Coachvideo on how to loop underspin with tacky rub

A 2500 player at my club uses and teaches a convex motion with Tenergy. Let's stop confusing personal preferences with objective facts.

i have both convex and concave shape to my stroke, at different times.
concave when looping against block and when looping backspin when the hitting point brings my hand close to the table.
When you consider that the racket only contacts the ball for a fraction of a second, it hardly seems sane to worry about something which is defined by the backswing and followthrough

DDreamer wrote: dingyibvs wrote: DDreamer wrote: I have a concave loop and use Euro rubber but I can loop perfectly fine with Chinese rubber. For non-elite players looping backspin it really doesn't matter what rubber you use - you just need to get your technique honed correctly. Depends on your definition of "perfectly fine".  People who use a concave stroke with classic Chinese rubbers always complain about its lack of speed, when in fact they're just not using it right.  Here's an example of the differences: Both are standard drills vs. blocking, note how Ma Long uses a considerably more convex stroke. I mean perfectly fine. Against backspin (which is the topic of the thread) I probably even slightly prefer Chinese rubber. Also, players like Xu Xin and Zhang Jike use Chinese rubber and yet appear to have a concave loop when playing heavy chop. For a beginner/intermediate player (which I presume the OP is - given that he has trouble looping heavy backspin) the type of rubber makes zero difference when it comes to learning how to loop backspin.

dingyibvs wrote: reflecx wrote: dingyibvs wrote: 2) The key is not to contact the ball with maximum racket speed, but with maximum racket acceleration.  Do NOT begin accelerate your racket maximally until RIGHT BEFORE your racket reaches the ball.  This is a very crucial point for both FH and BH loops vs. backspin.  If you do this, you'll find that if you simply want to loop a backspin back, it really doesn't require a whole lot of strength.  This is the reason why even 10 year old girls can loop backspins consistently.  Maximum acceleration gives you maximum dwell time, this allows your racket to almost "carry" the ball forward.  If you loop with maximum strength from the start if your motion, then your racket would have reached maximum speed with zero acceleration when it contacts the ball.   I think that contrary to what you're saying, you want maximum racket speed at contact, NOT maximum acceleration. Maximum acceleration probably occurs near the start of the swing, when the racket speed is close to zero. To overcome backspin, your racket speed has to be greater than the rotational speed of the ball.  No, I meant maximum acceleration.  F=ma, since mass stays the same, maximum acceleration will happen when you use maximum force, which is the key to this stroke.  Use your maximum force and give your racket maximum acceleration right before contact. Even a 10 year old girl can generate the racket speed necessary to overcome any backspin--a backspin doesn't rotate nearly as fast as a topspin mind you--so that's not the issue here.

F=ma is not the appropriate equation here.

Read the comments by David Bernstein in Larry Hodges's blog. I cringed when I first read that entry, good thing he deleted most of the wrong info.

http://www.tabletenniscoaching.com/node/1350

igorponger wrote: SPIN THE WHEEL ! Looping underspin balls is the hardest task to do.. THE racket proper acceleration is the keypoint here. High speed acceleration is needed. SPIN THE WHEEL!

You can also do this w/ upside down bicycle.

reflecx wrote: dingyibvs wrote: reflecx wrote: dingyibvs wrote: 2) The key is not to contact the ball with maximum racket speed, but with maximum racket acceleration.  Do NOT begin accelerate your racket maximally until RIGHT BEFORE your racket reaches the ball.  This is a very crucial point for both FH and BH loops vs. backspin.  If you do this, you'll find that if you simply want to loop a backspin back, it really doesn't require a whole lot of strength.  This is the reason why even 10 year old girls can loop backspins consistently.  Maximum acceleration gives you maximum dwell time, this allows your racket to almost "carry" the ball forward.  If you loop with maximum strength from the start if your motion, then your racket would have reached maximum speed with zero acceleration when it contacts the ball.   I think that contrary to what you're saying, you want maximum racket speed at contact, NOT maximum acceleration. Maximum acceleration probably occurs near the start of the swing, when the racket speed is close to zero. To overcome backspin, your racket speed has to be greater than the rotational speed of the ball.  No, I meant maximum acceleration.  F=ma, since mass stays the same, maximum acceleration will happen when you use maximum force, which is the key to this stroke.  Use your maximum force and give your racket maximum acceleration right before contact. Even a 10 year old girl can generate the racket speed necessary to overcome any backspin--a backspin doesn't rotate nearly as fast as a topspin mind you--so that's not the issue here. F=ma is not the appropriate equation here. Read the comments by David Bernstein in Larry Hodges's blog. I cringed when I first read that entry, good thing he deleted most of the wrong info. http://www.tabletenniscoaching.com/node/1350

dingyibvs, it would really help to read that link and reply before commenting further.

dingyibvs wrote: Yup, cannot overstate the importance of acceleration.  And do take note that it's acceleration and not necessarily speed that allows your rubber to hold onto the ball and bring it up and forward.

dingyibvs wrote: F=ma is ALWAYS the appropriate equation.  That blog is about how to generate the maximum F, which is not the point of discussion here.  You can worry about generating maximum force (hips, legs, and all the other things mentioned in the blog) after you've understood how to land the ball on the table first.

So you're rather loop a backspin ball where at impact time your racket is moving at 0 m/s with acceleration of 10 m/s2 vs moving at 10 m/s with 0 acceleration?

to be frank, IMO all these convex vs concave loop is just an illusion caused by looking at the loops from a side view, try looking at them from a back view and all becomes clear. These loops have the same mechanism, the only difference is the blade angle. Ma Long and Wang Liqin loop with a very open racket angle (with an emphasis on speed), while players like Zhang Jike, Fan Zhendong and Timo Boll loop with a much more closed racket angle (with an emphasis on spin). To me the form and feeling of ball contact is the most important thing in looping underspin. I would suggest that you start looping backspin by scooping the ball up with an open blade angle and just bring the ball onto the table with good height and some side-topspin (some people call it a roll). You can loop any backspin no matter how heavy it is with this manner. As you get the feeling of neutralising the backspin and producing some decent side-topspin with this technique, start closing your blade angle and involve more of your legs to "push" the ball upwards and forwards at contact, then you will find that as you close the blade more, you would need to swing harder and the spin that you impart on the ball becomes more vicious. Think spin instead of speed. But if you do not have the ball feeling required to loop underspin, any attempts on "increasing speed" or "increasing acceleration" is in vain. You must first be able to bring the ball onto the table with decent net clearance effortlessly before you even attempt to increase power. Ball feeling is the most important issue here for those who cannot reliably loop backspin, not power. Once you have the ball feeling, all these stuff about acceleration and speed will occur naturally as you close the paddle and use more of your legs/waist to drive the ball.

blahness wrote: to be frank, IMO all these convex vs concave loop is just an illusion caused by looking at the loops from a side view, try looking at them from a back view and all becomes clear. These loops have the same mechanism, the only difference is the blade angle. Ma Long and Wang Liqin loop with a very open racket angle (with an emphasis on speed), while players like Zhang Jike, Fan Zhendong and Timo Boll loop with a much more closed racket angle (with an emphasis on spin). To me the form and feeling of ball contact is the most important thing in looping underspin. I would suggest that you start looping backspin by scooping the ball up with an open blade angle and just bring the ball onto the table with good height and some side-topspin (some people call it a roll). You can loop any backspin no matter how heavy it is with this manner. As you get the feeling of neutralising the backspin and producing some decent side-topspin with this technique, start closing your blade angle and involve more of your legs to "push" the ball upwards and forwards at contact, then you will find that as you close the blade more, you would need to swing harder and the spin that you impart on the ball becomes more vicious. Think spin instead of speed. But if you do not have the ball feeling required to loop underspin, any attempts on "increasing speed" or "increasing acceleration" is in vain. You must first be able to bring the ball onto the table with decent net clearance effortlessly before you even attempt to increase power. Ball feeling is the most important issue here for those who cannot reliably loop backspin, not power. Once you have the ball feeling, all these stuff about acceleration and speed will occur naturally as you close the paddle and use more of your legs/waist to drive the ball.

what the hell is concave loop? Who comes up with this crap? Why is everything overcomplicated here? Just brush the damm ball up. No wrist. Open your elbow all the way, drop it down and relax. Now rotate the turret from the waist, swing the arm from the shoulder, and flex a little just before contact in the elbow. No wrist. Even with BH, little to no wrist. If you learn to use the wrist in brushing you will have a sissy, half-ass shot that will be spinny and will clear the net but will be slam-dunked on the other side. 

TTFrenzy wrote: No wrist?  Looping with wrist is very effective and fast and far better than looping without wrist snap.  The difficult part of the wrist snap is to coordinate it correctly with the rest body motion (legs hips waist shoulder forearm and then wrist) No wrist loop can be teached to players with lack of body coordination, but since you master a "no wrist" loop it is time to put more momentum by adding the wrist snap. p.s. Im referring to "maximum explosion" loops with minimum effort, and the wrist snap adds even more spin & speed to the ball. No wrist loop would be effective if the opponent is far away from the table, the incoming ball is slow (playing with a chopper for example) so you can loop it pass and close  the net to make him move and take him out of position.  But this "close to the net" loop can be also executed with wrist for good spin but with slower execution and a more vertical paddle

next level, where are you from? I want to challenge you to a match.

Edited by assiduous - 09/03/2013 at 4:58pm

blahness wrote: to be frank, IMO all these convex vs concave loop is just an illusion caused by looking at the loops from a side view, try looking at them from a back view and all becomes clear. These loops have the same mechanism, the only difference is the blade angle. Ma Long and Wang Liqin loop with a very open racket angle (with an emphasis on speed), while players like Zhang Jike, Fan Zhendong and Timo Boll loop with a much more closed racket angle (with an emphasis on spin).

Concave vs convex (or really should be called less-concave) is very much real. It's possible that because it's somewhat more advanced technique that folks can get to quite decent level without knowing it, but I'm pretty sure high level player have to understand it to some extent (even if just intuitively).

To illustrate, consider the flip, the extreme of a concave "loop". The intent here is a high-ish spin/speed ratio to clear a low/short ball over the net. The brush contact is thin, which is why the stroke is almost like wrapping around the ball (vs the direct pounding of a non-concave drive). Because the brush is relatively thin for the speed of the contact, good touch is required (which is why it requires decent level to execute). Incidentally this is also why fast setups (low dwell) make this sort of precision touch shot harder to execute and significant part of why the players who emphasize early point control (ie CNT) use seemingly slower equipment than ideal for rally.

But you are correct ball feeling is very important to do this. The statements just above demonstrate why.