Changing Serve - how do I setup my Loop now?

Well I will get to play with the Rhyzm tomorrow. I glued it on both sides tonight.

Edited by heavyforehand - 09/15/2015 at 7:10pm

heavyforehand wrote: Thanks a lot fellas! The Rhyzm recommendation was dead on. It's like Mark V but way better. Easier to loop and the adjustment was far easier than I thought. On serve I can use a lot less effort and get the same level of backspin. My FH loop requires less effort, and on my first match ever with the rubber I won 3 of 5, so my confidence was there pretty fast. As of right now I currently can not see a downside with the switch. I also am more confident on bachand now that I'm back to a higher speed and thicker rubber. I know I can get the bite to keep the ball in so I'm looping more now. A few weeks of really locking in with it and I think my game will only go up now. Really appreciate the advice.

Because know your goals helps me put advice and its value in their proper context. At your rating level (assuming it hasn't changed), one's ability to objectively assess certain things is a bit limited. I was where you were 4 years ago so I remember it. There is much more value in acquiring and building q consistent spin oreiendted stroke than anything else you are doing right now will bring to your game. Find the right coach and keep that focus in mind and the rest falls into place. Other things are largely distractors.

heavyforehand wrote: Agree completely. I already have a coach who is good and just wanted to get the gear thing sorted so I can move on. We use the new balls and going over the advise in this thread about using more modern rubbers and developing on them just really started to make sense.  Im just happy it was an easy transition. Really took no huge adjustment for me to switch to these max rubbers. My blade is very nice too so I think Im all set. I prefer to use the same gear for a long time because I get used to it and get better. So the switch to rhyzm made me think I'd take a step back - relieved that I did not.

Awesome you can put the EJ bug away and start having some fun.

Congrats.

I actually have good footwork. Wide base and I set up then hit. Probably my strong point. Im fast and played a lot of basketball so the wide base lateral movement comes naturally. When my feet are moving, and I line up my right foot to the ball on a forehand I can hit very big drives.

NextLevel wrote: wturber wrote: NextLevel wrote: Because know your goals helps me put advice and its value in their proper context. At your rating level (assuming it hasn't changed), one's ability to objectively assess certain things is a bit limited. I was where you were 4 years ago so I remember it. There is much more value in acquiring and building q consistent spin oreiendted stroke than anything else you are doing right now will bring to your game. Find the right coach and keep that focus in mind and the rest falls into place. Other things are largely distractors. With the possible exception being footwork.  Getting your footwork right early on and avoiding certain footwork pitfalls is, IMO, probably more important than good strokes if your goal is to reach a relatively high level. I've seen 2100+ kids with relatively bad footwork but excellent strokes so I am not convinced per se.  My footwork sucks as well.  My hierarchy is strokes, foot positioning then footwork.  And at almost any time, if you are willing to put in the work to develop new leg muscles, you can always work on your footwork.  Since foot positioning is an aspect of strokes, technical footwork IMO is about optimal ways of getting into position.  That said, subpotimal ways work better than many people think they do - that's what I have noticed from watching players with good strokes but bad footwork play. On the other hand, I am speaking in the context of inverted.  Short pips etc. have different timing demands.  Inverted allows you to play at your own timing more than any other surface.

I think the problem with all these footwork debates is that everyone seems to have a different definition of what footwork even is.

If someone does not bend his knees enough when moving between shots, is this classified as a footwork problem or a basic, body possitioning problem?

If a player plays his forehand with his right foot in front of his left foot and the coach considers this a problem (more debateable nowadays), is this a footwork problem or a foot positioning problem?

Many coaches advocate taking many small hops in between strokes. If a player doesn't do this, is this a problem related to footwork?

I guess your opion on the importance of footwork is heavily determined by just how all encompassing you consider the term "footwork" actually is. When people say "oh, my footwork is terrible!", I find that to be pretty vague and not particularly useful.

Edited by Ringer84 - 09/16/2015 at 8:36pm

benfb wrote: NextLevel wrote: It's virtually impossible to take a meaningful step back when you are under USATT 1600.  When people talk about protecting their game style, ratings etc. at that level, I try to make sense of it and I guess while it may be natural to feel that way, I can tell you that it's based on a very wrong view of where you are in the TT chain. Ooo! I just love this statement.  One small inaccuracy: replace 1600 with 2100, excluding highly coached and improving children.  Otherwise, good description.

NextLevel wrote: heavyforehand wrote: NextLevel wrote: It's virtually impossible to take a meaningful step back when you are under USATT 1600.  When people talk about protecting their game style, ratings etc. at that level, I try to make sense of it and I guess while it may be natural to feel that way, I can tell you that it's based on a very wrong view of where you are in the TT chain. Yes, but I spend 1-3 hours a day for weeks developing feel with a setup, so when it changes, I don't like it. In this situation it was not an issue luckily. I find myself going for loops earlier in the points and looking to attack quicker, which I believe is a good thing. If you are spending that much time and your rating is still 1000, maybe you need to re-evaluate what you are doing or review how many hours you have put in and whether your output is worth it.

Who says my rating is still 1000? I posted something like that weeks ago. I dont know what my rating is but the only guys that beat me right now are 1600-1900. The 1600 matches are pretty close. Im not sure what that makes me but i have had a lot of improvement since ive returned to the game. Anyway the snarky stuff is not needed and i dont even know what point you are trying to prove with it.

heavyforehand wrote: NextLevel wrote: heavyforehand wrote: NextLevel wrote: It's virtually impossible to take a meaningful step back when you are under USATT 1600.  When people talk about protecting their game style, ratings etc. at that level, I try to make sense of it and I guess while it may be natural to feel that way, I can tell you that it's based on a very wrong view of where you are in the TT chain. Yes, but I spend 1-3 hours a day for weeks developing feel with a setup, so when it changes, I don't like it. In this situation it was not an issue luckily. I find myself going for loops earlier in the points and looking to attack quicker, which I believe is a good thing. If you are spending that much time and your rating is still 1000, maybe you need to re-evaluate what you are doing or review how many hours you have put in and whether your output is worth it. Who says my rating is still 1000? I posted something like that weeks ago. I dont know what my rating is but the only guys that beat me right now are 1600-1900. The 1600 matches are pretty close. Im not sure what that makes me but i have had a lot of improvement since ive returned to the game. Anyway the snarky stuff is not needed and i dont even know what point you are trying to prove with it.

I have only very recently learned  to run a Faulkenberg drill with a blocker, after many years of failing.  Interestingly enough, none of my recent improvements on the drill have had anything to do with what I consider footwork.  

On footwork, coming from an athletic background I believe it is always important.

It's not unusual for people to keep a static rating between 1000 and 1500 for a while as they improve.  They're adding shots and they have to sort all that out.  It doesn't mean you're not getting better.

heavyforehand wrote: Not sure what a low level rating is - 1000? Anyway, I never lose to those players to the point now where they do not play me anymore. In the past I would drop matches now and then to lower level guys but I see the game a little better now and don't really struggle unless the player is more advanced.