he never named the players, mind you!!!) who has fantastic footwork and forehand.
But his take is generally true and you’ll see it if you analyse every grand slam champion even if only the ones from the modern era. He’s not saying you need to have a weak backhand to become one, he’s saying that you can even become one without a good backhand and players who rely on their backhand too much have generally weaker forehand and footwork which is true.

What does prefer the forehand mean? How would you quantity it in shot selection? How would you argue that Fan or Lin rely on their backhand too much? Does Hugo rely on his backhand too much? How did Fan stop relying on his backhand too much? Do you agree that being backhand oriented cost Lin vs Hugo?

Who is the weak backhand player who is a grand slam champion? How do we measure this?

 

[Tony's Table Tennis]

I might add that the title is utter clickbait. He never mentioned the end of anything whatsoever.

I think he criticises players to be too much reliant on their bh (aka LSD) and arent therefore not that good in their footwork and therefore in their fh.

no doubt clickbait

and watch how he teach players to play backhand too

While i agree that there is somewhat of a correlation in these things, i doubt that had anything to do with lsd and especially not wcq losing here.

when they are winning, there is no problem with strong backhand players?

As stated before wcq has amazing footwork and a fh that is one of the strongest. Same goes for ljk imo, so the only one who would match these statements in the top 5-10 would be lsd.
But i dont see his fh as weakness in itself. Though you could argue that his footwork isnt good enough right now, i think he simply lost because he couldnt change the rythm in the match. Hugo overpowered him in so many shots on both sides.

yep, to say LSD doesn't have footwork, then its like zeio saying everyone below Hugo must retire.

His shots landed way more often (especially his inside out bh) than usual and Hugo played closer to the table so non of his opponents had enough to adjust to his shots.

Just compare hugo in his former matches (maybe even his past matches against wcq and lsd) and you will see that hugo played slightly different but most important he landed way more of his hardest shots on the table.

Imo lsd his just not experienced enough to be able to defend himself against this power or to prevent it in itself. He lacks some variety and rythm breaker strategies. In that case he remembers me exactly of Fzd in his age of 16-20. Amazing bh and really strong abilities, but unable to change the game of he gets overwhelmed by whatever.

there is no doubt, without a strong backhand today, you can't reach the top.
Ma Long wouldn't be goat, if he relied only on his forehand - he would had to long retire long ago already.

 

[Tony's Table Tennis]

I never said any of them consistently beat the Chinese 🤷‍♂️. All i said were that Saive never came close to becoming a grand slam champion and that Dima is a more accomplished worldwide player which are facts. The number of titles doesn‘t lie.
Don’t know why you brought up consistency.

Saive was way closer to Grand Slam than Dima imo.
Dima was great, but his ceiling wasn't as dominate as Saive was.

 

[StreamOfWater]

Please speak more plainly. You are saying I am wrong to disagree with the shade that Zhang Jike is throwing at Lin Shidong and that Lin lost to Hugo Calderano because Lin is too backhand oriented and if he were more forehand oriented, he would have beaten Hugo?

Let's remember that WLQ once said that left handers were too lazy to ever become world Champions. If I disagree with that logic, is it because I do not know table tennis like WLQ?

The main point that ZJK is broadly making about the importance of forehand forehand building athleticism and it's reliability in rally play or for long tricky balls is traditional table tennis wisdom. But what does this really mean in an era of table tennis where many players have both strong forehands and backhands?

Where ZJK is much more murky is what it means to be a backhand dominated player. Is the issue that LSD doesn't pivot as much? Or is the issue that LSD doesn't have a good forehand? Would anyone argue that LSD in many ways plays like Hugo who just beat the CNT, just not as athletic ally? Is that because Hugo plays more forehands?

When you are age 19, your game still has years of development to go. LSD with his backhand oriented style is now among the top 2 players on the CNT. What about the CNT permits this to happen if the idea that forehand dominated game is the most important thing?

The reality is that most young players will have games that are not balanced. Fan Zhendong also had to balance out his game over time as he got older. ZJK can criticize players because he doesn't have to beat anyone any more. Same with Xu Xin etc. Throwing shade at a player who is young and developing is at best motivational. But anyone who thinks that Lin Shidong is backhand oriented because he is less athletic and unwilling to play forehands can watch thr video and make up their own minds.

It's as plain as it gets — I honestly don't know how much plainer you want me to say it 🤣. I never made any grand claims here. I didn’t even plan to argue, because I don’t feel in a position to argue — my level of play is nowhere near Zhang Jike’s, and that’s the whole point.

If you want it in the most straightforward way possible: I don’t believe anyone here is qualified enough to outright dismiss what Zhang Jike said. We’re all just observers — amateurs. You, me, everyone here. The gap in skill, experience, the training environment of the CNT, and the sheer level of achievement makes any direct critique from us feel like noise.

I’m 100% sure there are countless nuances in this sport that only become visible at the absolute top, and that’s not something you get from slow-mo breakdowns or fan discussions — it comes from living it at that elite level.

Your WLQ lefty comment was a sweeping generalization about personality and work ethic — not technical or tactical insight. It was subjective, and arguably disproven by left-handed champions like Xu Xin, Jun Mizutani, Timo Boll etc. Zhang Jike’s statement, on the other hand, is rooted in the CNT’s developmental philosophy, which has consistently emphasized forehand dominance and full-body footwork in producing world champions. He’s critiquing a tactical pattern, not throwing out personality-based assumptions.

And "ZJK can criticize because he doesn't have to beat anyone anymore"... So... his achievements make his insights invalid now? What kind of logic is that? That’s like saying Bruce Lee can’t talk about fighting because he’s not in the UFC.

Audience/public critiquing professional commentary or gameplay — claiming how things should be — it’s a common problem. They definitely know better than professionals, especially ones with insane achievements... don’t they? 😂

 

[mcangus]

I don't know ZJ was implying that, what I got from the video is BH dominant players will come short in the footwork department compared to FH dominant players due to their over reliance on BH, he is also comparing the 1%ters, the cream of the crop, those players have solid BH and FHs, He even said in that video that while his BH was good he relied on his FH during difficult times, to be honest I haven't seen the new crop of players cover the table with the legendary footwork Ma Long, Xu Xin, FZD and Zhan Jike had, the new batch do tend to go for more BH shots in rallies instead of pivoting to the stronger FH.

I don't know what Xu Xin proved he was the first lefty to ever lose in doubles at the Olympics.Xu Xin failed miserably even as a doubles specialist.
But I think ZJK isn't being honest here.His forehand from the right hand side has always been erratic he got the work done with physicality rather than good technique which is why he declined so rapidly.Players with good backhand aren't supposed to decline that dramatically.
The only player I can think of is Kong Linghui who had a pretty similar style on his forehand but of course didn't have the physical prowess of ZJK.

 

[Dominikk85]

I think you just need to be a complete player these days. You can't really cover weaknesses anymore with the plastic ball. Rallies are long and there is plenty of time to test both wings.

Some players are more BH dominant but you still need to be very good on both wings or you will get exposed.

Players like dima or Hugo are somewhat BH dominant but still have a very good forehand.