Chinese forehand Vs. Euro forehand?

APW46 wrote: FireHorse wrote: I'm not sure about the straight arm loop fits for the shorter guys.  Remember that the straight arm loop was invented by the Hungarian and those guys are tall.  And I don't know if just because the Chinese now has the "Chinese" loops that they are the best in the World.  I think they can have the "European" loops and still dominate table tennis at this moment.  I also don't think that because of the rubbers that make them doing the straight arm loop to get the benefit out of it (Those Hungarian guys, I believe they played with Butterfly rubbers).  I believe that with hard sponge or soft sponge or tacky or grippy rubbers, if someone know how to utilize them then it doesn't matter if they loop straight arm or compact. But I agree that table tennis is more suitable for Asian or better yet, for someone who has Ectomorphic body type. FireHorse  IMO, that is as near perfect answer as is possible.

Edited by friendship - 10/09/2010 at 8:40am

I respectfully disagree about comment that smaller body types are more likely to win.  My evidence is Gatien, Schlager, Persson, Waldner, WLQ.  They account for a substantial portion of the last several world championships.  Plus Boll and Samsonov, a couple of guys who havent won world championships but who are real good.

Of course there are smaller great players too.  Bengtsson, Ma Lin, KLH, Wang Tao, Kreanga.  The great thing about table tennis is that almost any body type can win as long as one is fit, talented and dedicated.  And otherwise genetically perfect for the sport, and with the good fortune to be seen at a young age, and coached by good people in an environment where there is competition good enough to let you get good.  (Which pretty much rules out any American player). The stars have to align!

The Chinese are great because they are well coached from age of practically zero and are selected from a huge pool of great players who are turned into professionals by age 11 and then refined by armies of coaches who are paid to think and innovate about table tennis because a huge budget is devoted to it.  The level of competition a Chinese has to go through just to make a provincial team is insane.  Power of numbers.  Same reason they make lots of good footballers and Brazil and basketball players in the US  

friendship wrote:   with euro-type loop shorter player looses on speed

 Ok, why?

APW46 wrote: friendship wrote:   with euro-type loop shorter player looses on speed  Ok, why?

Edited by friendship - 10/10/2010 at 1:56pm

APW46 wrote: friendship wrote: APW46 wrote: friendship wrote:   with euro-type loop shorter player looses on speed  Ok, why?   pure law of physics. with equal radial speed (rpm), and shorter radius, you get less linear speed at th moment of ball hit. to increase the speed, you can either increase speed of body rotation (which has limits), or stretch your arm which will increase radius, which increases speed   if you were shorter armed guy, stretching arm would be more or less the only way by which you could match the speed of top players which are tall guys. otherwise you would be speed inferior      J.P Gatien, one of the most powerful f/hands ever with a wonderfully compact stroke, infact he rarely extends over 90deg http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kpIXhQDlQhI

   

Awesome video, thanks for posting.

I agree (as I must, since it is a law of physics) with the statement that, all other things being equal, the "longer the arm the greater the speed". (Please forgive the clumsy generalization but I'm trying to be brief.)

Nonetheless, what I think APW's vid demonstrates is that there are still other factors to consider. Gatien's timing is impeccable (at least in 99% of the shots in that montage). I don't think I saw one ball drop below the apex of its bounce before it was hit, which has an effect on power as well.

So although in isolation an extended arm will increase speed, there are also other factors to consider... like timing, etc. There are also even practical considerations, like rate of stroke recovery. So, like many people have mentioned many times already in the endless debates of "Chinese/Hungarian/Straight-arm loops vs. European/Compact/Chicken-wing loops", there are many variables involved and either stroke can take a person to victory... assuming the rest of their game is tight.

Perhaps speaking in terms of angular momentum will clear up the confusion?

Angular momentum is a function of mass, its linear velocity, and its distance from a center. For simplicity, let's just isolate the hitting arm for this discussion and treat angular momentum as the mathematical product of the arm's mass, length of the arm's swing, and swing speed. Since the mass of the arm remains unchanged, the only way to increase the angular momentum, and thus the ball speed, is to increase the product of the length of swing and swing speed.

If we assume that the strength of the arm is constant then the swing speed should be inversely proportional to the arm length; in other words, one can swing faster with a bent arm than with a straight arm. As such it becomes an optimization problem: finding a combination of arm length and arm speed that one can generate that will maximize the angular momentum and resulting ball speed.

Of course, this simplification ignores any biomechanical advantage or disadvantges of the bent arm vs straight arm configuration. It could be that the straight arm makes better use of the kinetic chain, leading to additional swing speed.

racquetsforsale wrote: Perhaps speaking in terms of angular momentum will clear up the confusion? Angular momentum is a function of mass, its linear velocity, and its distance from a center. For simplicity, let's just isolate the hitting arm for this discussion and treat angular momentum as the mathematical product of the arm's mass, length of the arm's swing, and swing speed. Since the mass of the arm remains unchanged, the only way to increase the angular momentum, and thus the ball speed, is to increase the product of the length of swing and swing speed. If we assume that the strength of the arm is constant then the swing speed should be inversely proportional to the arm length; in other words, one can swing faster with a bent arm than with a straight arm. As such it becomes an optimization problem: finding a combination of arm length and arm speed that one can generate that will maximize the angular momentum and resulting ball speed. Of course, this simplification ignores any biomechanical advantage or disadvantges of the bent arm vs straight arm configuration. It could be that the straight arm makes better use of the kinetic chain, leading to additional swing speed.

racquetsforsale, if I haven't yet mentioned that I've enjoyed every post of yours that I've read, then let me do so now . I'm very encouraged to see someone such as yourself join this community.

Sorry for the temporary derailing... back to the discussion!

Thanks, Anton.

pnachtwey wrote: ...    Straight arms are harder to accelerate than bent ones. ...

Pnachtwey,

I think angular momentum is appropriate when discussing the collision between ball and paddle. I could be wrong; it's been a long time since I reviewed my physics.

I agree that a straight arm is harder to accelerate and that the optimization scenario assumes limited arm strength. Those are assumptions I stated in my original post.

the difference between delivery speeds of cricket bowlers;

Edited by APW46 - 10/10/2010 at 4:26pm

APW46 wrote: the difference between delivery speeds of cricket bowlers; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gqaDxk8CTlE&feature=fvst and Baseball pitchers is similar, infact baseball pitchers have the edge, Cricket bowlers however, can be running a full sprint on delivery, and MUST deliver with a straight arm (bending is unlawful) The greater release speed of the B/ball pitcher is arrived at by complex mechanical intergration of the legs torso and arm, the Cricket bowler by the slingshot action of a straight arm and forward motion, both achieve the same goal, but in different ways, kind of my point really.

APW46 wrote:  J.P Gatien, one of the most powerful f/hands ever with a wonderfully compact stroke, infact he rarely extends over 90deg http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kpIXhQDlQhI

lets just clear one thing up, this guy was looping with a straight arm when the Chinese were still flat hitting, and for the most part had not embraced loop technique at all;

To me Gatien's forehand was the evolution of the 38mm speed-glueing player. I'm not sure that his technique would be possible (or at least as effective) now. Two-winged prowess seems more important than it was then.

I remember Michel Gadal (his coach) saying that the key to his success was not the speed of his forehand but how early he took it. His theory was that taking the ball early takes time away from you but double the amount of time away from the opponent (e.g. if you change you contact point to 30cm closer than in the past, the ball travels a 60cm shorter distance from your opponent's perspective because it has to travel that 30cm both ways).

One of the best matches I ever saw anyone play was at the 97 World Champs. Wang Tao from China had been in awesome form in the teams but Gatien took him apart 3-0. He did have one major weakness though; he was terrible against choppers.