Yoshimura Serve Techniques

suds79 wrote: So to bring the talk back to his actual serve vs how legal it is or not, what I find interesting is how his wrist is seemingly always in the cocked, reverse pendulum motion. At least to me this makes sense as I find transitioning, during the balls descent, easier to go to the pendulum wrist action vs the opposite. The reason I say this is because of that dang reverse pendulum serve in the backspin version. I've messed & messed with this serve. The blade must come forward to get any real type of backspin. Any blade motion to the side and you're looking at almost pure sidespin (or some version of corkscrew) after the 2 bounces. So for me it's just easier to be in the reverse pendulum wrist position ready as I turn my body facing forward if I do the backspin verison. It's just one less thing to do during the serve.. I serve from a closed body position facing the opponent. If I'm looking to do the reverse pendulum serve with side or topspin added, I simply don't rotate my body towards the opponent during the serve. Not needed. I'm always curious to see how pro players like Yoshimura or Freitas have a good reverse pendulum serve version with backspin included. It's a hard serve to do IMO without having to rotate your body in the open position giving away the serve's deception (easy to see).

Tinykin wrote: Gman4911, why don't you umpire a few matches and show how us how it's to be done?

Baal wrote: My theory is that ITTF officials are calling thing the way they sre instructed to because it provides a reasonable balance between serve and return. They did not ever intend to fundamentally change the sport.

Baal wrote: My theory is that ITTF officials are calling thing the way they sre instructed to because it provides a reasonable balance between serve and return. They did not ever intend to fundamentally change the sport.

Wrong

Baal wrote: wturber wrote: Baal wrote: My theory is that ITTF officials are calling thing the way they sre instructed to because it provides a reasonable balance between serve and return. They did not ever intend to fundamentally change the sport. It is the rules themselves that are supposed to strike the balance.  If they fail, then they are supposed to be amended. That would require someone admitting they were wrong.

Baal wrote: Working for what?

wturber wrote: Actually, I think he hides the ball significantly more than average.  He's actually hiding the contact point at times.

I strongly disagree.

The intent of the rule restricting hidden serves could not have been to create a level playing field. Since both players were previously allowed to hide their serves, the game was already fair. It was just a matter of who could serve more skillfully and/or deceptively. It is clear the intent was to make the game more watchable/marketable by restricting the service to make for easier returns and therefore increasing the amount of longer, enjoyable rallies. But, the rule failed as it is difficult to enforce due to its subjectivity. So, at the risk of sounding like an idiot, here's a half-baked idea that I haven't heard mentioned: 1) Eliminate the rule restricting hidden serves. This would solve much of the controversy over illegal serves. 2) Add a visible seam to the ball. This would simultaneously reduce the advantage of hidden serves, and keep the initial intent of the rule to make serve receives easier. While we're at it...if the ball had a visible seam, then the 'unfair' advantage of frictionless LPs would be reduced too. So, we can go ahead and lift the ban on them too. *To be clear, I think part 1) of my plan would be sufficient, and part 2) is kinda silly .

Edited by Ringer84 - 09/07/2015 at 12:18am

Ringer84 wrote: Assuming that the current rules either cannot or will not be enforced, what changes to the rules would you propose so that the game could be played fairly?  Is there any other possibility besides forcing the ball to be visible to both umpires for the duration of the serve? Edit: Assuming we do not reintroduce hidden serves...

The Chinese Super League article is interesting. I don't know if I agree with this paragraph:

"The reason behind this is that the organisers and the Chinese Table Tennis Association would want ordinary fans to understand the sport more. With the use of the two-toned balls, the rotation will be much more visible during competitions and this will make fans appreciate the sport more."

I have some of these two-toned balls. I've used them to help teach spin to my kids. You can see the rotation when you're at the table or very close by. But, if you're away from the table and there is heavy spin on the ball, it's pretty much a blur.

I am ok with solutions 1 and 2.  I don't think the big seam will help much but I have no problem with it. 

NextLevel wrote: Baal wrote: I am ok with solutions 1 and 2.  I don't think the big seam will help much but I have no problem with it.  It will kill backspin vs. no spin combinations for all but the most incompetent returners.

Edited by Ringer84 - 09/07/2015 at 1:01pm

I still don't mind a big black seam.  My "no spin" serve always has enough spin to probably be a blur with a big black seam.  My spinny serve is actually just spinnier.  

When returning serve if someone hides the ball part of the way down with their head I really don't care at all.  I am focused on the point of contact between ball and blade. 

This guy Yoshimura, I am going to study him closely.  He has so many ways to be insanely deceptive.  It is really rare to see world's top 20 to be this messed up.  Looking at the video again several times, though, I am starting to think that Jay may have a point when he says he is actually hiding the point of contact.  I think I don't "strongly disagree" anymore.  I am not sure what the returner would be seeing.  I think his serves would be filthy and sneaky (in a good way) even if he didn't.

My favorite serve in this video came at the :53 second mark.  I think it gives you a good idea of how short the acceleration at contact of a pro player is.  I had a hard time even telling whether this serve was regular pendulum or reverse pendulum the first time I saw it.

Edited by Ringer84 - 09/08/2015 at 10:34am

Hoo boy hoo boy hoo boy!  The eternal what if anything to do about illegal/hidden serves problem.

I've been posting to table tennis forums since 1998 (the good ol' hide the contact with your forearm and stomp voraciously before, during, or after contact) and now it's 2015 and we are still beating this cayuse to death.

Let me see if I can sum up the schools of thought on the service situation without coming across as overly sarcastic.

One school of thought holds that a service is legal so long as an umpire or one's opponent allows it.  Otherwise known as the de facto position.  Makes a screwy sort of sense if you hold that when a shoplifter pilfers a carton or two of cigarettes from a convenience store and a cop sitting nearby in his patrol car noshing on a Dunkin' Donut while swilling a cup of coffee ignores this indiscretion, no crime is committed.

A second position holds that the ITTF rules regarding service probably should be enforced, but that the rules regarding service are insufficiently clear so as to determine what is a legal serve and what isn't. 
Besides, if I can return effectively, or at least safely, the other guy's serve, no harm no foul.

Still a third position holds that rules, even if they don't make sense to you personally, are meant to be enforced in sport, or what the hell, let's all play dodgeball.  I rather incline towards this position, as much out of fear as anything else, as a cursory check on ancestry.com tells me that I am a distant descendant of Cotton "Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God" Mather.  I serve legally because I don't want to spend an eternity trying to read impossibly ridiculous spins in Table Tennis Hell.