|
|
SuperCPen -- designed for RPB |
Post Reply | Page <12345 15> |
Author | |||
Anton Chigurh
Premier Member Joined: 09/15/2009 Status: Offline Points: 3962 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
That's the precise setup I'm using now--YE, Red Diamond (FH), and Gambler Outlaw GCS (BH). It's great. I hope you enjoy the grip. Like you, I attempted Cpen seriously in the past but just couldn't make it work. With this grip, I've forsaken shakehand entirely and am now a full-on Cpen player. |
|||
Neo H3 40D| Offensive S | Tenergy 80
|
|||
Sponsored Links | |||
qynthnghm
Gold Member Joined: 11/22/2009 Location: Philadelphia Status: Offline Points: 1033 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
! |
|||
Anton Chigurh
Premier Member Joined: 09/15/2009 Status: Offline Points: 3962 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
! Edited by Anton Chigurh - 02/24/2011 at 11:36am |
|||
Neo H3 40D| Offensive S | Tenergy 80
|
|||
qynthnghm
Gold Member Joined: 11/22/2009 Location: Philadelphia Status: Offline Points: 1033 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
I won't be outdone, Anton. I'm switching to pistol-grip. Check these puppies out:
Edited by qynthnghm - 02/24/2011 at 11:42am |
|||
Anton Chigurh
Premier Member Joined: 09/15/2009 Status: Offline Points: 3962 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
Did I forget to mention? I'm playing Cpen... with my feet. Top that. EDIT: I didn't see that pic until just now. Those are ridiculously awesome. Edited by Anton Chigurh - 02/24/2011 at 11:49am |
|||
Neo H3 40D| Offensive S | Tenergy 80
|
|||
Anton Chigurh
Premier Member Joined: 09/15/2009 Status: Offline Points: 3962 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
And now for some "serious" stuff:
Based on some things that have been said in this forum and on another, regarding the SuperCpen, I wanted to address a few points before they get repeated enough to become myths with no basis in reality. I will repeat these again later in my formal review for the sake of comprehensiveness. MYTH 1: A handle that big will make the blade heavy and that's not good for Cpen players who use their wrist. - This is FALSE. I sent my YE blade to Dr. Feng to be modified. It weighed 80.0 grams when I shipped it off and when it came back it weighed 79.3 grams. The SuperCpen modification actually reduced the weight by almost a gram. MYTH 2: This grip looks like it will be no good for traditional backhand blocking. - This too is FALSE. In my experience, the SuperCpen blade makes traditional backhand blocking easier. The larger handle creates much better leverage points. Manipulating the blade angle is far easier and the larger handle also makes any grip feel much more solid and stable. MYTH 3: The wide handle looks like it will decrease mobility and inhibit the short game. - Again, FALSE. Think of it this way: The ideal grip for Cpen is a deep grip. (You may not personally grip deeply, but I have it on good authority that a deep grip is "ideal" in that all the pros grip deeply and other high level players have told me the same.) The reason for this is that it creates a stabler grip and, more importantly, facilitates better manipulations of the blade by putting one's fingers in closer proximity to the wings. The SuperCpen grip pulls those wings out further... or makes them much more accessible, if you will. This makes manipulating the angles much easier, while also making the grip much stabler. So in short, anything you can do with regular Cpen you can also do with SuperCpen, except some things will be easier and everything will be stabler. I can understand how these "myths" came into being. (To be fair, I should probably call them "speculations" and not myths.) It seems counter-intuitive that a larger handle would make for a lighter blade and less cumbersome grip. But I can assure you that if you try this grip for yourself you will see what I'm saying. |
|||
Neo H3 40D| Offensive S | Tenergy 80
|
|||
sandiway
Gold Member Joined: 04/15/2010 Status: Offline Points: 1554 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
I got a prompt reply from Dai about the his SuperCPen and how it compares with what I've done. See http://mytabletennis.net/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=40182 I've taken the liberty of posting some excerpts from what he said.
Then:
Edited by sandiway - 02/24/2011 at 1:45pm |
|||
Anton Chigurh
Premier Member Joined: 09/15/2009 Status: Offline Points: 3962 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
Interesting... I find that his explanation lines up almost entirely with my experience, with the only exception being on the RPB. For my forehand, I use my index finger to hook the handle and control it precisely as he says. However, on my backhand (RPB), I find that my index finger barely does anything at all besides create a little stability. In short: My thumb comes into play a lot more on my RPB, whereas my index finger comes into play a lot more on my forehand. The wider handle helps both because there is plenty of leverage and stability. And the way the racket now rests in my hand (due to this leverage) makes the angles for both forehand and backhand more intuitive. |
|||
Neo H3 40D| Offensive S | Tenergy 80
|
|||
addoydude
Silver Member Joined: 01/29/2008 Status: Offline Points: 848 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
I'm waiting for my SuperCpen. Dai said he should be able to ship on or before Friday, so I migt get it next week. LetLs see if it lives up to the hype, then there will be another evangelist for SuperCpen aside from Anton. :)
|
|||
Yasaka Ma Lin Carbon
H3 NEO / 388-D1 |
|||
sandiway
Gold Member Joined: 04/15/2010 Status: Offline Points: 1554 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
This is precisely why I added the thumb grip. For the RPB. For the forehand, I submit that you don't need to modify the basic penhold handle. If you need index finger grip stability, the Japanese style penhold paddle already gives you that. However, I'm always open to innovation. That's why I asked him to explain why his grip is better than mine for RPB. Sandiway
|
|||
Anton Chigurh
Premier Member Joined: 09/15/2009 Status: Offline Points: 3962 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
I'm excited for you! I hope I didn't build it up too much. I can do that sometimes when I find something that I think is really cool... especially if it relates to something I love as much as TT. I'm interested to see what a more "full time" Cpen player thinks about it. I only dabbled in Cpen so any changes I had to make were pretty easy (i.e., not as ingrained muscle memories). I hope the transition is not too difficult for you. Three of my training partners are relatively high level Cpen players (ranging from 1700 to 2000). What's weird is that they all agree that RPB is much easier and that the grip is quite comfortable... but none of them have decided to modify their blade yet. There is one guy that I think may convert sooner than the others. Although his overall game is pretty strong, his RPB is fairly weak and I know he really wants to develop it. Maybe if my Cpen skills surpass his own he might be persuaded. |
|||
Neo H3 40D| Offensive S | Tenergy 80
|
|||
sandiway
Gold Member Joined: 04/15/2010 Status: Offline Points: 1554 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
I think I'd like insert a cautionary note here.
No matter what handle we use, the strokes have to be good in the first place. SuperCPen cannot turn anyone from zero to superhero. In other words, it can provide good support and improved stability and reliability to an already decent stroke. But it won't magically fix flaws. The arm stroke itself is just such a small part of what it takes to hit the ball accurately and with power. My perspective given my limited ability. |
|||
Anton Chigurh
Premier Member Joined: 09/15/2009 Status: Offline Points: 3962 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
Well put, and I could not agree more. I hope my exuberance did not suggest that this grip will make anyone a superhero. My excitement stems from the fact that I've always admired Cpen and wanted to play that style due to some of the increased options that I perceived. However, the ergonomics of the grip (as it is now) were simply more of an obstacle than I cared to deal with. The SuperCpen grip eliminates (or at least significantly mitigates) those obstacles for me, and in turn gives me the opportunity to develop the Cpen game I always wanted to but found to challenging. As I've said ad nauseam by now (sorry!), the SuperCpen does make my grip more stable and my angles more intuitive, which in turn "helps" my strokes in a way. But there is no substitute for good technique, I agree. So my enthusiasm comes from my newly found opportunity to actually play Cpen successfully, and not because it's a substitute for good technique. To be metaphorical: It's like a person confined to a wheelchair for most of his life who thinks he'll never walk again. If he were told that there was a device that will help him walk again, he'd be extremely excited... but he'd still have to go through all the challenging physical therapy that would be necessary to use the device and actually walk. The SuperCpen is that device for me. The "physical therapy", in the form of developing my technique properly, still awaits me. |
|||
Neo H3 40D| Offensive S | Tenergy 80
|
|||
addoydude
Silver Member Joined: 01/29/2008 Status: Offline Points: 848 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
what??? I thought this was going to bump up my rating 200 points! :)
seriously I'm going to give it a good try, but not sure if I'm switching back to penhold. I'm no longer a fulltime cpen player. Been using shakehand for ayear. I did use penhold with RPB for 2 years prior to that. I guess I was just inspired by Xu Xin and Wang Hao winning again. Will see... Edited by addoydude - 02/24/2011 at 4:56pm |
|||
Yasaka Ma Lin Carbon
H3 NEO / 388-D1 |
|||
sweetstrike
Silver Member Joined: 11/30/2010 Location: California Status: Offline Points: 689 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
The top 3 on the pro tour currently are all cpen players as of 2/24/11. It's almost unbelievable considering how many more shakehand players are out there. It's almost like cpen is more advantageous.
|
|||
prott.co.uk
Super Member Joined: 04/13/2010 Location: United Kingdom Status: Offline Points: 217 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
One thing I'm most interested in is whether you've got your patent approved.
|
|||
SuperCPen
Super Member Joined: 01/22/2011 Status: Offline Points: 107 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
Ah, so it was your PG-3 SuperCPen mod that I dropped off this morning. I hope you will turn into a evangelist I send you an email with tracking number.
|
|||
SuperCPen DHS PG-3
Tenergy 05/Tenergy 05 |
|||
SuperCPen
Super Member Joined: 01/22/2011 Status: Offline Points: 107 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
"With SuperCPen, the index finger is in optimal position to manipulate the handle and keep it securely in the grip. The thumb is very much in a supporting role, except in RBP strokes when it has to help "push" the racket forward. With minimal force, you can keep the racket securely in your hand no matter how fast you swing it."
|
|||
SuperCPen DHS PG-3
Tenergy 05/Tenergy 05 |
|||
SuperCPen
Super Member Joined: 01/22/2011 Status: Offline Points: 107 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
Yes, I agree 100% too. SuperCPen is just a enabler...
That is a great metaphor, and exactly what I hope SuperCPen will do. To be good, one will have to endure the "physical therapy". And if I may add, SuperCPen will make the "physical therapy" more bearable.
|
|||
SuperCPen DHS PG-3
Tenergy 05/Tenergy 05 |
|||
SuperCPen
Super Member Joined: 01/22/2011 Status: Offline Points: 107 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
Personally, I found the SuperCPen helped my forehand as much as my RPB. This could be due to my background of having played with short pip until about three years ago. I always found it troublesome to get the racket to the closed angle for looping until SuperCPen.
From the little I have played with JPen, index fingre is mainly used to keep the paddle from flying off when you make big swings. It doesn't do much in helping fine control of the blade angle. It gives a more secure grip, but not much more stable grip.
Explaination really is no substitute for first hand experience
Edited by SuperCPen - 02/25/2011 at 4:18am |
|||
SuperCPen DHS PG-3
Tenergy 05/Tenergy 05 |
|||
Anton Chigurh
Premier Member Joined: 09/15/2009 Status: Offline Points: 3962 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
I've found this as well. As you already did on your website, I can demonstrate it empirically. By holding a regular Cpen and looking at the angle of the racket, then holding a SuperCpen with my hand at the same angle and then looking at the angle of the racket, it's easy to see that the SuperCpen racket angle is much more closed. This is what I mean when I say the angles are more intuitive for both RPB and my forehand. P.S. I played last night and was very competitive against some of my higher level training partners. I don't think it will take nearly as long as I thought to get as good with my SuperCpen as I was with shakehand. |
|||
Neo H3 40D| Offensive S | Tenergy 80
|
|||
sandiway
Gold Member Joined: 04/15/2010 Status: Offline Points: 1554 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
I don't know what level you guys loop at. So perhaps I'm talking out of my rear end. But, at my looping level (2100-2200), you generally want to avoid an overly closed paddle angle for the loop. (It's too easy to net a ball if your paddle is too closed. The margin for error becomes very small.) Of course if you are looping over the table or counterlooping close to the table, you need a closed paddle angle. But then if you can do that, you are at least 2300 anyway. |
|||
Anton Chigurh
Premier Member Joined: 09/15/2009 Status: Offline Points: 3962 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
Sure... but there is a difference between "closed" and "overly closed". In fact, it's not so much about the angle being "closed" as it is the racket being at the angle you want WHILE having your arm in a more comfortable position. I'm not explaining this well. I think it can be soundly argued that shakehand is an easier style to play. One of these reasons is that it's more intuitive. If your arm/wrist/whatever is angled in a certain way then the angle of the racket follows the angle of your arm. However, in Cpen, when my arm was angled a certain way then I found the angle of the racket face was not at the angle I imagined it would be, given the angle of my arm/wrist/whatever. I would have to overcompensate my arm angle to make sure the racket angle was where I wanted it to be. In other words, the SuperCpen grip makes the angles of Cpen nearly as intuitive as the angles of shakehand. Before, with regular Cpen, my proprioceptive feed back didn't match the output of the racket, and now, with SuperCpen, it does. |
|||
Neo H3 40D| Offensive S | Tenergy 80
|
|||
addoydude
Silver Member Joined: 01/29/2008 Status: Offline Points: 848 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
what does looping level mean? Some people get to 2200 without looping. And some people can loop a single fed ball like a pro but have a much lower level complete game.
|
|||
Yasaka Ma Lin Carbon
H3 NEO / 388-D1 |
|||
addoydude
Silver Member Joined: 01/29/2008 Status: Offline Points: 848 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
btw I started practising penhold with the robot again in anticipation of my supercpen arriving next week.
I observed that my hand position is different when looping with Jpen versus with Cpen. With Jpen i bring the blade face in the same plane as the plane of motion by pushing with the thumb. With Cpen I don't really try to push with the thumb so much (still does but lesser extent), instead I bend my wrist more or manuever the blade with the way I hold it so that it is more tucked in to my arm. Onther way to describe this: if you stop the motion when the forearm is horizontal (around the time of contact), with Jpen, the lengthwise axis of the blade is also nearly horizontal, but with Cpen the lengthwise axis of the blade is pointed at an angle downward. How do you guys loop with Cpen? |
|||
Yasaka Ma Lin Carbon
H3 NEO / 388-D1 |
|||
Anton Chigurh
Premier Member Joined: 09/15/2009 Status: Offline Points: 3962 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
Same for me. The racket is pointed downward and my wrist is bent. |
|||
Neo H3 40D| Offensive S | Tenergy 80
|
|||
beeray1
Premier Member Joined: 07/03/2008 Location: Iowa Status: Offline Points: 5169 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
haha I feel like I'm one of those guys who, when practicing, looks a LOT better than I actually am haha.
I am fully capable of counterlooping at the table and looping over the table. I am able to because I don't think of it as being impossible or too high leveled a skill for me. I try it over and over no matter how muh i miss, and then i eventually started doing it successfully. I am able to do it against a looper who is very very strong, and opens heavier than anyone I've ever played. Also helps that he seems to make it 90% of the time. I'm definitely not a 2300 player, I just like to play out of my a$$ when it comes to playing guys like that, and it happens to work sometimes. To me, the more competitive agressive and mentally into it I am, the more fun it is. I like to think of matches like that as Epic Gung-fu fights. I feed off of agressive players.
But to me, no single skill in table tennis can determine your level at all. I've seen that before- "I saw you backhand counterloop, you must easily be 2300" But that doesn't mean anything. Edited by beeray1 - 02/25/2011 at 5:35pm |
|||
sandiway
Gold Member Joined: 04/15/2010 Status: Offline Points: 1554 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
If someone can open against you strongly both to your forehand and backhand, and you can counterloop using your reverse backhand and also from the forehand, you definitely have the rest of the skill set and footwork for 2300. I can't do it. My rating is 21-something, and my current playing level is close to that. I'm pretty sure if I could give up the open and counterloop from both sides, I'd be 2300 for sure. |
|||
SuperCPen
Super Member Joined: 01/22/2011 Status: Offline Points: 107 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
Here is my humble opinion. Although I am a just 1600 player, I have hit with players of all ranges up to 2500+. The general trend is that the spin on a loop produced by the player is proportional to his rating. This indicates that as a player progresses in skill, he needs to be able to hit with a more closed racket. Everything else being equal (incoming ball trajectory, speed, spin, players stroke), the more closed a racket, the more spin and lower initial trajectory the returning ball will have. So for the higher level players, he must be using a relatively more closed racket: to produce more spin (whether the incoming ball is top spin or under spin) and to control the returning balls trajectory from being too high (counter looping against increasingly heavy top spin). For any given incoming ball and striking point, how fast you can hit it and still have it land on the opposite table is determined solely by how much top spin you can impart on the ball. Give an particular rpm you can generate on the ball, there is a unique ball speed beyond which the ball's trajectory can no longer clear the net AND hit the end of the table. From this point, if you increase the spin and lower the throwing angle (which I define as the angle of ball velocity as it leaves the racket relative to the plane defined by the table horizontally placed) so that the ball just clears the net, then the ball will land closer and closer to the net. This distance between the landing spot and the edge of the table is the margin for error. Conversely, the margin can also be defined as the distance the ball clears the net when you increase the throw angle to have the ball land right on the end of the table. I am going to call this margin the trajectory margin. So how do you achieve maximum spin? You do that with the closest possible rack angle. On my web site, I used the term "closed racket" loosely. But in this discussion, we need to define the closed-ness of a racket more precisely as the incident angle of the ball -- the smaller the angle, the more closed the racket. And the incident angle of the ball is the angle between the relative velocity vector of the ball and the racket and the racket face just before the impact of the ball against the racket. The more closed the racket, the more spin you can generate, thus the more trajectory margin is possible. This is of course, provided that the racket, or predominantly, the rubber on the blade, can support. If you use a sand paper racket, and try to hit a ball with closed face, the ball just skid of the racket and kept going forward past you. To be able to hit a ball with closed racket, you need a rubber sheet combine with a blade to produce a high coefficient of friction when contacting the ball. The higher the coefficient of the friction (i.e. greppier, tackier) the rubber / blade combination, the more closed you can position the racket, and thus the more margin you can have in your return balls trajectory. In this sense, the sticker rubber give you higher potential for control. This is one reason why the sticker rubbers are desirable. Therefore, give an rubber/blade combination, there is an optimal incident angle for producing the maximum spin. Sticker the rubber/bald, smaller this optimal angle. Thus, to produce the maximum trajectory margin, you want to use the stickiest rubber/blade to hit the ball with the closest possible racket. But this has a cost. The more closed (i.e., smaller incident angle) you make the racket, smaller the effective hitting area you have, the more likely you are going to make a mistake when hitting the ball. In fact if your racket sweet spot has an areas of size A, the effective sweet spot as a function of the incident angle (i.e., closed-ness of the racket) is A*sin(incident angle). So if you hit the ball with a fully open racket at 90 degree incident angle, you have an undiminished sweet spot of area A*1. But at zero incident angle of a fully closed racket, you have an effective sweet spot of area A*0 – you can only hit the ball with the edge of the racket. Here, I introduce the concept of hitting margin of error: the more closed the racket, the smaller the hitting margin, the more likely mish*t is produced. This is where a top player differentiate himself: he has the ability to operate within a very small hitting margin to gain maximum trajectory margin, thus allowing him to hit very fast shots and still clear the net and land on the table. If you look at the top player, especially the Chinese ones who use the supper tacky rubbers on the forehand, you will notice how closed their rackets are when they make full swing loops. This is the case even when they loop heavy chops. In this case, it may appear they have an fairly open racket, when you look at the angle of the racket vs the horizontal plane. But the incident angle is actually small because the relative velocity between the ball and the racket is dominated by the racket velocity. Now we come back to the original point I am trying to make, after this long winded discussion. That is, closing the racket does not inherently reduce the margin for error, in fact, it increases margin for error by increase the trajectory margin. But it forces one to operate with a smaller hitting margin. This is where the less skilled player gets in trouble. When I took my first less from Stellan Bentgson about a month back, one recurring message I got from him was to get my racket more closed. He told me I don’t have enough arc on my loops, and to get more margin, I must close the racket more to generate more spin (of course I had to adjust my swing for that too).
Yes, the key is to make the racket “naturally closed”. In other words, with no extraneous adjustment to one’s wrist or arm position, you can easily get your racket to produce the optimal incident angle. In fact, for SuperCPen, I tried to make this happen without any adjustment from the wrist or the arm. I believe, this is what Anton is experiencing. Edited by SuperCPen - 02/26/2011 at 5:54am |
|||
SuperCPen DHS PG-3
Tenergy 05/Tenergy 05 |
|||
SuperCPen
Super Member Joined: 01/22/2011 Status: Offline Points: 107 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
That will be a while. There is a huge back log on patent applications. |
|||
SuperCPen DHS PG-3
Tenergy 05/Tenergy 05 |
|||
Post Reply | Page <12345 15> |
Tweet
|
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |
Forum Home | Go to the Forums | Forum Help | Disclaimer
MyTableTennis.NET is the trading name of Alex Table Tennis Ltd. |