Playing against short pips hitter

Name a top 5 Chinese player with sp?

Tt4me,

The 'hiding something' quote simply means that given the versatility of inverted rubbers, most pips users are people who are unable to use inverted for some reason. The 'good reason' for using pips is that one likes to chop. However, you don't give up a backhand loop unless you never had one. You typically go to pips on the backhand after you have given up on making this your main backhand shot.

*

Edited by roundrobin - 10/27/2015 at 12:45pm

well said roundrobin! The "good reason" to use pips is that one likes to chop. Are you kidding me? I play with SPs to attack/block effectively. Jiang Jialiang and Liu Guoliang used SPs but were anything but a chopper.

roundrobin wrote: power7 wrote: Name a top 5 Chinese player with sp? Sp on a top players blade means their paddle speed isn't competitive anymore for counter looping.  Or they are not as good in reading and countering spin fast enough. Sp is like bringing a dagger into a sword fight.  Interesting but not as effective. Señor He,  would you use sp if you were 18 again and on the cnt?   Tu loco, I would use Ma Lin setup The new poly ball may prove otherwise. As to your assertion that sp users are not as good in reading spin and countering spin fast enough, that's pretty loco alright.

I am not ignorant of anything. I am making casual conversation. Short pips are also good for hitting or taking the ball early, and that is why they are more popular in the women's game. I still stand by the claim that a backhand looper will never even consider pips. I say this as a hitter.

tt4me wrote: power7 wrote: To me sp on bh means that's their weaker side and they are compensating for something.  It could be mobility, arm speed, spin recognition, etc. Why does this myth get repeated over and over again?  There are a lot of very good Chinese players that play with SP on just one side of their cpen  What are they trying to cover up?  What can they cover up?  Do they have weak fore-hands too?  Perhaps you should discuss this with He Zhi Wen.

Edited by JacekGM - 04/26/2013 at 9:40pm

NextLevel wrote: I am not ignorant of anything. I am making casual conversation. Short pips are also good for hitting or taking the ball early, and that is why they are more popular in the women's game. I still stand by the claim that a backhand looper will never even consider pips. I say this as a hitter.

And, what is, to you, a bh looper? A player in our first team, with a Usatt rating of no less then 2500, changed to SP prior to this season. Are you saying that he couldn't loop with his bh? Cause I've seen him play and I certainly think he was perfectly capable of looping with his bh, but he decided to go with SP instead, as he thought this allowed him to finish the point quicker.

Whatever you call it, Zhan Jian's forehand is a fully developed, big stroke, and his legs and shoulders and footwork are fully developed too.

Edited by Zhaoyang - 04/27/2013 at 1:33pm

benfb wrote: I can think of two example from the pro ranks that are interesting. Stellan Bengtsson, 1971 World Champion, originally played smooth on both sides. Somewhere in the late seventies or early eighties he switched to SP on the backhand. My impression is that he didn't feel confident that his BH loop was that strong at the world elite level. Second, more recent example is Johnny Huang, who played SP on both sides. Johnny looped from both sides with his SP but he was able to vary the spin more and have more deception on his loops with SP.

Speedplay wrote: NextLevel wrote: I am not ignorant of anything. I am making casual conversation. Short pips are also good for hitting or taking the ball early, and that is why they are more popular in the women's game. I still stand by the claim that a backhand looper will never even consider pips. I say this as a hitter. And, what is, to you, a bh looper? A player in our first team, with a Usatt rating of no less then 2500, changed to SP prior to this season. Are you saying that he couldn't loop with his bh? Cause I've seen him play and I certainly think he was perfectly capable of looping with his bh, but he decided to go with SP instead, as he thought this allowed him to finish the point quicker.

So what about his game makes this so? He likes to take the ball earlier on just his backhand?

The point here is that looping is a devastating weapon.  If you win points with it a higher level, you would never use pips.

Thanks JacekGM - As I mentioned earlier - quite a few suggestions have been given - I'll just try it all see which ones I can correctly execute and see which ones my friend has trouble with. Since we are both intermediate players it'll probably come down to least amount of unforced errors.  Taking pace off was something I wasn't trying - I was trying to hit it past him. I would like to beat his short pips BH rather than go away from it - it's sort of interesting trying to figure out a way to neutralize it! 

Speedplay wrote: NextLevel wrote: Speedplay wrote: NextLevel wrote: I am not ignorant of anything. I am making casual conversation. Short pips are also good for hitting or taking the ball early, and that is why they are more popular in the women's game. I still stand by the claim that a backhand looper will never even consider pips. I say this as a hitter. And, what is, to you, a bh looper? A player in our first team, with a Usatt rating of no less then 2500, changed to SP prior to this season. Are you saying that he couldn't loop with his bh? Cause I've seen him play and I certainly think he was perfectly capable of looping with his bh, but he decided to go with SP instead, as he thought this allowed him to finish the point quicker. So what about his game makes this so? He likes to take the ball earlier on just his backhand?The point here is that looping is a devastating weapon.  If you win points with it a higher level, you would never use pips. The same thing could be said about SP, they are a devestating weapon when it comes to hitting and if you win points with it at higher level, you would never use inverted.

Of course, you could say that.  The problem is that most top players don't use short pips and aren't beating double inverted players with them, making the claim empirically vacuous.  So in absolute terms given modern circumstances, inverted is the more flexible and powerful surface.


Edited by NextLevel - 04/28/2013 at 1:57am

roundrobin wrote: NextLevel wrote: Of course, you could say that.  The problem is that most top players don't use short pips and aren't beating double inverted players with them, making the claim empirically vacuous.  So in absolute terms given modern circumstances, inverted is the more flexible and powerful surface. Inverted is the most practiced surface by the Chinese since late 80s because they lost to Sweden and wanted to copy their style.  They have succeeded beyond all expectations, and today they train them by the millions via a human conveyor belt system, in factory-like settings.  It's as simple as that.  The key for China is to keep doing exactly what they are successful in doing until another country starts to beat them.  Them they innovate and try to find something new again.  Short pips styles like LGL, Johnny Huang and Ding Song can definitely beat double inverted players at the very highest level.  The fact is even an Eric Boggan windshield-wiper style with anti on one side can be trained to become world champion if a country like China devote enough resources to it.  Ask LGL or KLH about it yourself.  You like to argue as if you know more than them, but I don't think so.  Both of them will tell you any style can be trained to become world champion regardless of the rubbers used, as long as one side has enough "killing" power.  Table tennis is all about strategy, power and positioning, and ultimately the ability to implement them.  Nothing else.  "Monster loop drives with devastating spin from both wings" does not matter if the opponent can consistently return one more shot to end the point.   As you learn more about table tennis in the next decade or two you will understand what I am talking about.  Repeatedly talking trash about other rubbers being "inferior" to inverted, and their users "don't have the ability to use inverted" make you sound extremely ignorant.  If LGL and KLH can respect all rubber surfaces and their users (most CNT coaches are big fans of Eric Boggan) you should listen too.

In what year did you have these conversations that you use to make it sound like you have experts on your side?  These all sound like ancient history from the spin pips, speed glue and 38mm ball days, and not related at all to contemporary table tennis.

I will let the results speak for themselves.  You simply want to imagine a world in which inverted players are dominated by pips players because you can imagine it.  That world passed away in the 1990s and early 2000s with the rule changes affecting the aspect ratio of pips.

In the real world, pips players are dominated by inverted players simply because the power and spin that inverted can generate from various distances makes it hard to play with pips in the men's game.  That is the sense in which pips are inferior.  If we could change the rules back to what they were before 1998, we would be on a more level playing field.  But pips are now inferior.  It doesn't mean that one can't play well without them. It doesn't mean that they aren't a good surface.   It does mean that if you decide to go with pips instead of inverted, you simply decided to give up on playing a high spin game.  And a high spin game, given the power men possess, is going to be the dominant TT game unless the new ball does something to change that (unlikely).

roundrobin wrote: NextLevel wrote: Of course, you could say that.  The problem is that most top players don't use short pips and aren't beating double inverted players with them, making the claim empirically vacuous.  So in absolute terms given modern circumstances, inverted is the more flexible and powerful surface. Inverted is the most practiced surface by the Chinese since late 80s because they lost to Sweden and wanted to copy their style.  They have succeeded beyond all expectations, and today they train them by the millions via a human conveyor belt system, in factory-like settings.  It's as simple as that.  The key for China is to keep doing exactly what they are successful in doing until another country starts to beat them.  Them they innovate and try to find something new again.  Short pips styles like LGL, Johnny Huang and Ding Song can definitely beat double inverted players at the very highest level.  The fact is even an Eric Boggan windshield-wiper style with anti on one side can be trained to become world champion if a country like China devote enough resources to it.  Ask LGL or KLH about it yourself.  You like to argue as if you know more than them, but I don't think so.  Both of them will tell you any style can be trained to become world champion regardless of the rubbers used, as long as one side has enough "killing" power.  Table tennis is all about strategy, power and positioning, and ultimately the ability to implement them.  Nothing else.  "Monster loop drives with devastating spin from both wings" does not matter if the opponent can consistently return one more shot to end the point.   As you learn more about table tennis in the next decade or two you will understand what I am talking about.  Repeatedly talking trash about other rubbers being "inferior" to inverted, and their users "don't have the ability to use inverted" make you sound extremely ignorant.  If LGL and KLH can respect all rubber surfaces and their users (most CNT coaches are big fans of Eric Boggan) you should listen too.

IMO roundrobin is right on the money, and NextLevel should give us all a rest from his tedious theories which only serve to highlight his lack of real knowledge which he tries to disguise with high school debating techniques. Its really sad that the few knowledgeable posters on the forum are continually interrupted by pathetic types, who are unable to admit that others are wiser.