Alex Table Tennis - MyTableTennis.NET Homepage
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Serve from FH corner
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Serve from FH corner

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12
Author
GeryMerke View Drop Down
Beginner
Beginner


Joined: 09/17/2019
Location: Madison,WI
Status: Offline
Points: 11
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote GeryMerke Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09/17/2019 at 8:37pm
Originally posted by larrytt larrytt wrote:

Actually, I wrote very specifically, "...into a lefty's extreme backhand..."

I was not questioning your "lefty's extreme backhand"
And I clarified righty to righty as well & I was only referring to your incorrect spin orientation


Originally posted by larrytt larrytt wrote:

Many players don't naturally aim their receive "where most of the table is located," but instead naturally go crosscourt, 
If the ball comes to a player's  deep backhand, and if most players naturally go cross-court, where would the table be located then , may I ask ? 
Yes most players naturally go cross-court but that is ONLY because that is where most of the table is located in most situations LOL (unless you are playing a forehand from your backhand side like Ryu SeungMin or vice versa)  


Edited by GeryMerke - 09/17/2019 at 8:46pm
Back to Top
larrytt View Drop Down
Silver Member
Silver Member
Avatar

Joined: 04/04/2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 844
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote larrytt Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09/17/2019 at 8:59pm
Originally posted by GeryMerke GeryMerke wrote:

Originally posted by larrytt larrytt wrote:

Actually, I wrote very specifically, "...into a lefty's extreme backhand..."

I was not questioning your "lefty's extreme backhand"
And I clarified righty to righty as well & I was only referring to your incorrect spin orientation


Originally posted by larrytt larrytt wrote:

Many players don't naturally aim their receive "where most of the table is located," but instead naturally go crosscourt, 
If the ball comes to a player's  deep backhand, and if most players naturally go cross-court, where would the table be located then , may I ask ? 
Yes most players naturally go cross-court but that is ONLY because that is where most of the table is located in most situations LOL (unless you are playing a forehand from your backhand side like Ryu SeungMin or vice versa)  
In the first case, you specifically wrote, incorrectly, "Yes, assuming a righty receiver (which I assume you meant also)." This is incorrect since (as I already pointed out), you "assume" something that is not true. The rest of your argument was about something I did not write, since I was writing about serving to a lefty, including your statement, "this statement is MOSTLY incorrect." 

In the second case, you contradicted your own statement, where you wrote, "the receiver will naturally angle his racket towards the left of the server, because that is where most of the table is located." Here you are defining most of the table to be that big area to the server's left (since he's serving from the forehand side), which would be down the line. Now you are redefining it to be going crosscourt. Sorry, you can't have both contradictory definitions. 

You joined this forum less than two hours ago and your only five posts EVER are in response to my tactical posts where you misread what I wrote and contradict your own statements. It's somewhat obvious who you are (so much for the 30 days suspension) and am not interested in wasting time with you again. 
-Larry Hodges
Professional Table Tennis Coach & Writer
Member, USATT Hall of Fame
USATT National & ITTF Certified Coach
Former Chair, USATT Coaching Committee
www.TableTennisCoaching.com
www.MDTTC.com
Back to Top
GeryMerke View Drop Down
Beginner
Beginner


Joined: 09/17/2019
Location: Madison,WI
Status: Offline
Points: 11
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote GeryMerke Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09/17/2019 at 9:06pm
Originally posted by larrytt larrytt wrote:

Originally posted by GeryMerke GeryMerke wrote:

Originally posted by larrytt larrytt wrote:

Actually, I wrote very specifically, "...into a lefty's extreme backhand..."

I was not questioning your "lefty's extreme backhand"
And I clarified righty to righty as well & I was only referring to your incorrect spin orientation


Originally posted by larrytt larrytt wrote:

Many players don't naturally aim their receive "where most of the table is located," but instead naturally go crosscourt, 
If the ball comes to a player's  deep backhand, and if most players naturally go cross-court, where would the table be located then , may I ask ? 
Yes most players naturally go cross-court but that is ONLY because that is where most of the table is located in most situations LOL (unless you are playing a forehand from your backhand side like Ryu SeungMin or vice versa)  
In the first case, you specifically wrote, incorrectly, "Yes, assuming a righty receiver (which I assume you meant also)." This is incorrect since (as I already pointed out), you "assume" something that is not true. The rest of your argument was about something I did not write, since I was writing about serving to a lefty, including your statement, "this statement is MOSTLY incorrect." 

In the second case, you contradicted your own statement, where you wrote, "the receiver will naturally angle his racket towards the left of the server, because that is where most of the table is located." Here you are defining most of the table to be that big area to the server's left (since he's serving from the forehand side), which would be down the line. Now you are redefining it to be going crosscourt. Sorry, you can't have both contradictory definitions. 

You joined this forum less than two hours ago and your only five posts EVER are in response to my tactical posts where you misread what I wrote and contradict your own statements. It's somewhat obvious who you are (so much for the 30 days suspension) and am not interested in wasting time with you again. 
-Larry Hodges

Looks like I touched a nerve & there is no reason to get mad at me.
I was only referring to your incorrect (or lack of understanding) of  spin orientations in case 1

In case 2 , I am not NOT contradicting myself. I am just saying your twisting my words. 
All I said was table will be to your right if you are a righty playing a normal forehand. Playing a cross-court is after the fact. You play cross-court one and only because most of the table is to your right.
Simple as that . Period   
Back to Top
larrytt View Drop Down
Silver Member
Silver Member
Avatar

Joined: 04/04/2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 844
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote larrytt Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09/17/2019 at 9:13pm
Originally posted by GeryMerke GeryMerke wrote:

Originally posted by larrytt larrytt wrote:

Originally posted by GeryMerke GeryMerke wrote:

Originally posted by larrytt larrytt wrote:

Actually, I wrote very specifically, "...into a lefty's extreme backhand..."

I was not questioning your "lefty's extreme backhand"
And I clarified righty to righty as well & I was only referring to your incorrect spin orientation


Originally posted by larrytt larrytt wrote:

Many players don't naturally aim their receive "where most of the table is located," but instead naturally go crosscourt, 
If the ball comes to a player's  deep backhand, and if most players naturally go cross-court, where would the table be located then , may I ask ? 
Yes most players naturally go cross-court but that is ONLY because that is where most of the table is located in most situations LOL (unless you are playing a forehand from your backhand side like Ryu SeungMin or vice versa)  
In the first case, you specifically wrote, incorrectly, "Yes, assuming a righty receiver (which I assume you meant also)." This is incorrect since (as I already pointed out), you "assume" something that is not true. The rest of your argument was about something I did not write, since I was writing about serving to a lefty, including your statement, "this statement is MOSTLY incorrect." 

In the second case, you contradicted your own statement, where you wrote, "the receiver will naturally angle his racket towards the left of the server, because that is where most of the table is located." Here you are defining most of the table to be that big area to the server's left (since he's serving from the forehand side), which would be down the line. Now you are redefining it to be going crosscourt. Sorry, you can't have both contradictory definitions. 

You joined this forum less than two hours ago and your only five posts EVER are in response to my tactical posts where you misread what I wrote and contradict your own statements. It's somewhat obvious who you are (so much for the 30 days suspension) and am not interested in wasting time with you again. 
-Larry Hodges

Looks like I touched a nerve & there is no reason to get mad at me.
I was only referring to your incorrect (or lack of understanding) of  spin orientations in case 1

In case 2 , I am not NOT contradicting myself. I am just saying your twisting my words. 
All I said was table will be to your right if you are a righty playing a normal forehand. Playing a cross-court is after the fact. You play cross-court one and only because most of the table is to your right.
Simple as that . Period   
And I pointed out that you are incorrect in your statements above. We could go in circles, but we've already had this trolling game before, and now you are back under a different name. 
-Larry Hodges
Professional Table Tennis Coach & Writer
Member, USATT Hall of Fame
USATT National & ITTF Certified Coach
Former Chair, USATT Coaching Committee
www.TableTennisCoaching.com
www.MDTTC.com
Back to Top
GeryMerke View Drop Down
Beginner
Beginner


Joined: 09/17/2019
Location: Madison,WI
Status: Offline
Points: 11
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote GeryMerke Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09/17/2019 at 9:21pm
Originally posted by larrytt larrytt wrote:

And I pointed out that you are incorrect in your statements above. We could go in circles, but we've already had this trolling game before, and now you are back under a different name. 
-Larry Hodges

Sir,
It perfectly ok if you disagree with me but if it was you I would not disrespect someone you do not know by calling them names and accusing them just because they found some serious logical flaws in your analysis. If you disagree it is Ok but there is no need to call me names.  
Back to Top
larrytt View Drop Down
Silver Member
Silver Member
Avatar

Joined: 04/04/2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 844
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote larrytt Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09/17/2019 at 9:27pm
Originally posted by GeryMerke GeryMerke wrote:

Originally posted by larrytt larrytt wrote:

And I pointed out that you are incorrect in your statements above. We could go in circles, but we've already had this trolling game before, and now you are back under a different name. 
-Larry Hodges

Sir,
It perfectly ok if you disagree with me but if it was you I would not disrespect someone you do not know by calling them names and accusing them just because they found some serious logical flaws in your analysis. If you disagree it is Ok but there is no need to call me names.  
Keith Lin, here is the complete text of the posting you responded to: "And I pointed out that you are incorrect in your statements above. We could go in circles, but we've already had this trolling game before, and now you are back under a different name." 

Now, where did I call you names? Answer: You just made that up. Conclusion: You are trolling. (That's not name-calling, that's referring to an action.) 
-Larry Hodges


Edited by larrytt - 09/17/2019 at 9:28pm
Professional Table Tennis Coach & Writer
Member, USATT Hall of Fame
USATT National & ITTF Certified Coach
Former Chair, USATT Coaching Committee
www.TableTennisCoaching.com
www.MDTTC.com
Back to Top
GeryMerke View Drop Down
Beginner
Beginner


Joined: 09/17/2019
Location: Madison,WI
Status: Offline
Points: 11
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote GeryMerke Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09/17/2019 at 9:40pm
Originally posted by larrytt larrytt wrote:

Originally posted by GeryMerke GeryMerke wrote:

Originally posted by larrytt larrytt wrote:

And I pointed out that you are incorrect in your statements above. We could go in circles, but we've already had this trolling game before, and now you are back under a different name. 
-Larry Hodges

Sir,
It perfectly ok if you disagree with me but if it was you I would not disrespect someone you do not know by calling them names and accusing them just because they found some serious logical flaws in your analysis. If you disagree it is Ok but there is no need to call me names.  
Keith Lin, here is the complete text of the posting you responded to: "And I pointed out that you are incorrect in your statements above. We could go in circles, but we've already had this trolling game before, and now you are back under a different name." 

Now, where did I call you names? Answer: You just made that up. Conclusion: You are trolling. (That's not name-calling, that's referring to an action.) 
-Larry Hodges


Accusing someone of trolling is no less than calling them a troll.

Obviously you are hell bent on going in circles and using semantics to play the same game
I will take the high road & ignore you.
Good Bye  

Back to Top
larrytt View Drop Down
Silver Member
Silver Member
Avatar

Joined: 04/04/2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 844
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote larrytt Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09/17/2019 at 9:40pm
Originally posted by Baal Baal wrote:

Originally posted by larrytt larrytt wrote:

There's a simple way to decide whether to serve from the forehand side. Try it, and if it is effective, use it. If not, don't. There are many players, mostly righties, but also some lefties, who have trouble with this type of serve. For example, a righty's tomahawk serve deep into a lefty's extreme backhand can give him difficulty if he doesn't have a strong backhand loop, and often sets up an easy third ball. 

One of the quickest ways to get a few free points from a "top" player is to do a forehand pendulum serve from the forehand side - they see it so rarely that they have great difficulty the first few times. (After that it loses its effectiveness, so it's sometimes a "trick" serve to be used occasionally.) It's sometimes more effective if the server has a strong backhand, but he can also follow up the serve by stepping to his left. It's rarely done at the world-class level, but below that it can give even strong players fits. I remember watching the 1850 level JJ Hardy, former Orioles shortstop that I coached, give fits to a 2450 player at my club who had never seen forehand pendulum serves from the forehand side, which is what JJ kept doing! 

Kanak Jha is a classic example. He has very good receive, especially with his backhand. Many players make the mistake of serving from their backhand side short to his forehand, which Kanak not only is used to, but gives him the option of either forehand flipping or stepping over and backhand receiving - and this variation can mess up servers. It's better to serve from the forehand side where you have an angle into his short forehand (or a surprise serve deep to the backhand), and so can force him to receive forehand. It's not that his forehand receive isn't good, it's just that relative to his very high level of play and his backhand receive, his forehand receive is a little weaker. 
-Larry Hodges (currently in Berlin)

This of course assumes that the server has practised this enough to have a decent serve and reliable third ball when serving from there .  There's definitely value in being a bit different.
Usually, yes. It's best to practice these things so they are ready when you need them. But sometimes you have to improvise, especially for players below world-class level. The first time I ever did forehand pendulum serves from the forehand side was at the North American Teams, in response to a specific style - and I didn't get a chance to practice it first. Below is an excerpt from my tactics book on this, from the chapter "Tactical Examples." If I hadn't invented this tactic on the spot, I would likely have lost both matches. Just about anybody else in the tournament who played these two players could have done this, but they weren't flexible with their tactical thinking and so played conventional tactics against unconventional players, and so they all lost. 
-Larry Hodges

At the North American Teams one year I was playing with slightly lower-ranked players as a player/coach. I was one of the three undefeated players in the division. The other two were two junior players from Canada. Our teams played in the final. Both of the Canadian juniors played the same style, which had created havoc throughout the division: big forehand looping attacks, but medium long pips on the backhand which they used to flat hit shot after shot. They quick-hit every short serve with their backhands (spin didn’t take on their pips), even short ones to their forehand, and followed with their big forehands.

As I watched them play, I realized that they would have little trouble with my best serve, a forehand pendulum serve I do from my backhand corner, which sets up my forehand. No matter where I’d serve it, if it was long, they’d loop it; if it was short, they’d backhand hit it. I could use a tomahawk serve to their forehand, but that would take away my big serving strength. What to do?

When I went out to play the first of the two, I set up like I normally do to serve, in the backhand corner. Then I took two steps to my right, and spent the whole match serving forehand pendulum serves from my forehand corner. This gave me an angle into his forehand so that he’d have to receive with his forehand (or risk me going down the line to his open backhand side if he tried to cover the short forehand with his backhand), and so I was able to use my pendulum serve to his inverted forehand, something he had probably rarely had to deal with. Since he couldn’t return it aggressively, I was able to move back into position after each serve to attack with my forehand. The same strategy worked against the other Canadian junior, and I won both matches. (Ironically, before the last match, the perceptive Canadian coach took the other junior off to a table and mimicked my serve over and over from the forehand side so the kid could practice against it, but it wasn’t enough.) I won all three of my matches, but alas, we lost the final 5-3.



Edited by larrytt - 09/17/2019 at 10:15pm
Professional Table Tennis Coach & Writer
Member, USATT Hall of Fame
USATT National & ITTF Certified Coach
Former Chair, USATT Coaching Committee
www.TableTennisCoaching.com
www.MDTTC.com
Back to Top
larrytt View Drop Down
Silver Member
Silver Member
Avatar

Joined: 04/04/2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 844
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote larrytt Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09/17/2019 at 9:50pm
Originally posted by GeryMerke GeryMerke wrote:

Originally posted by larrytt larrytt wrote:

Originally posted by GeryMerke GeryMerke wrote:

Originally posted by larrytt larrytt wrote:

And I pointed out that you are incorrect in your statements above. We could go in circles, but we've already had this trolling game before, and now you are back under a different name. 
-Larry Hodges

Sir,
It perfectly ok if you disagree with me but if it was you I would not disrespect someone you do not know by calling them names and accusing them just because they found some serious logical flaws in your analysis. If you disagree it is Ok but there is no need to call me names.  
Keith Lin, here is the complete text of the posting you responded to: "And I pointed out that you are incorrect in your statements above. We could go in circles, but we've already had this trolling game before, and now you are back under a different name." 

Now, where did I call you names? Answer: You just made that up. Conclusion: You are trolling. (That's not name-calling, that's referring to an action.) 
-Larry Hodges


Accusing someone of trolling is no less than calling them a troll.

Obviously you are hell bent on going in circles and using semantics to play the same game
I will take the high road & ignore you.
Good Bye  

Actually, Keith Lin/Hunkeelin, they are very different things. If I do something stupid tactically, that doesn't mean I'm stupid; one refers to the action, the other to the person. To use a famous example, Albert Einstein famously did a dumb math mistake early on in his relativity work, which set his work back for a time. Calling his mistake dumb was not calling Einstein dumb, which he definitely was not. In our discussions, I didn't use semantics; I simply responded to what you wrote, where I pointed out the "problems" that I saw in your responses to me. However, I am glad you are taking the high road and will ignore me, and I will do the same from here on. 
-Larry Hodges
Professional Table Tennis Coach & Writer
Member, USATT Hall of Fame
USATT National & ITTF Certified Coach
Former Chair, USATT Coaching Committee
www.TableTennisCoaching.com
www.MDTTC.com
Back to Top
Baal View Drop Down
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator


Joined: 01/21/2010
Location: unknown
Status: Offline
Points: 13375
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Baal Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09/18/2019 at 1:42pm
My extreme improvisations rarely worked for me.  But for sure, some moderate changes in the position I serve from has been useful on occasion.  But a complete change in service motion to something I've basically never practiced has only ever ended up in my losing the point.  i don't hit backhand serves for example.  I've never practiced it (not even when I was a kid and Stellan Bengtsson was my hero).  No way I'm going to try that in a match even if all my usual stuff is turning out to be not real effective against opponent.  And I have to say, I've never actually tried serving all the way from my own forehand corner, not even in practice.  So I wouldn't try it in a match.
Back to Top
blahness View Drop Down
Premier Member
Premier Member
Avatar

Joined: 10/18/2009
Location: Melbourne
Status: Offline
Points: 3125
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote blahness Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09/18/2019 at 11:42pm
Larry, thanks for your thoughts. That was a really good strategy executed under pressure!

I started trying out serving from my FH side (corner is too extreme, slightly beyond the middle line works the best). Most people I played with had huge difficulty receiving serves from that corner as they're just not used to it, it completely changes the game for them. I love it because I no longer need to leap to my FH for the third ball, I'm already there in a position to attack from both wings but particularly on the BH.  

There's a receive to the BH short which is unattackable pretty much but I can step in and do a deep fast push to throw the problem to my opponent. Any other short receive will be met by a dangerous chiquita, with the sideswipe and short push as variation. Long receives will be met by strong BH and FH opening loops (it still feels like I'm attacking in a weird position which I'll have to get used to, there's a lot of moving to the BH corner to attack and attacking with the BH from the middle line). But those opening loops from these weird positions also create weird lines of play which most opponents feel uneasy...

The serve to the FH short corner of the opponent really limits his or her options due to the lack of stable attacking options which makes the follow up quite devastating if trained well. There's also long serves down the line to prevent people from being too comfortable, which has its own follow up patterns. 

Having a primary serve pattern that people are not used to could be a significant advantage in competitions I think...
-------
Tacky rubber lover :)

Stiga Clipper CR

FH: Hurricane 8
BH: Hurricane 3-50
Back to Top
wilkinru View Drop Down
Silver Member
Silver Member
Avatar

Joined: 04/28/2015
Location: Las Vegas
Status: Offline
Points: 566
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote wilkinru Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09/19/2019 at 5:00pm
Originally posted by blahness blahness wrote:


Having a primary serve pattern that people are not used to could be a significant advantage in competitions I think...


Just play with your left hand...
TB ZLF
inverted
inverted
Back to Top
blahness View Drop Down
Premier Member
Premier Member
Avatar

Joined: 10/18/2009
Location: Melbourne
Status: Offline
Points: 3125
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote blahness Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09/19/2019 at 6:18pm
Originally posted by wilkinru wilkinru wrote:

Originally posted by blahness blahness wrote:


Having a primary serve pattern that people are not used to could be a significant advantage in competitions I think...


Just play with your left hand...

Lol if only it was that easy....
-------
Tacky rubber lover :)

Stiga Clipper CR

FH: Hurricane 8
BH: Hurricane 3-50
Back to Top
cole_ely View Drop Down
Premier Member
Premier Member
Avatar

Joined: 03/16/2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 6238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote cole_ely Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09/19/2019 at 7:18pm
Originally posted by blahness blahness wrote:

Originally posted by wilkinru wilkinru wrote:

Originally posted by blahness blahness wrote:


Having a primary serve pattern that people are not used to could be a significant advantage in competitions I think...


Just play with your left hand...

Lol if only it was that easy....

I wasn't coaches as a kid.  No video obviously. I made all my serves up. I have odd ones that I can get an odd point off anybody, just because of unorthodoxy. It typically only works once though.
W1 St with Illumina 1.9r, defender1.7b

Please let me know if I can be of assistance.
Back to Top
wilkinru View Drop Down
Silver Member
Silver Member
Avatar

Joined: 04/28/2015
Location: Las Vegas
Status: Offline
Points: 566
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote wilkinru Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09/19/2019 at 7:29pm
Originally posted by blahness blahness wrote:


Lol if only it was that easy....


My point is, you are correct - a little variation from the norm can be really effective. Like left handers often enjoy.
TB ZLF
inverted
inverted
Back to Top
blahness View Drop Down
Premier Member
Premier Member
Avatar

Joined: 10/18/2009
Location: Melbourne
Status: Offline
Points: 3125
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote blahness Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09/20/2019 at 4:15am
Originally posted by wilkinru wilkinru wrote:

Originally posted by blahness blahness wrote:


Lol if only it was that easy....


My point is, you are correct - a little variation from the norm can be really effective. Like left handers often enjoy.

Yeah exactly Tongue

I noticed Liu Shiwen and Miu Hirano used FH serves from the FH side too to great effect, see below...


-------
Tacky rubber lover :)

Stiga Clipper CR

FH: Hurricane 8
BH: Hurricane 3-50
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.01
Copyright ©2001-2018 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.156 seconds.

Become a Fan on Facebook Follow us on Twitter Web Wiz News
About MyTableTennis.NET | Forum Help | Disclaimer

MyTableTennis.NET is the trading name of Alex Table Tennis Ltd.

Copyright ©2003-2019 Alex Table Tennis Ltd. All rights reserved.