@blahness
you need to observe just the millisecond of actual contact to get whats really going on.
Its a fundamental of good stroking that the racket angle should be constant through contact. Otherwise errors would result.
The "wraparound" exhibited in yr Ma Long example is a function of Ma Long 's follow through which enables him to have good transition (to balance and readiness) by pulling the racket towards his body by folding his elbow. Also in this case the impression of "Wraparound" is exaggerated by his "hooking" the stroke to send the ball wider to the fh. But again this "Hook" does not involve changing the contact angle during the stroke it just means setting the angle before contact.

@blahness
again I would suggest you ask yourself how the ball can be affected by the stroke when not in contact!

I wonder if the Flat Earth Society is looking for members?

But seriously look no further than these ideas of yours for lack of progress in your game.
Once you start to smell the coffee things will get better

blahness wrote: Umm, all of the super high level players I've played with teaches the wrapping of the ball. Even higher level players like Timo Boll, coach Meng from WRM table tennis channel (ex table tennis champion from China). I'm not sure how high level of a player you can be without understanding the wrapping of the ball.  As you can see from the slowmo of Ma Long's loop, he closes the racket angle at contact.

you can refer to high level players all you want. In the end its what they do that counts not what they say. In watching yr video of ML i see him executing a quality closed racket contact without changing the angle during the contact phase.
its worth remembering that not every high level player is also a high level analyst of tt technique whether his own or other peoples. Its worth remembering that the words you read or listen to may have been misinterpreted by you. On the other hand the video of ML represents the truth

i am 72 i am no superstar, but back in the days before computer rankings I beat my national ranked no 23. During my career I have had the opportunity to converse with all kinds and levels of players and coaches and the consensus is that the stability of the wrist at the contact phase is vital otherwise errors result. Thus if the arm is swinging through contact at 46 degrees then the whippyness of the wrist should not be changed to 48 degrees. rather it should also be brushing at 46 degrees. Indeed I remember refusing to coach a promising junior because he had similar ideas to you. All the coaches agreed that he had a "wobble" in his stroke at vital moments causing errors but he wouldnt listen to us, so, in spite of his woderful bh he did not progress


i watched the video . no wrap. no wobble. Just ML with his very simple excellent no frills technique with racket at same angle through stroke



Edited by pingpongpaddy - 04/11/2021 at 6:09am

when coach meng hits the ball for real his stroke is normal and stable. When he shadow strokes he demonstrates something   like your theory his japanese mate is the same. He is unfortunately one of those coaches who has not considered that he is trying to teach something that he himself does not do in practice.
its a pity because though his heart is in the right place his classes lead people like Blahness who dont have the habit of critically analysing incoming advice right up the garden path into error. Moral:: no matter who advises you, dont forget to use your own ability to think for yourself.
here is a real coach. no bs no diagrams. just commonsense

chinese olympic coach


i played with inverted from 1960' to 1977- lp and tackiness up to 1979 then sp thereafter
some tt history:-
the modern style of playing with inverted began with hasegawa(1967) bengtssen (1971) when the heavier topspin briefly overcame the chinese sp hitting style of zhuang de dong. In 1977 the chinese recovered their dominance using lp play and looping play to be interrupted by the swedes later on.
the first high performance inverted rubbers were sriver, super sriver and mark v which arrived about 1971- 72
btw
I can recall doing that same practice that ML demonstrates 4 or 5 times a week with my practice partners in the early 70's. I would have been using mark v 2mm. There was no internet so we learnt the techniques from studying motion analysis photos from butterfly report. In those days we were loop crazy even more than today, partly because at the the time we saw the loop as something that overturned china dominance. We loved the round the net play of Jonyer and Gergely. However the the play of today shows that the fundamentals of tt tactics from china in the 60's - close to the table early striking have reasserted themselves in the advanced topspin of the 21st century

we are starting to repeat ourselves.
good luck in yr career


Edited by pingpongpaddy - 04/11/2021 at 9:11am

The first swing path shows the traditional way and the second one shows the new hitting through technique to launch  a explosive forward speedy topspin .


Edited by Robin.w - 04/11/2021 at 5:06pm

1:The swing path of  your racket combines all the movement of your leg, body, elbow, arms, wrist, finger, blade....

Edited by Robin.w - 04/11/2021 at 11:42pm

     GIVE UP ALL THE LOOPS . LEARN FORHAND DRIVES INSTEAD.   

Japanese coach gave a new destroyer to ITO Mima hands, that is to drive the ball rather than looping.
DRIVING the ball with a racket open face. This is the clue to Mima's super_power.

Be happy.

PS// Go and consult from Youtube video of Mima's training behind closed doors.

Edited by racquetsforsale - 02/22/2022 at 9:25pm

From my experience,  it really depends on the player's preference and playing style. Some players prefer to keep the badminton racket parallel to the path of the shuttlecock's travel, while others may have a more open racket angle. Personally, I tend to go for a slightly open angle to give my shots a bit more power and spin. How about you?  Have you found a specific racket angle that works best for your forehand loop?

Edited by Yenwatte - 05/05/2023 at 5:07am

For completeness sake and future reference.

https://www.tabletennisdaily.com/forum/topics/european-games-2023.31432/post-413358

latej wrote: But they still have value for me, for example the 2nd one. I may tend to have a slightly longer follow-through. It may indicate that I actually don't hit at the optimal moment of zero acceleration and max speed.

On that, one study from Taiwan (on FH and BH fast loop at maximum effort close to the table among 6 div A collegiate players in 2011) and a series of studies from China (on FH fast loop from mid-far distance among 11 national level players in 2016 and its BH counterpart in 2018, 2018, and 2019) have actually found that the players do hit at nearly the maximum velocity upon contact AND accelerate through the contact, consistently.

How is that possible? It turns out that, instead of the resultant racket velocity (which is what many studies focus on), you have to look one step further at its 3 directional components - forward, upward, and lateral, as postulated by another study from Poland in 2018. What actually happens is that the players' stroke reaches the maximum velocity first in the forward direction moments before contact, and then accelerates through the contact in the upward direction. To be more precise, the curves of the forward, upward and lateral velocities are out of phase, reaching the peaks at different times. The prominent argument on reaction time is therefore irrelevant as the swing is moving in 3 directions simultaneously yet separately.

The findings in those studies support the notion of "hit first and then brush", that is, wrap around the ball.

桌球�£、反拍拉球動作之生物力學分析_黃信學
Fig. 4-1-1 Time of maximum resultant velocity of racket after contact
Legend
FH/BH: left/right bar
Left to right: topspin diagonal, topspin parallel, backspin diagonal, backspin parallel
https://i.imgur.com/Fr06PBv.png
Fig. 4-1-2 Time of maximum forward velocity of racket before contact
https://i.imgur.com/Vq99cfv.png

乒乓球�£手中远台拉冲技术的生物力学特征分析_蒋津君
[url unfurl=false]https://i.imgur.com/K2Pf6o1.png[/url]
Fig. 9 Resultant velocities and their 3 velocity components for shoulder, elbow, wrist, and racket markers for FH
Legend
a1/-2/-3: end of backswing
b1/-2/-3: impact
c1/-2/-3: end of follow-through
d1/-2/-3: recovery
Top part
Top right corner from top to bottom: racket, wrist, elbow, shoulder
Bottom part
Top right corner from top to bottom: racket-lateral, racket-forward, racket-upward
https://i.imgur.com/hE3JSjB.png

乒乓球反手中远台拉冲技术核心环节的运动学特征分析_蒋津君
Fig. 5 and 6 Resultant velocities and their 3 velocity components for shoulder, racket, elbow, and wrist markers for BH
Legend
Shoulder (blue), racket (red), elbow (green), and wrist (purple)
Racket X lateral (blue), racket Y forward (red), racket Z upward (green)
https://i.imgur.com/s3rnAhG.png

Edited by zeio - 07/02/2023 at 2:14pm

https://www.tabletennisdaily.com/forum/topics/wrapping-the-ball.31447/post-414565
Was going to supplement NextLevel's post in the European Games thread, but keeping it here for future reference.

Image of the path of the racket tip for the FH and BH mid-far distance loop from the studies from mainland China.
FH
https://i.imgur.com/KkgPY1k.png
FH and BH
https://i.imgur.com/cOPuJIa.png

Also, for those who haven't had a chance, check out the path and racket angle of the FH counterhit between by Singaporean expert (pro teams and clubs) and novice players (1 hour of playtime per week, w/o formal training) in a study (2017) from Singapore.
http://mytabletennis.net/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=89854&PID=1111185&title=looping-racket-angle#1111185