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 10 Jul 2020, 15:10


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 This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 52 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 22 Oct 2008, 00:05 
Offline
Full member
User avatar

Joined: 13 Oct 2008, 11:42
Posts: 68
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 0 time
Kees wrote:
Guys, let's try and stick to the point here instead of drifting off to matters like who's better than who and whether or not people have changed their views. I can't imagine somebody profiting from the latter type of dicussion, whereas it certainly seems worthwhile to inform players about possibilities so-called out-dated strokes may still offer.
There used to be strokes typically performed in the single-sided pips-out penholder style only and the forehand topspin wrist-flick is just one of them. In the 1960's (yes, that's long ago, but I was born even before that) Zhuang Zedong (I believe it is written like this; it used to be Tsuang Tse Tung) developed the then existing penholder style, focussing on quick short movements which could be performed over the table or close to the table; this made the style faster, more powerful, and much more effective than before. Tsuang's philosophy, if you will, was in line with the ancient Eastern/Chinese tradition of unarmed combat developed for the weak to defend against the strong (read: farmers against soldiers), using a simple tool imaginatively to bring out hidden strength. In this style, when defending, one is to use the strength of the enemy against him, and when attacking, to use all of one's own at once without getting vulnerable. The forehand wrist-flick is an attacking stroke; it may look unimpressive, but it is devised to allow the player to use all of his force instantly. A straight hard hit may send the ball over the table; the wrist-flick adds topspin so that this fast ball will land on the table instead. It allows the player to hit hard and put all of his weight into the hit. To be able to do that the arm and hand must be before the shoulder, so that the rotation of the upper body ("going into the ball") is completely transferred to the stroke. The player has not only to come behind the ball, but also stay behind his bat. His bat is his sword, but his shield at the same time; because the stroke is made with such small movement, the bat is always in position to deal with the return. Chinese players of this old (better: classic) school seem to move around very little, apparently taking their ease, but in fact they move very fast, they just keep their strokes shorter than everybody else. The wrist-flick is a forehand attacking stroke, but Tsuang introduced several backhand attacking strokes, too; similar to the wrist-flick, because so very little motion is used, they look like a block and actually are developed from it. The left-side hit is a left-side block that is made aggressive by adding a short but very fast flick of the underarm and wrist; again, this adds topspin, allows to pick up the ball, and land it on the table with speed. Here also it is the body that brings power to the stroke: a quick leaning forward, bringing the weight of the body so far forward that sometimes the left leg has to be extended backwards to retain the balance. And then there were defensive strokes that used a flick of the wrist, for instance the right-side and left-side high sidespin push that looks much like the high chop especially female shakehander defenders use close to the table; or the short-cut chop, a stabbing down that cuts off the pace of an incoming topspin attack and reverses the spin at the same time, producing a flat ball that will land short and, when returned, almost always will be attackable. Much of this repertoire was used less and less when the game was dominated more and more by fast and spinny inverted rubbers, not because it became less effective, but because this rubbers allowed shakehanders to be almost as effective in over the table play as penholders. Since penholders had to practice for 5 years (learning attack and defence) whereas shakehanders had to practice for just 3 (learning attack only), the old school virtually died out. They came back into the game with the introduction of the 40 mm ball, which made the game shorter initially; now, penholders again had the advantage over shakehanders - theoretically, and not by much. But because of that other modern development, the introduction of the 11-point system, it seemed to many that points had to be won more quickly than ever before and the ability to initiate attack became almost an obsession with players and coaches. Yet a few defenders did very well and so did the even fewer remaining masters of the old pips-out penholder school. The reason for this is, in my opinion, that the harder the attack, the easier it can be redirected to the attacker. A skilled defender and a skilled pips-out penholder have learned how to use the increased force of the modern attackers against them and in doing so create opportunities for counter-attack. That is why Tsuang's repertoire and way of thinking are - still or again - very much worth to consider. They are not out-dated and I think they never will be.


kees

excellent post..is there a Hall of Fame for good posts? that one certainly qualify's. the only possible thing i could add is that the ph fh is the most ergonomically correct stroke in all of table tennis...always in natural attack mode if you will with no unnatural tilt of the hand to grip the racket that is required for the western grip. I don't think its an accident that the grip for the ph and the grip for eating with chop sticks is remarkably similiar

regards
rick


Top
 Profile  
 


 Post subject:
PostPosted: 22 Oct 2008, 00:09 
Offline
OOAK Super User
OOAK Super User

Joined: 14 Jan 2008, 23:45
Posts: 1073
Location: England
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 0 time
Rick Anderson wrote:
Dark horse wrote:
Rick Anderson wrote:
you actually sound like someone who has very little experience against good penhold players.... how true would that be btw?

rick


It depends what you call good? I have played a few that would murder you, but not JJ perhaps, if you payroll them you can practice with anybody and then claim to hold a 'higher' wisdom.


dh

the question was not whether or not the few ph players you have played can beat *me* ...the question was really how many good ph players Have you played? by your answer is sounds like you have played about three.


No, I questioned what you call Good? in my 30 yrs playing experience, I've probably played 20 who are a better standard than you, but far below JJ's standard. There did used to be far more of them,in the UK I must say.

_________________
the covers blown, mission over


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 22 Oct 2008, 00:19 
Offline
Full member
User avatar

Joined: 13 Oct 2008, 11:42
Posts: 68
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 0 time
Dark horse wrote:
Rick Anderson wrote:
Dark horse wrote:
Rick Anderson wrote:
you actually sound like someone who has very little experience against good penhold players.... how true would that be btw?

rick


It depends what you call good? I have played a few that would murder you, but not JJ perhaps, if you payroll them you can practice with anybody and then claim to hold a 'higher' wisdom.


dh

the question was not whether or not the few ph players you have played can beat *me* ...the question was really how many good ph players Have you played? by your answer is sounds like you have played about three.


No, I questioned what you call Good? in my 30 yrs playing experience, I've probably played 20 who are a better standard than you, but far below JJ's standard. There did used to be far more of them,in the UK I must say.


dh

so it seems you have very little experience playing against ph players.

tx for answering the question


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 22 Oct 2008, 00:38 
Offline
OOAK Super User
OOAK Super User

Joined: 14 Jan 2008, 23:45
Posts: 1073
Location: England
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 0 time
And you have vast experience? do they have many down in the Canadian 600's

_________________
the covers blown, mission over


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 22 Oct 2008, 00:49 
Offline
Full member
User avatar

Joined: 13 Oct 2008, 11:42
Posts: 68
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 0 time
Dark horse wrote:
And you have vast experience? do they have many down in the Canadian 600's


yes, i have vast experience playing phs due to my particular location. they of course play at all levels not just 600



8)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 22 Oct 2008, 01:14 
Offline
OOAK Super User
OOAK Super User

Joined: 14 Jan 2008, 23:45
Posts: 1073
Location: England
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 0 time
Rick Anderson wrote:
Dark horse wrote:
And you have vast experience? do they have many down in the Canadian 600's


yes, i have vast experience playing phs due to my particular location. they of course play at all levels not just 600



8)


Oh Goody, you sound like just the man we've been waiting for to help an ongoing forum debate.

what are yr views on the pro's and cons of p/hold players employing the use of the RPB? would you advise a p/holder of a decent level to adapt to use the RPB or not and what would yr reasons be for yr advice? What do you consider the main weakness of RPB? Thanks in anticipation :)

_________________
the covers blown, mission over


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 22 Oct 2008, 01:48 
Offline
Full member
User avatar

Joined: 13 Oct 2008, 11:42
Posts: 68
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 0 time
Dark horse wrote:
Rick Anderson wrote:
Dark horse wrote:
And you have vast experience? do they have many down in the Canadian 600's


yes, i have vast experience playing phs due to my particular location. they of course play at all levels not just 600



8)


what are yr views on the pro's and cons of p/hold players employing the use of the RPB? would you advise a p/holder of a decent level to adapt to use the RPB or not and what would yr reasons be for yr advice? What do you consider the main weakness of RPB? Thanks in anticipation :)


dh

when the rph first made it onto the international scene i said to myself: "its about time" and wondered why it took so long to adopt a grip that allowed for a western bh attack with a penhold grip....the best of both worlds

doing a forehand ph hit followed immediately by a rph bh is probably the most natural of all two shot sequences since there is no unnatural twisting of the arm or hand cocking...and both angles of contact are automatically in attack mode...

rph bh can more easily execute acute angles off to the side allowing attackers to beat their opponents outright with this particular attack.

the one downside (there may be more) is that my fingers get in the way on the bh side sometimes.

i think that in the future the rph bh will be the primary bh for the penhold style with the traditional ph bh being used as a last resort for a bh shot...yet used primarily for blocking in the middle and punch shots..

without having studied the history of the reverse penhold i can only surmise that it came about as a result of the chinese wanting to address the weakest aspect of the penhold grip....the backhand...which in my opinion is one of the most ergonomically incorrect body movements in all of sports.

i posted this before but if you dont mind here it is again...my buddy and i both do a rph smash... its hard to catch his but watch as he steps in and destroys it

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9mueTb61oxk



good question.

rick


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 22 Oct 2008, 02:07 
Offline
OOAK Super User
OOAK Super User

Joined: 14 Jan 2008, 23:45
Posts: 1073
Location: England
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 0 time
Do you not think that the RPB presents the exponent with a Crossover point that previously did not exist. Not having a crossover point is the reason that yr Friend JJ was so quick close to the table, the pendulum action from f/hand across to b/hand left him and his compartriots with only one face of the bat to strike the ball with, in contrast to the shakehander who has decision time and stroke limitations when played close to the body up to the table, this is why before the heavy topspin game evolved the penhold game was superior especially in close to the table play, but terribly weak when it was exposed off the table on the b/hand wing. The rpb has solved the problem off the table and to brought the p/hold b/hand to a parr with the sh/hands b/hand close to the table, but it has the disadvantage of creating a crossover p[oint that did not previously exist. This is the reason that many top p/hold players have not adopted that style. I can carry on later, I've got a match to go to.....

_________________
the covers blown, mission over


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 22 Oct 2008, 02:15 
Offline
Full member
User avatar

Joined: 13 Oct 2008, 11:42
Posts: 68
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 0 time
Dark horse wrote:
Do you not think that the RPB presents the exponent with a Crossover point that previously did not exist. Not having a crossover point is the reason that yr Friend JJ was so quick close to the table, the pendulum action from f/hand across to b/hand left him and his compartriots with only one face of the bat to strike the ball with, in contrast to the shakehander who has decision time and stroke limitations when played close to the body up to the table, this is why before the heavy topspin game evolved the penhold game was superior especially in close to the table play, but terribly weak when it was exposed off the table on the b/hand wing. The rpb has solved the problem off the table and to brought the p/hold b/hand to a parr with the sh/hands b/hand close to the table, but it has the disadvantage of creating a crossover p[oint that did not previously exist. This is the reason that many top p/hold players have not adopted that style. I can carry on later, I've got a match to go to.....


dh

you make a valid point as there is a new crossover pt (albeit a small one) that hitherto the introduction of the rph didnt exist.....but a player who utilizes the rph makes the decision to cross over provided there is time to do so and if theres not then he just strikes in a traditional ph bh fashion....

maybe having an extra option means that this type of player has to think just a bit more which could arguably be a detriment at different juctures of a rally..

rick


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 22 Oct 2008, 02:40 
Offline
Do you feel lucky (young) punk?
Do you feel lucky (young) punk?
User avatar

Joined: 27 Mar 2007, 12:57
Posts: 5592
Location: USA
Has thanked: 96 times
Been thanked: 178 times
Blade: Juic Hinoki One Ply
FH: Tibhar 5Q
BH: Scandal
That is just like the Seemiller grip, no cross over unless I decide to use the backside. I still think the option is better than no option. :D

_________________
Shakehand, left handed.
Blade, Yinhe, W-1
Forhand, H-3 National
Backhand, Sriver FX Max


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 22 Oct 2008, 03:34 
Offline
Mind Gamer Extraordinaire
User avatar

Joined: 02 Jun 2007, 01:25
Posts: 477
Location: Leuven, Belgium
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 0 time
Rick Anderson,

I must say that for me, your posts have been the most annoying ones I have ever read on this forum (or any other). Enjoy yourself posting videos on youtube with you playing some old guy but please refrain from mocking other people's views and playing levels or experience.

Kees, a respected member of this forum, is backing Jiang Jialang and the traditional penhold style, not you. He has made a lot of posts that deserve a spot in the hall of fame more than the one you claim does (IMO).

I don't know of any of your prior posts or actions on other forums or communities, but from what I've read here, I genuinely dislike you.

Now before you go and respond in a manner like:

"Well, guess you haven't played as much great players as me..."

or

"Guess you haven't evolved enough to understand..."

Save your breath. I could not care less what you think.

_________________
Ask me about:

Tibhar IV-S - Donic Defplay SensoV3 - BTY Tackiness D/C - BTY Feint Soft - Meteor 813


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 22 Oct 2008, 04:08 
Offline
Full member
User avatar

Joined: 13 Oct 2008, 11:42
Posts: 68
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 0 time
Jasper wrote:
Kees..is backing Jiang Jialang and the traditional penhold style


as was I but we forgot to talk about how fast jj's feet are....extremely quick

issues with sharing much jasper? thanks for stopping by my thread with your vitriole...im sure we all appreciate it

you will always find me in the video, general or general off topic folders.

if you decide in the future to drop by and visit one of my threads i would ask that you be more positive...

even a cursory purusal of my posts indicate that im all about the positivity

thanks

8)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 22 Oct 2008, 07:31 
Offline
OOAK Super User
OOAK Super User

Joined: 14 Jan 2008, 23:45
Posts: 1073
Location: England
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 0 time
Rick Anderson wrote:

Kees

very well said..you sound like a seasoned veteran or a young wise man...either way, its nice to encounter someone with an evolved outlook.



I think that patronising remarks such as above may be leaving a sour taste in a few mouths including mine, the implication is that anyone who does not agree with yr 'evolved' statements and comments is not ''a seasoned veteran or a young wise man who has evolved'' I can assure you we're quite seasoned, pretty wise, and there are many players around here who hold a standard that you can only dream about. nuff said? Yr comment about an rpb crossover point 'being a small one' exposes you, crossover points don't come in sizes, they exist or do not, you can't grade them or measure them, there either is one or there is not.

_________________
the covers blown, mission over


Last edited by Dark horse on 22 Oct 2008, 07:38, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 22 Oct 2008, 07:38 
Offline
Full member
User avatar

Joined: 13 Oct 2008, 11:42
Posts: 68
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 0 time
Dark horse wrote:
Rick Anderson wrote:

Kees

very well said..you sound like a seasoned veteran or a young wise man...either way, its nice to encounter someone with an evolved outlook.



I think that patronising remarks such as above may be leaving a sour taste in a few mouths including mine, the implication is that anyone who does not agree with yr 'evolved' statements and comments is not ''a seasoned veteran or a young wise man who has evolved'' I can assure you we're quite seasoned, pretty wise, and there are many players around here who hold a standard that you can only dream about. nuff said?


dh

its my opinion that kees opinion about one opinion is evolved...

you really ought not make it anymore complicated than that.

he sounds like someone who appreciates the finer nuances of the game while in fact some others dont...one is neither *better* per se...but one is certainly more evolved.

as for my standard..im doing quite well thanks and getting better every day.

did you ever tell us the name of that world champ you've been beaten up on?



:?:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 22 Oct 2008, 07:44 
Offline
OOAK Super User
OOAK Super User

Joined: 14 Jan 2008, 23:45
Posts: 1073
Location: England
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 0 time
I think Ill keep it to myself a little longer and see how big the pit you are digging is going to be :wink:

_________________
the covers blown, mission over


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 52 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next




All times are UTC + 9:30 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 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