OOAK Table Tennis Forum


A truly International Table Tennis Community for both Defensive and Offensive styles!
OOAK Forum Links About OOAK Table Tennis Forum OOAK Forum Memory
It is currently 08 Jul 2020, 23:11


Don't want to see any advertising? Become a member and login, and you'll never see an ad again!



All times are UTC + 9:30 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 40 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: 04 Dec 2013, 03:47 
Offline
OOAK Super User
OOAK Super User
User avatar

Joined: 17 Feb 2007, 01:37
Posts: 1685
Location: Netherlands
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 238 times
foam wrote:
mynamenotbob wrote:
foam wrote:
It can't, it's like a slippery long pimple, you have to rely on the other player making enough spin to beat himself.

That isn't always true. Antis like Yasaka Antispin and Juic NeoAnti can impart a decent amount of spin. As far as chopping with anti, the 2012 German O40 champion chops with Butterfly Super Anti on both wings. Here's the 5th game when he won it:



Yeah I've used the Yasaka Anti, but it plays practically the same as a normal inverted rubber and we all know you can chop with inverted quite well :). By the way that guy looks like he knows what he's doing with anti but it's still going to be well out of the league of usability for 99.9% of humans for chopping, especailly with a properly slippery one. Short pips is a far better idea for the majority imho at least then you can play the game in whatever way you decided during a point and enjoy it.


In my opinion, things are a bit more complicated than you seem to want them to be, foam ;) . There is of course a good reason why adult male pro defenders do not ever use inverted on the backhand: it is impossible to chop well enough with the backhand to stand up to really heavy and fast incoming topspin. If you are able to do that anyway, your opponents will likely be medium to lower class players who can't really loop very well (as compared to pros, that is - everything is relative); in that case it really doesn't matter much what kind of rubber you use on your backhand, and you would be quite right in maintaining that grippy rubbers like slow inverted or thin short pips will offer you the greatest number of options during play. But they do not offer all options, nor necessarily the best. Using LP or anti offers different options, which aren't less effective. But picking the right one of them out of their many different forms and then using them requires understanding how they work and practising extensively to master the techniques needed, and then you have to come up with a number of tactical plans to succesfully play against different kinds of opponents. That is hard work and takes time, but a lot of players like it. For them, it would be pretty boring to use inverted or short pips. And knowing their equipment, they certainly wouldn't accept your statement that Yasaka Anti plays practically like a normal inverted rubber.

_________________
Without opponent, no match.


Top
 Profile  
 


PostPosted: 04 Dec 2013, 09:21 
Offline
Comeback Chopper
User avatar

Joined: 29 Feb 2012, 09:48
Posts: 328
Location: State College, Pennsylvania, USA
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 71 times
Back in the 1975 World Championships, as I recall, there were 9 male defensive players, of which 4 used antispin on their backhand. I am listing their names, country, and backhand rubbers, as best as I remember.

Norio Takashima (Japan, Butterfly Plous)
Toshiaki Furukawa (Japan, inverted rubber)
Liang Ke-liang (China, short pips?)
Lu Yuan-sheng (China, long pips)
Janos Borzsei (Hungary, antispin)
Paul Pinkewich (Australia, Yasaka antispin)
Sudkhir Phadke (India, Joola Tonihold Antispin)
G. Jagannath (India, ordinary pimpled rubber)
birding&table.tennis (Canada, Joola Tonihold Antispin)

(The top two defenders at that time were clearly Norio Takashima and Liang Ke-liang. I was certainly amongst the bottom three.)

So, in the mid-1970s, antispin on the backhand was a viable backhand rubber for a defensive player. It is also interesting that perhaps defensive players at the international level in the 1970s exhibited greater diversity of backhand rubbers than at any other time, i.e., inverted rubber, short pips, long pips, antispin, ordinary pimpled rubber).

I have a question. What changed? When I returned to playing table tennis two years ago all international level male defensive players used either long pips or short pips. Why was antispin no longer viable? My guess is the following. The introduction of speed glue and modern rubbers resulted in loops that were much faster with much more spin. To cope with these changes, defensive players needed greater spin variation on their backhand, and at that same time need to maintain a high level of control. These requirements eliminated antispin (in addition to ordinary pimpled rubber and inverted rubber). Is my explanation reasonable?

By the way, this is my 100th post.

Steven

_________________
Butterfly Joo Se Hyuk
Butterfly Tenergy 80-FX 1.9mm
TSP Curl P1R 1.4-1.7mm
--------------
Returned to table tennis September 2011
Canada National Team Member, 1973-1975
--------------
1972-1987
Brickell Balsa/Birch 3-ply Blade
Yasaka Mark V 1.5mm
Joola Toni Hold AntiTopspin 2.5mm


Last edited by birding&table.tennis on 04 Dec 2013, 12:53, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 04 Dec 2013, 10:55 
Offline
OOAK Super User
OOAK Super User
User avatar

Joined: 11 Dec 2010, 13:39
Posts: 1363
Location: Canada
Has thanked: 5 times
Been thanked: 64 times
MNNB!

Thanks for the video on the O40 champonship in Germany. Guenter Englmeier was VERY interesting to watch. Double Anti for rubber! He certainly kept his chops very deep. At 2:10 he drops one short of the net, it bounces over the net, and then it has the MOST backspin I have ever seen on a chop. Any comments anyone??

_________________
My paddle has a weird shape, looks like the one in my avatar image.

Blade: KTL Instinct+

Rubbers: BH Friendship 802-1 Short Pips 1.0mm
FH Gambler Reflectoid 1.5mm inverted


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 04 Dec 2013, 12:12 
Offline
Freak of Nature!
Freak of Nature!
User avatar

Joined: 04 Jun 2010, 04:46
Posts: 2442
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 77 times
For a purely defensive game I think the only viable option at world level still today is inverted both sides. I think the lack of choppers in the world these days is more about lack of kids taking up that style than anything else. I can still remember the way the old inverted choppers used to play scooping balls almost off the floor, its much different to the way a modern defender chops because you need to wait for the spin to be out of the ball rather the using the spin. I don't share the belief its impossible to chop against world level loops with inverted, I believe its easier with lp but that's about it.

I know one guy who was a very good inverted chopper in his day and not being able to move much now or reach down to the floor to chop has limited his ability to return multiple fast loops, back in the day though I could barely put a ball past him, he went 20 years undefeated in his prime. Ive never encountered an anti chopper, only blockers, obviously it works for a very few people up to a certain level but I can't imagine its the right thing for many.

_________________
Donic defplay senso
Haifu whale soft (grips-euro)
Nittaku pimplemini 1.0mm


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 04 Dec 2013, 13:03 
Offline
Comeback Chopper
User avatar

Joined: 29 Feb 2012, 09:48
Posts: 328
Location: State College, Pennsylvania, USA
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 71 times
foam wrote:
For a purely defensive game I think the only viable option at world level still today is inverted both sides. I think the lack of choppers in the world these days is more about lack of kids taking up that style than anything else. I can still remember the way the old inverted choppers used to play scooping balls almost off the floor, its much different to the way a modern defender chops because you need to wait for the spin to be out of the ball rather the using the spin. I don't share the belief its impossible to chop against world level loops with inverted, I believe its easier with lp but that's about it.

I know one guy who was a very good inverted chopper in his day and not being able to move much now or reach down to the floor to chop has limited his ability to return multiple fast loops, back in the day though I could barely put a ball past him, he went 20 years undefeated in his prime. Ive never encountered an anti chopper, only blockers, obviously it works for a very few people up to a certain level but I can't imagine its the right thing for many.


Norio Takashima, presumably the best doubled inverted defender ever (ranked #5 in the world in 1975), would play just as foam described. He would take the ball very late, almost to the floor. He would give almost everyone a very difficult time with his spin variation.

With regard to double anti, in the 1970s, probably the top two male defenders in the US played with double anti. They were Fernando Roberts and Horace Roberts. If I am not mistaken, Fernando Roberts was good enough to play on the US team. Fernando Roberts would chop back just about everything, and any loose balls, he could pick hit for winners with either his forehand or his backhand.

Steven

_________________
Butterfly Joo Se Hyuk
Butterfly Tenergy 80-FX 1.9mm
TSP Curl P1R 1.4-1.7mm
--------------
Returned to table tennis September 2011
Canada National Team Member, 1973-1975
--------------
1972-1987
Brickell Balsa/Birch 3-ply Blade
Yasaka Mark V 1.5mm
Joola Toni Hold AntiTopspin 2.5mm


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 04 Dec 2013, 15:37 
Offline
OOAK Super User
OOAK Super User
User avatar

Joined: 17 Feb 2007, 01:37
Posts: 1685
Location: Netherlands
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 238 times
@birding&table.tennis: Liang Ge-Liang used LP (OX). What changed since then is just about everything: the rule about the different colours of BH and FH means you can't delude your opponent anymore as to which rubber you used, blades are faster, rubbers are very much faster and the way they make spin has been developed further as well, and the ball is bigger, and games are 11 points. If these days you would chop from 6 meters away, due to the air-resistance the ball would have lost most of its bite by the time it bounced on te opponment's half and with modern OFF rubbers/blade wouldn't be hard to return for a good looper; this is why that type of classic defense isn't seen anymore. These balls were not so very hard to return in the 70s either, as then as well they would have lost part of the spin chopped into it (for the same reason the defender would go that far back: to wait for the spin to subside so the ball could be controlled) but OFF equipment was far less fast then, so an attacker had to work much harder to get the ball back and make the defender run for it; in time, the attacker would weaken and begin making mistakes. Because games were 21 points, defenders could use this tactic of wearing the opponent down. Not anymore. Attackers can't be fooled by the colour of the rubber anymore either, and only just a little by variation in spin, as their equipment is designed to deal with it. That is why modern defenders have to attack as well; which keeps them in the general neighborhood of the table, too. There are exceptions, like Chtchetchetine, who doesn't attack frequently, but even he needs LP on his BH.

_________________
Without opponent, no match.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 04 Dec 2013, 22:02 
Offline
OOAK Super User
OOAK Super User
User avatar

Joined: 21 Mar 2007, 15:49
Posts: 1566
Location: USofA
Has thanked: 17 times
Been thanked: 15 times
birding&table.tennis wrote:
Back in the 1975 World Championships, as I recall, there were 9 male defensive players, of which 4 used antispin on their backhand. I am listing their names, country, and backhand rubbers, as best as I remember.

Norio Takashima (Japan, Butterfly Plous)
Toshiaki Furukawa (Japan, inverted rubber)
Liang Ke-liang (China, short pips?)
Lu Yuan-sheng (China, long pips)
Janos Borzsei (Hungary, antispin)
Paul Pinkewich (Australia, Yasaka antispin)
Sudkhir Phadke (India, Joola Tonihold Antispin)
G. Jagannath (India, ordinary pimpled rubber)
birding&table.tennis (Canada, Joola Tonihold Antispin)

(The top two defenders at that time were clearly Norio Takashima and Liang Ke-liang. I was certainly amongst the bottom three.)

So, in the mid-1970s, antispin on the backhand was a viable backhand rubber for a defensive player. It is also interesting that perhaps defensive players at the international level in the 1970s exhibited greater diversity of backhand rubbers than at any other time, i.e., inverted rubber, short pips, long pips, antispin, ordinary pimpled rubber).

I have a question. What changed? When I returned to playing table tennis two years ago all international level male defensive players used either long pips or short pips. Why was antispin no longer viable? My guess is the following. The introduction of speed glue and modern rubbers resulted in loops that were much faster with much more spin. To cope with these changes, defensive players needed greater spin variation on their backhand, and at that same time need to maintain a high level of control. These requirements eliminated antispin (in addition to ordinary pimpled rubber and inverted rubber). Is my explanation reasonable?

By the way, this is my 100th post.

Steven

Happy 100th,

In 2001 when I came back to the game after a 20 some year general lay-off I was talking to John Hilton about what equipment I should use. When I mostly quit playing in the early 80s after the death of my wife I was playing with inv/anti. I thought to take that up again, but John said with the two colour rule, in force, that long pips would be the better choice.

Side note: I was fortunate enough to have been in Berne to see John win the Euros.

From my perspective, he was certainly correct.
tOD


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 05 Dec 2013, 00:01 
Offline
Modern Chiseler.
Modern Chiseler.
User avatar

Joined: 05 Oct 2007, 06:49
Posts: 11063
Location: USA
Has thanked: 493 times
Been thanked: 542 times
Blade: Grubba ALL+
FH: Marder 1mm
BH: DG ox, TM ox
This is a very interesting discussion. At the top levels no one uses antispin to chop anymore (I think primarily because of the big ball, which will soon be even bigger), but if a double-anti player can win the O40 domestic championship in a table tennis powerhouse country like Germany, chopping with anti is definitely a viable option for 95% of players.

_________________



The MNNB Blog has had some pretty amazing stuff lately. Just click this text to check it out.
| My OOAK Interview
Table Tennis Video Links: itTV | laola1.tv | ttbl | fftt | Challenger Series | mnnb-tv

No matter how good you are at something, there's always about a million people better than you.
Homer J. Simpson


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 05 Dec 2013, 00:16 
Offline
Super User
User avatar

Joined: 03 Apr 2013, 12:39
Posts: 248
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 9 times
yea, I think anti gets a bad rep and is often written off as a bad rubber choice.Although recently I did get a chance to see I guy who is a twiddling Penhold player at the club who plays with anti on his backhand. He was chopping down the young 2100 USATT loopers for fun. My coach says hes 2300+. It was funny to see this guy warming up with a vicous loop and then go play and just chop. People had a really hard time with the variation between the inverted/anti. Unfortunately I didn't get a chance to play him since there was practically a line :lol: .

Basically what I am trying corroborate:
mynamenotbob wrote:
chopping with anti is definitely a viable option for 95% of players.

_________________
VKM
Tenergy 05 2.1
Feint Long III .5


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 05 Dec 2013, 00:43 
Offline
OOAK Super User
OOAK Super User
User avatar

Joined: 17 Feb 2007, 01:37
Posts: 1685
Location: Netherlands
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 238 times
mynamenotbob wrote:
This is a very interesting discussion. At the top levels no one uses antispin to chop anymore (I think primarily because of the big ball, which will soon be even bigger), but if a double-anti player can win the O40 domestic championship in a table tennis powerhouse country like Germany, chopping with anti is definitely a viable option for 95% of players.

Absolutely right. Learning to chop with anti is easier than learning to chop with LP, because you don't have to deal with bending the pips, and the sponge is generally helping as well, giving far more control than sponge with LP. Besides, I think varying spin with anti, which is done like with inverted (the amount of wrist added to the chop) is also easier than it is with LP, and just as effective. Perhaps LP became so popular (more than anti) when frictionless LPs were introduced and suddenly it was enough to hold out your bat to get disruption and spinreversal; well, sort of. The new frictionless antis by Neubauer are far less easy to use than the frictionless LPs were, and that may steer players even more clear of anti in general.

_________________
Without opponent, no match.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 11 Dec 2013, 10:54 
Offline
Comeback Chopper
User avatar

Joined: 29 Feb 2012, 09:48
Posts: 328
Location: State College, Pennsylvania, USA
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 71 times
Kees wrote:
@birding&table.tennis: Liang Ge-Liang used LP (OX). What changed since then is just about everything: the rule about the different colours of BH and FH means you can't delude your opponent anymore as to which rubber you used, blades are faster, rubbers are very much faster and the way they make spin has been developed further as well, and the ball is bigger, and games are 11 points. If these days you would chop from 6 meters away, due to the air-resistance the ball would have lost most of its bite by the time it bounced on te opponment's half and with modern OFF rubbers/blade wouldn't be hard to return for a good looper; this is why that type of classic defense isn't seen anymore. These balls were not so very hard to return in the 70s either, as then as well they would have lost part of the spin chopped into it (for the same reason the defender would go that far back: to wait for the spin to subside so the ball could be controlled) but OFF equipment was far less fast then, so an attacker had to work much harder to get the ball back and make the defender run for it; in time, the attacker would weaken and begin making mistakes. Because games were 21 points, defenders could use this tactic of wearing the opponent down. Not anymore. Attackers can't be fooled by the colour of the rubber anymore either, and only just a little by variation in spin, as their equipment is designed to deal with it. That is why modern defenders have to attack as well; which keeps them in the general neighborhood of the table, too. There are exceptions, like Chtchetchetine, who doesn't attack frequently, but even he needs LP on his BH.


Kees,

Thanks so much for your very interesting post. As with all your posts, I learn so much.

Would you or anyone else know when anti-spin ceased being used at the international level? When I dig up information on the web about defensive players in the 1980s and 1990s, I find Chen Xinhua (short pips) in the 1980s, and Li Gunsang (long pips?), Koji Matsushita (long pips), and Ding Song (short pips) in the 1990s and early 2000s. John Hilton won the European championships in 1980 and the two colour-rule began in 1985. Did antispin cease to be a viable option for defensive players at the international level some time around 1985?

Thanks again,

Steven

_________________
Butterfly Joo Se Hyuk
Butterfly Tenergy 80-FX 1.9mm
TSP Curl P1R 1.4-1.7mm
--------------
Returned to table tennis September 2011
Canada National Team Member, 1973-1975
--------------
1972-1987
Brickell Balsa/Birch 3-ply Blade
Yasaka Mark V 1.5mm
Joola Toni Hold AntiTopspin 2.5mm


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 11 Dec 2013, 15:55 
Offline
OOAK Super User
OOAK Super User
User avatar

Joined: 17 Feb 2007, 01:37
Posts: 1685
Location: Netherlands
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 238 times
General opinion is anti ceased to be used when the two-colour rule was instated. But you have to qualify this. On the pro level, players make decisions about equipment almost solely based on the answer to the question whether or not it will give them an advantage over opponents. On the sub-pro level, where players may be equally skilled, other considerations count as well; especially whether or not a player feels comfortable or not using certain equipment. I daresay anti was used on high levels after 1985, even if it wasn't used by worldchamps. But never widely, because even before 1985 the vast majority of players using spin-reversing or spin-insensitive equipment preferred long pips or short pips.
You may be aware of the accomplishments of Amelie Solja, formerly from Germany, now playing for Austria. She doesn't chop with anti, as she plays close the table, but she has succeeded to play with anti on the highest pro level. The coach of the German Women's team refused to make her a member of the team as, according to him, antispin rubbers weren't viable equipment in present-day table tennis; at least, this is what I heard. So she moved to Austria, had to wait a few years to become an Austrian citizen, and then of course she made it to their national team and has done well ever since.
Apart from that, what you yourself use, should not depend on what pro's use - or anyone else, for that matter. Everyone should use what he or she is comfortable with and enjoys, at least in my opinion, as this is generally the easiest way of making sure that it fits the way you play best.

_________________
Without opponent, no match.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 14 Dec 2013, 03:45 
Offline
Super User
User avatar

Joined: 10 Aug 2011, 05:18
Posts: 876
Location: The (Un)ited States
Has thanked: 10 times
Been thanked: 10 times
Blade: Appelgren Allplay
FH: Mark V GPS 2.0
BH: Reflectoid 2.0
I've said it already somewhere, but anti is not for me. I played with it for more than a month. Here's some notes on it:

Attacking: Bleh. I was extremely inconsistent, and even when I did attack, it was nothing special. This doesn't detract too much from anti's rep though. After all, noone uses it to attack (other than anti's actually made for it).

Pushing: Very consistent, but very hard to make pushes difficult to attack. The reflectoid gives nice spinny pushes; anti gives dead/slight topspin pushes.

Blocking: Anti is a blocking demon!!!! Consistent, easy, and good. That is all.

Chopping: VERY consistent. Unfortunately, it is also somewhat predictable and easy to attack against.

Flicking: Throw is too low. Flicking/flipping is almost impossible.

Conclusion: Anti for the defensive player. I like flicking and hitting on the BH too much to use it. I can chop with reflectoid....but I think I'll switch to something a little faster on the BH soon (Like LKT Rapid sound).

_________________
Happy Holidays 'round the world!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 14 Dec 2013, 05:22 
Offline
Super User
User avatar

Joined: 22 Mar 2012, 10:37
Posts: 508
Location: Phoenix
Has thanked: 32 times
Been thanked: 79 times
Blade: Stiga 2000 ALL '76
FH: DHS H3N
BH: DrN ABS2 2.3
Kees wrote:
You may be aware of the accomplishments of Amelie Solja, formerly from Germany, now playing for Austria. She doesn't chop with anti, as she plays close the table, but she has succeeded to play with anti on the highest pro level.

Kees, please keep in mind that Amy plays with a frictionless (slick) Dr. Neubauer anti (she uses Grizzly with ABS sponge) which has nothing to do with the antis discussed in this thread. The frcitionless anti gives you strong spin reversal on a passive block just like the nowe banned frictionless pips used to do. The classic antis like discussed here and used by choppers have some (not much though) grip remaining so that they wil create only very little reversal and essentially give you dead balls. Playing with frictionless anti is a completely different game.

_________________
Equipment:
Stiga 2000 All '76, FH: DHS H3 Neo 2.1, BH: Dr. Neubauer ABS2 2.3


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 14 Dec 2013, 06:23 
Offline
OOAK Super User
OOAK Super User
User avatar

Joined: 17 Feb 2007, 01:37
Posts: 1685
Location: Netherlands
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 238 times
Matt Pimple wrote:
Kees wrote:
You may be aware of the accomplishments of Amelie Solja, formerly from Germany, now playing for Austria. She doesn't chop with anti, as she plays close the table, but she has succeeded to play with anti on the highest pro level.

Kees, please keep in mind that Amy plays with a frictionless (slick) Dr. Neubauer anti (she uses Grizzly with ABS sponge) which has nothing to do with the antis discussed in this thread. The frcitionless anti gives you strong spin reversal on a passive block just like the nowe banned frictionless pips used to do. The classic antis like discussed here and used by choppers have some (not much though) grip remaining so that they wil create only very little reversal and essentially give you dead balls. Playing with frictionless anti is a completely different game.

I had in mind answering the question as to when antispin ceased to be used on a pro level. Amelie is a pro... ;)

_________________
Without opponent, no match.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 40 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next



All times are UTC + 9:30 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Copyright 2018 OOAK Table Tennis Forum. The information on this site cannot be reused without written permission.

Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group