Chinese forehand Vs. Euro forehand?

Why would a person use a Chinese forehand?



WHy would a person use a Euro Forehand?


Is equipment the only reason why a person would have a Chinese forehand as to a Euro forehand?


See link as an example

http://www.alphatabletennis.com/clips/06-09.html

@ Fruit loop:

Am I right to assume that your FH is Euro while your BH is Chinese style?

So what would happen if a player played with a euro rubber but used the Chinese stroke? What would be the result?

cntcasey wrote: So what would happen if a player played with a euro rubber but used the Chinese stroke? What would be the result?

so basic answer is when dissecting the whole stroke, if one element is not a fluid continuity of the precedent then there is loss of power.

in ma long's fh loop he starts slow and finishes fast. that's the secret of power. every element of the stroke is inheriting speed from the precedent with a minimal waste in the process and some speed is added up at each level.

maze tries to go super fast from the beginning. so the hips go super fast (thanks to a fast weight transfer between legs) while the torso has not started; then the torso starts (already some power is lost there); then we have the impression that the torso is pulling the hips (exaggerating). Then there is that forearm + wrist snap that I am  not so sure about...looks like the throw of a stone to me and I have been thinking it's right a thing to do and I am again wondering....

how about that: the core is not controlling the whole stroke in maze's loop while the core is controlling EVERYTHING in ma long's loop.

It's so hard to explain in simple words such a complicated stroke.

a baseball pitcher throws a fast ball starting slow and finishing fast. Is that a good analogy?

Rack wrote: Fruit loop wrote: European technique generally has more back issues because of the more low to high technique. Euro styles back movement is a more upward movement (shoulders drop down) whereas the chinese style rotates around the hips and has less shoulder dip. Chinese rubber also requires more of a grazing ball contact to generate spin because of the tacky topsheet, therefore the longer arm action to keep the ball on the bat longer to generate the spin via leverage. European softer rubbers or tenergy style rubbers use a mixture of sponge and topsheet to generate spin. Notice how maze hits a lot more into the ball. Please feel free to disagree =] It's only my opinion.   I use to think the same way about Chinese rubber and just "grazing" with the topsheet before I started getting coaching... turns out thats completely wrong.  You must hit hard enough to penetrate into the hard sponge and use the sponge and topsheet together.  When done in harmony, you hit in the ball into the sponge at 80-90 degrees and begin to naturally followthrough which closes your blade along with some wrist movement.  The tack will cause the ball to stick or "dwell" as your blade closes and there enlies the high control factor.  Then you catapult the ball forward to where you wanna go.  Basic simple description Chinese stroke loop vs no spin.  Of course theres much more to the stroke as well but it would take ages to describe.

Obviously you need to use the sponge as well but it's less extreme than softer european style rubbers.

does anyone have any good vids for the CHINESE FH, not games, just practice, training or drills?

DreiZ wrote: [/QUO

Imo, with chinese slower rubber you need to backswing more behind you in order to get the ball into the sponge properly, while the tackiness gives you nice spin with this stroke. Low speed and tackiness give you more dwell and good spin.  Euro/jap rubbers are faster (and softer) and to impart good spin on the ball you need to "carry the ball in the sponge" for some time, so you backswing down, go more up while holding the ball in the sponge.

fatt wrote: I wrote this in the other thread: (same topic starter) It's the first time I came to think about back problems and loss of power in maze and boll technique and I find the topic fascinating (just like the clip above). can't wait to read more comments. it seems to me that� m maze has a lag between the torso rotation and the hips rotation. Same with Boll: the hips start and give momentum to the torso; the torso goes too fast and the hips catch back. that has to stress something really badly at the lower back level. In ma long's loop the whole body rotates together in harmony. that could explain the back problems; at least it's the only thing I can think about. But again it is so cool to see the acceleration process in ML's loop. it is SOOOO FLUID!!!!!! no power is wasted in the way and everything goes into paddle's speed.

Your analysis of Maze's loop is pretty good. I have been studying these videos as well.

There's one point I think you are missing, though:
What you call a loss of power is actually a gain of power. What he is doing is something similar to a "recoil" effect.

The first thing he does is he starts with the legs and instead of the typical lefty forehand instance he places his left in front of his right leg. This creates tension since he starts rotating his hips back and the body wants to come back (like a slingshot).
Try it your self right now. Instead of putting your right leg behind (assuming you are right handed) place your right leg in front and rotate the hip to the right. You'll feel how the body, the hips and the legs want to come back to their original position.
Now he just relaxes his arm down and proceeds to wind back his body. He starts from down to top like an spiral, so the speed multiplies as the whole body recoils. Then the relaxed arm follows the body like an elastic band pulled forward by the body motion.

Basically each rotation is adding up to create a very fast and powerful motion that its followed by the additional wrist action that he adds (with some side-spin at the end as well).
The speed and spin generated is so big that there's no need to wind back too much and this helps a bit by making the stroke shorter as well as the preparation time needed to hit the ball.

I also agree that this can hurt their back since there's so much going on. On the other hand, the Chinese stroke requires a lot of arm motion and this can add a lot of stress on the elbow/shoulder.

I don't think either stroke is better or worst. It probably depends more on your body type. But the Chinese stroke has a nice "simplicity" about it that probably makes it more consistent.

I also agree that this can hurt their back since there's so much going on. On the other hand, the Chinese stroke requires a lot of arm motion and this can add a lot of stress on the elbow/shoulder.

I don't think either stroke is better or worst. It probably depends more on your body type. But the Chinese stroke has a nice "simplicity" about it that probably makes it more consistent.


So If a new player was trying to decide what school of thought to adopt Chinese or European? What would be the recommendation?

I am 6'3 260 and have natural power from playing many years of baseball and weight lifting. Would I do better using the Chinese approach, or the European approach?

Chinese stroke does require you to fully execute every single stroke almost perfectly.  It requires a bit more work and doesn't work for people with bad form.

Can you explain why it requires more work?

cntcasey wrote: I also agree that this can hurt their back since there's so much going on. On the other hand, the Chinese stroke requires a lot of arm motion and this can add a lot of stress on the elbow/shoulder. I don't think either stroke is better or worst. It probably depends more on your body type. But the Chinese stroke has a nice "simplicity" about it that probably makes it more consistent.So If a new player was trying to decide what school of thought to adopt Chinese or European? What would be the recommendation? I am 6'3 260 and have natural power from playing many years of baseball and weight lifting. Would I do better using the Chinese approach, or the European approach?

Unless you want to emulate wang liqin I think you could benefit from your body strength and size and use an European stroke.
In other words, if your body tends to be more powerful than quick I think the Eurpean stroke could fit you better.

I would make that decision based on what kind of coaching you can get, though. If you have only access to coaches with a chinese influence you might be better learning the chinese stroke.
In a sense both strokes use body rotation and you should learn this no matter what.

I now understand where i went wrong in my description. What I really meant was that with a euro stroke you hit through the sponge more directly and into the blade. Whereas the chinese stroke should rarely ever 'hit the blade' if this makes sense.

I also disagree with needing a coach for a certain type of stroke. I've taught myself and havn't had any issues. (No one uses chinese rubber at my club.)

So you're saying that in essence I'm totally wrong in my analysis? I was trying to be very generic for a player that doesn't understand properly. You can use both styles of rubbers for the same shots. (which require a lot more penetration of the sponge!)

I also feel my technique is quite good and I've used chinese rubbers for maybe 7 months of my 2 years of play. I've never had technique coaching given no one plays this style at my club.