BRS wrote:
I should start by saying I agree with everything in your post. Except for this.
"it is always easier to win by doing things that create problems for the opponent."
Unless you count simply keeping the ball on the table as a thing that creates problems, it is not always easier to win, at USATT ~1650 level. You sugarcoated this a bit, IMO. The truth is a player will lose some matches he or she could have won while developing the proper instincts. Maybe this is only true for an uncoached adult learner and not a coached junior, but I doubt it. Anyone will have off matches or days where going for higher-quality shots just won't work out.
Letting your opponent beat himself is a guarantee of stagnation for a non-defender, that is true. But accepting some unnecessary losses is part of changing these instincts too, got to be honest about that.
IMO, there is a transition from passive shots, to "safe" aggressive shots, to quality aggressive shots. Trying to skip direct from passive to quality will result in a lot of misses, and that pain can be hard to take. It's one thing if between games you have a coach telling you that you are playing the right way and relax and go for it, and another thing entirely being on your own and only knowing that you are losing a match you should be winning.
None of that is an argument for not playing aggressively. But as an intermediate just landing a decent topspin usually puts you in control of the point, so going for a sideline and missing, or going for too much on a high fifth ball, actually reinforces passive instincts. You can only win each point once, there's no bonus.
This also assumes you are playing another looper. I think you stated that. But in cases where the opponent wants to go back and defend it's better to loop safely and wait for your best chance to attack an easy one, IMO. If you know the opponent isn't going to pressure you, why pressure yourself? But it's hard to be patient like that.
BRS,
Thanks for the kind words - as for the disagreement, I think it is largely insubstantial.
Maybe the biggest point is that I consider safe topspins to be fine as long as they are taken when you have balls that are tricky to judge. That's the whole point of building them. Tricky to judge is an individual assessment and changes with practice.
It is easier to beat opponents by posing them problems. It's not sugarcoating. It's virtually a truism. Accepting losses when playing this way is about developing shot consistency, and is not about whether posing problems for your opponent is the easiest way to win. Usually, most of these things would be drilled to a good level in practice drills, and then carried over to matches. But if you don't do practice drills, then your practice matches become dual purpose. And unfortunately, we confuse practice matches with tournament matches sometimes. And then if we practice improperly, we get tense during tournament matches rather than just executing what we practiced with slight modifications for environmental changes and the opponent's quality of ball.
The players you beat just by keeping the ball on the table, more often than not, are players you play on a regular basis and whose limitations you know. Yes, you can beat them by doing things that are not aggressive, but you can also beat them if you put a simple, spinny topspin on the table to wherever they block and then attack the next ball aggressively and consistently. As fleetwoodmac pointed out, aggressively doesn't mean hard - it just means a quality shot. I tend to use power and I have my fair share of misses, but it is not the only way or the best way - and power often has to be aided by placement when you have opponents who can step back and bring back the ball if you are too off balance. I find placement more important than power in my game generally.
One problem is possible that you are not comfortable with the footwork and stroke demands to do both shots 3rd ball and 5th ball shots consistently, so you sometimes overcompensate or undercompensate, or you don't have the serve quality to get the balls you can attack. That is fine. But missing shots is not posing the opponent problems.
Another issue is that you need to judge the risk relative to your stroke quality. A safe shot is a quality shot - it is a requirement when the good 3rd ball opportunity is not there. At every level, the definition of safe and quality changes and gets higher and higher so you always have to refine your strokes and placement etc. In general, if your topspins are too safe, they get easier to counter. But sometimes, what you consider a safe topspin might be hard to counter for the opponent. The key thing to note is whether the opponent usually block the first topspin or the opponent counters the first topspin aggressively. If the former, you have time to set up your attacks and wait for the right ball to be decisive with. IF the latter, then you may have to do more with the third ball.
Judging the quality of the opponent's return takes time as well. That is why good serving to limit the opponent's ball manipulation options and to give you a better idea of what the opponent has done to the ball is helpful. So is being able to judge what is on the ball by how the ball looks/flies.
Changing a playing style requires you to change certain things, and change takes time. Learning requires certain things to become subconscious so that other things can be consciously adapted to. This process is never ending and is why you need to start this earlier or be forced to rebuild your game at a higher level. Playing more conservatively is easier to learn as you build in more defense and opponents will naturally put you under pressure. But playing weakly/defensively not under pressure is hard to change when the opponent is putting you under pressure. IT is hard to beat better players with defense.
In fact, it is quite possible to play a good game and lose to a good player who is technically worse than you, but played in the zone for the match. On Sunday, I saw a kid that I have never lost to beat one of my club mates who beats me most of the time in 3 straight sets - the ratings gap was almost 270 pts. In fact, the kid who lost would probably never lose to me if he wasn't my training partner. After the match, I asked what happened and my training partner and coach both said the same thing - my training partner took his shots and the kid counterlooped extremely well. My club mate had no other bad losses that day and he beat some extremely good players pretty decisively. Could he have beaten the kid he lost to by playing differently? I think so. But what does that prove? Maybe that he needs to be able to switch up his game or that he needs to get better at doing what he currently does. But my point is that losing is always on the menu options when you play GOOD players, and I define good players as players who can either consistently make or return good topspins.
For me, the more difficult issue, and I have to address this later, has to deal with strategic pushing and blocking (or even fishing). All are very important. They just aren't want a player should build his game in the first 3 shots around if they want to get better quickly. Even controlled topspins at some point get into trouble if they aren't located properly. In the end, improving is about continually making your shot quality better while playing in a way that poses opponents problems. The whole point of being aggressive early is that it allows you to draw your gun first.
What you will learn later, and I didn't discuss it here, is that even if you want to play a defensive player or a flawed unorthodox player, how you set up the point with serve and first attack, or serve return, is very important in determining how the whole point transpires.
For example, many people make the mistake of serving a person who uses his backhand all over the table to his backhand. Why not serve him to the short forehand and make him uses his backhand short over the table there so his defenses are not set up properly, or serve him long to the forehand to test his attack off long backspin and see if he transitions to defend the table with his backhand properly? Even choppers - sometimes, it makes sense to serve them to bring them over the table so that they are faced with the first ball/attack while retreating from deeper in. It also reduces their ability to put spin on the serve.
So ultimately, this style does require people who are very conservative about their TT and who want to manage their results carefully to practice much more. But those without the ability to practice their attacking repertoire with drills have to think long term. Again, it's painful to rebuild your game later.
It is best to do this kind of rebuilding with videotape so you can look at your misses and reflect on what was misjudged about the ball or what was wrong with your stroke.