Quick way to Gain 500 Usatt Points!

mhnh007 wrote: evilelf2407 wrote: I read some of the responses, but there were a lot, its finals week, and im tired as hell, so im speaking from experience as a usatt 2000 player. i used to play with a sh*tty balsa blade back when i was 1200, this got me to 1600. i switched to sriver on both sides, offensive classic (a lot slower setup), and got to 1800. when I reached 1800 i switched to a faster setup (tenergy, JO platin soft, and still OC blade), and now im 2000. I'm a two winged looper so it fits my style. thats a little background on me, heres my experience playing 1200-2200 players: anyone above 1800 is a respectable table tennis player. sorry to those below that, and i sptne a few years below 1800, but if a bystander who does not play table tennis watches a match between two 1700 players, they will not be impressed. a match between 1900, they will be impressed. 1800 is the cutoff between me going easy on you, or trying my hardest. nobody should be worrying about fast equipment if you are below 1900 usatt. above 1900, you start worrying about having to hit harder, more consistently, and more spin... below 1800, i can beat you without playing offense, because you make more mistakes than winners. You may hit a winner shot every 5 shots, but the rest of the match i can move you around, block you down, and let you make mistakes. if you are a little better, i can send a slow loop your way, and you'll give me an easy 5th that i can smash. another thign ive noticed, <1800 you have no short game. sorry, but its true. if you serve me short, i can drop it short, and you'll push it long. ive yet to play someone below 1800 that has a respectable short game. this also applies to serve return...both something that i blame on lack of practice, and equipment that is too fast. that is my personal experience. ive had so many beginners (1000-1200) players come to me and ask me what equipment i use, and i almost dont want to tell them, because ik they'll try it, and a) its an expensive setup, and b) it will not suit their game +1. You speak the truth...  BTW - how long does it take you to go over the hump, and what did you do to get over it?  Thks,

Double Spot ON!  

I mean the 1800 hump.  The exact 3 things that you list are the exact 3 things I am working on, Serve return is what what cause me to loose game now though.

icontek wrote: evilelf2407 wrote: I read some of the responses, but there were a lot, its finals week, and im tired as hell, so im speaking from experience as a usatt 2000 player. i used to play with a sh*tty balsa blade back when i was 1200, this got me to 1600. i switched to sriver on both sides, offensive classic (a lot slower setup), and got to 1800. when I reached 1800 i switched to a faster setup (tenergy, JO platin soft, and still OC blade), and now im 2000. I'm a two winged looper so it fits my style. thats a little background on me, heres my experience playing 1200-2200 players: anyone above 1800 is a respectable table tennis player. sorry to those below that, and i sptne a few years below 1800, but if a bystander who does not play table tennis watches a match between two 1700 players, they will not be impressed. a match between 1900, they will be impressed. 1800 is the cutoff between me going easy on you, or trying my hardest. nobody should be worrying about fast equipment if you are below 1900 usatt. above 1900, you start worrying about having to hit harder, more consistently, and more spin... below 1800, i can beat you without playing offense, because you make more mistakes than winners. You may hit a winner shot every 5 shots, but the rest of the match i can move you around, block you down, and let you make mistakes. if you are a little better, i can send a slow loop your way, and you'll give me an easy 5th that i can smash. another thign ive noticed, <1800 you have no short game. sorry, but its true. if you serve me short, i can drop it short, and you'll push it long. ive yet to play someone below 1800 that has a respectable short game. this also applies to serve return...both something that i blame on lack of practice, and equipment that is too fast. that is my personal experience. ive had so many beginners (1000-1200) players come to me and ask me what equipment i use, and i almost dont want to tell them, because ik they'll try it, and a) its an expensive setup, and b) it will not suit their game   Great post!

Speedplay wrote: PB hardly looks like a 2200 rated player in that one and if we didn't know about Schlagers ability, we would probably judge PB as a noob. Knowing about Schlagers level makes us aware that he could make us all look like noobs.

This is just it. Schlager controlled the points.

And while professionals like Schlager, aspiring olympians, US2000+ (2200?) offensive attackers and the lucky folks who have been formally trained as juniors might actually benefit from OFF+ blades and rubbers; those same tools in the hands of people who play at US800-1500 tend to reinforce inconsistency and unforced errors.

Control (over your equipment) translates well into Control (over your strokes) which translates well into Control (over your shots).

Ultimately these things allow you to Control (the point).


Which leads me to a question:

At this beginning/intermediate level - who else uses the blade inspection portion of the match to guide what tactics to try in game 1 and two?

At this level if I see OFF+ equipment, I play a lot of short and dead, knowing that they likely won't have a consistent flip. And more than speed - I also focus on producing heavy spin on loops and pushes, knowing that low dwell and fast rubbers means that their strokes have to be that much more grooved and precise to counter the spin. And, because those blades require very well developed touch to consistently push safe, I can frequently bait those players into popping up for easy pick hits.

And while I could simply serve long and then battle it out with forehand drives at a mid distance, (and possibly lose the point) - if my opponent wants to play at being a US1200 mid distance powerlooper, they have to demonstrate that they have the shortgame, shotmaking and control to setup up that type of game.

As a result, several players now have the attitude of "I could beat that guy, but he's too much of a coward to battle it out like a man"...

icontek wrote: Speedplay wrote: PB hardly looks like a 2200 rated player in that one and if we didn't know about Schlagers ability, we would probably judge PB as a noob. Knowing about Schlagers level makes us aware that he could make us all look like noobs. This is just it. Schlager controlled the points. And while professionals like Schlager, aspiring olympians, US2000+ (2200?) offensive attackers and the lucky folks who have been formally trained as juniors might actually benefit from OFF+ blades and rubbers; those same tools in the hands of people who play at US800-1500 tend to reinforce inconsistency and unforced errors. Control (over your equipment) translates well into Control (over your strokes) which translates well into Control (over your shots). Ultimately these things allow you to Control (the point). Which leads me to a question: At this beginning/intermediate level - who else uses the blade inspection portion of the match to guide what tactics to try in game 1 and two? At this level if I see OFF+ equipment, I play a lot of short and dead, knowing that they likely won't have a consistent flip. And more than speed - I also focus on producing heavy spin on loops and pushes, knowing that low dwell and fast rubbers means that their strokes have to be that much more grooved and precise to counter the spin. And, because those blades require very well developed touch to consistently push safe, I can frequently bait those players into popping up for easy pick hits. And while I could simply serve long and then battle it out with forehand drives at a mid distance, (and possibly lose the point) - if my opponent wants to play at being a US1200 mid distance powerlooper, they have to demonstrate that they have the shortgame, shotmaking and control to setup up that type of game. As a result, several players now have the attitude of "I could beat that guy, but he's too much of a coward to battle it out like a man"...

Good points for sure!      No superfluous usage from icontek in my mind.

I just set up a Yasaka Sweden Classic with some 2.0 Palio ME 42.5.   I have been using the PME on several blades much faster, but have been using it mostly now on my Yasaka regular Extra.  I'm very comfortable with an allround game in this setup.  But now for a little experiment using the slower Sweden Classic blade, I can see that I can use a much much slower blade with a faster rubber like that PME. 

The only thing that I really have a hard time with is play off the table.  My arms get pretty tired and the touch is much more difficult with such a slow blade when I'm back of the table 4+ feet.  But is it really fun to have such a larger degree of forgiveness in so many shots with the slower blade.  It's kind of addicting actually. 

I can understand more clearly now the proper execution of various strokes with this slower setup.  It forces me to make much more pronounced movements of feet, body, and arms.  I do not rely so much on my wrist as much as I would with a faster blade.  Although, my 87g. Extra blocks and loops much better, (probably because of max sponge on the PME instead of 2.0mm) I am having a hard time deciding which blade I want to use.  I guess it will depend on who I play or how much energy I have at the time.

So, long story short.......The Yasaka Sweden Classic with some Palio Macro Era 42.5 2.0mm is a great setup!  

Anton Chigurh wrote: using gear that is appropriate to one's level. to me the notion that all people below some arbitrary level "should" only use "slow" gear borders on a dogmatic statement and I see little evidence to support it. To say that all people below a particular level should always use a certain type of setup is an overreaching statement. Some people have good coaches. Some people don't. Some people are highly athletic with a background in related sports. Some people aren't athletic and have no comparable experience. Some people are above average intelligence, some people are not.

I agree

I agree

I agree

True

Some people have to be coached and have a really hard time improving unless they get outside advice because they simply cannot put their finger on what's going wrong, that would be like one of my friends, perfect example of that, would get into funks for weeks and not be able to land a shot.
Another friend, he's had a coach for years but never improves because, quite frankly, his coach sucks, he told him to get a Timo Boll Tricarbon and Bryce Speed on both sides for a 1300 rated player, he never developed him opening game and I ended up coaching him in the summers when we worked together and at least when I was around, to switch to slightly slower setups.
Some people get better just by practicing with other people and work it out like another friend of mine, develops a very strong, though simple, core game.
Me...never got coached in anything in my life, very self motivated and am used to self examination. I decided to like baseball in highschool but I was homeschooled so I made a pitching mound and threw at a backstop every day for a couple years and read books, watched videos, and never played on a team or had a coach, yet got offered several scholarships to pitch for college teams when I went to a couple tryouts. Mainly because I was a lefty who could throw in the upper 80's all day long and had developed like 20 other junk pitches.

i apologize for sounding like a dogmatic broken record :D

i would be silly if i thought that intelligence, natural ability, previous exposure to raquet sports had no bearing on the equation.

i simply meant that for a majority of players of below a certain level, the downside of OFF+ blades is greater than the upside.

This is because the amount of work it takes to develop the fundamentals of the game using really fast gear is likely exponentially greater than the effort involved using tried and true combinations like a Primorac with Sriver EL.

I was hoping to have ohgourami chime in with the improvements to his game after going from an OFF+ to a more OFF- setup :D

AHAHAHAHAHA "who else uses the blade inspection portion of the match to guide what tactics to try in game"
icontek, you are too damn smart
and anton, I am pro freedom of choice when it comes to equipment. I hate it when people at the club talk down to a player for using lp, sp, or anti. but for people that want to gain points quick, using a fast setup doesn't make sense. i've also seen coaches make rocket blades for absolute beginners, it's painful to watch all the misses, and bad form develop. but some coaches are in it to make money, not players, and lessons pay the bills. and like elf says, you can't convince a new player/me to use slow setup
my journey, was similar to elf.
started with fast setup, arrogantly stayed 1000 for about a year. then i accidently picked up this cheap and slow 729 stuff, suddenly instead of playing scared and lobbing, I somehow was attacking and looping, got to 1700 in about a few weeks, stayed at 1700 for about 2 months. then changed to fast setup, which destroyed whatever technique i had. stayed 1800 for about 5 months. realized i wasn't improving so i got lessons. the more lessons i took, the more i thought my equipment was way too fast(i was discovering how to create power). then downgraded my equipment, got to 2000 in about 3 months.

icontek: I'm not sure what you mean by recursive. (I understand the definition of recursive; I mean I'm unsure how what I'm saying fits that definition.)

BMonkey: I appreciate your epiphany and respect your input. However, I'm slightly confused by something you said. You feel you "slowed down" by going from an Acoustic to a Clipper? That seems baffling to me, as I found the Clipper much faster than the Acoustic and quite a bit more difficult to control in the short game. Just my experience, not the objective "truth", but nonetheless I thought it was a salient discrepancy. The Clipper is thicker, stiffer, and heavier--all traits that seem to imply increased speed.

For the record, I'm not opposed to the idea that "slower gear" is better for learning. To an extent, that seems reasonable. However, the key to me is "to an extent". In addition, what "slower gear" means precisely.

Regarding coaches that allegedly push fast setups so they can make a buck by keeping their students in a state of perpetual stagnation and frustration... I'm not buying that argument. That isn't to say that nobody has ever done it, but it's just not a compelling argument.

First, it requires a pretty Machiavellian person to think of it, want to do it, and actually pull it off. Such people exist, but fortunately they are certainly not the majority. In addition, I doubt that by some chance table tennis coaches happen to make up a large proportion of such scandalous people. Second, my coach, for example, started me on a fairly fast setup (as stated above). However, he wasn't charging me any money. He was a 2000-2100 player, a fellow student and member of the university table tennis club, and he gave me free lessons just because he's a nice guy. I fail to see how sabotaging me with fast equipment would benefit him in any way. It seems that such a premise is simply an (unconscious?) attempt to substantiate an argument one really wants to believe.

I appreciate the logic behind the argument, but logic doesn't always match empirical results. (That's why there's such a large chasm between philosophy and science these days.) The empirical results you provided are slightly compelling, but it's a very small sample size, and the examples are being presented by the very people who have a vested interest in the argument. So again, it does not seem to be an airtight case.

I still believe that if there is to be a "dogma", then the dogma should be that players should use equipment that is appropriate to their abilities. Granted, it's a bit more vague than "people under 1800 should use slow gear", but I think the vagueness is a good thing. It leaves room for contingencies.

Sorry to be sort of oblique.

I was using recursion in an attempt to reference an in-built bias and will do my best to explain.

Tabletennis is a sport with more spin variation than any other raquet sport (1 - 9000rpm by some reports). As such it has tremendously high granularity. Control of that spin, and mastering the skills to work both with and against it is the greatest challenge of the inverted era. Regardless of natural athleticism, perception, or even a history of racquet sports, new and old players alike face the same fundamental challenges of being able to read, understand and produce these spins.

Look at the process whereby a low-intermediate level player with limited perception of the game attempts to make equipment choices based on their perceived understanding.

At it simplest form - this behavior occurs when someone makes a statement like "i am an aggressive attacker" and chooses an OFF+ blade to "complement" that style.

However, in a more complex form, it can occur when a coach recommends equipment to a developing player that the coach (who usually has very grooved strokes) believes is high control.

And in many cases when players choose a blade that is faster than their level - they are almost forced to buy "high performance rubbers" - because these are capable of producing enough topspin to bring down a ball before the endline.






p.s.
I'll be the first to admit (as an EJ) that I have occasionally slapped on a sheet of BW2 so I can spend a night at the club "hitting through" several opponents who usually return my 1st attacks with my more modest ALL+ setup. I'm sure that dopamine is involved, because I the recollection of those points is simultaneously warm, fuzzy and vivid.

tpgh2k wrote: i love those warm and fuzzy feelings....i get it all the time now =).

Did the frequency of those shots landing increase when you went from the Mizutani to the YEO?

Don't get me wrong, you've put in tremendous work drilling in the last year; and it shows! But how much of the "power WITH control" can you attribute to the blade?

Mdman wrote: So what is a good carbon blade to start with?

Seems like the best answer so far would be: none, start with all wood.

icontek wrote:     many players don't think of "controlling the arc of their topspin" as an aspect of control. I would argue that fast blades generally produce longer, flatter arcs (which is why those same blades are great for attacking from 10 feet behind the table) and why many players turn to high spin rubbers to shorten the arc. of course when those high spin rubbers are also highly elastic and also fast... well, the unintended happens, and players find it easier to hit the floor instead of the table.

+1 !  Exactly what I have found with all the various combo's I have tried.

I don't think using a slower setup automatically gets you 500 points.
I think getting some real coaching, training proper strokes, having sound tactics, AND having appropriate level gear is going to help raise your game and probably your rating.

But to say a 1200 rated player will go to 1700 because of a equipment switch-- I just don't think that flies straight. Just my opinion though. If you are having problems hitting 10 consecutive loops against underspin, you may want to change your gear. (notice I didn't say get slower gear -- just look a my new sig)