The great China vs Euro loop myth

NextLevel wrote: pnachtwey wrote: The only thing you can control is the speed, attitude and direction of the paddle at the moment of contact.  It doesn't make ANY DIFFERENCE what happened before or after the ball leaves the paddle 2-4 milliseconds.  Convex, concave, straight arm or chicken wing, it makes no difference if you are standing on your head or just throwing the paddle and happen to hit the ball just right.  If the speed,attitude and direction of the paddle are the same at contact the result will be the same if the balls direction, speed and spin are the same. What is all boils down to is the paddle imparts an impulse ( force times dwell time ) on the ball. This impulse has a magnitude and direction.  If the impulse is the same then the ball will respond respond in the same way given it has the same speed, direction, and spin.   All this talk about speed, throw and spin really boils down to the magnitude and direction of the impulse.   TT is still subject to the laws of physics.  How is that for sucking the fun out of an argument? In a moment of letting my brain run in neutral I got sucked in to that convex/concave argument many months back.     I think that while playing today, I realized that this POV is quite wrong and in a dangerous way too, because in practice what you do before and after contact does affect how the ball is contacted.

I think the only thing chinese about the way chinese players loop the ball is their skin color and what their rubber says. The better I get at the game, the more I see how much I have over-thought certain things and the more I see that this is myth. Every player has a repertoire of different loops. People used to just say that the straight arm loop was the chinese loop. But I see europeans do it just as much. I think individual style changes much more than "chinese vs european" Each chinese player loops the ball differently just as each european player loops the ball differently. Some europeans loop more like certain chinese players than other chinese players do. It is directly a result of the person's style, and not their nationality. At the end of the day- everyone just moves their arm forward and up to loop the ball. Now if you wanna talk about the "chinese game" vs the "European game" then I think that holds a little bit more water. Their foundation of thinking is all similar because it comes from the same coaching. It's cultural. But stroke is strictly personal style. The only cut difference is their rubber material, which has an effect on how certain balls are played, and how the ball comes off of the racket or reacts to the rubber, but it's not different enough to really matter much. One could say that Ryu Seung Min has a really heavy chinese style loop, but he always used bryce and now tenergy. Guy still loops with a lot of action and power. Hell, the fact that the chinese play shakehand now should be enough to prove there is no seperation. That was originally a totally European idea. 

pnachtwey wrote: I agree that the stroke before does affect the impact but there are many strokes that could make the same impact, the same impulse with the same state at impact.  Only the state at the time of impact matters.  If the state is the same the results will be the same.  The ball doesn't care what happened before impact. I disagree with the after impact part.  It has no affect on the ball.

The primary reason I disagree is that a stroke forms a trajectory.  Therefore I think the idea that only state at the time of impact matters is wrong is that the stroke is not just about state at time of impact, but about the buildup and the follow through.

So why did I come to this realization?  Two things:

1) I have been looping inconsistently of recent and I happened on Sunday to hit some mid speed loops against one of my opponent's blocks.    Today with my hitting partner, I was looping again and we went into a drill where instead of hitting his popups, I had to loop them all.  Then I realized that usually, when I tried to spin the ball, I hit the ball at the back or at the top of the ball with a vertical drive stroke.  I was far more consistent when I used a stroke that arced around the ball.  It then came to me that I was "covering the ball" and that for some reason, this made a huge difference in consistency for my game versus just contacting the ball at the back with a rapid tangential stroke.

2) I am able to serve heavy backspin on my forehand but I was having problems replicating the same success on my backhand side.  I asked my coach why and he told me that I was curving around the ball and pulling it upwards on my forehand but that on the backhand, it seemed that I was just trying to brush the bottom of the ball rather than going around it.  This insight fixed the problem instantly.

My point here is that maybe on some strokes, the dwell time is so short that shaping ("covering the ball") is not as big a deal but I am skeptical that these strokes can be easily separated from the ones where shaping is not a big deal because the stroke is a path and I think that a follow through is a part of that path, while it seems to me that you think that a follow through is not.  I agree that a follow-through can be excessive but that is in part determined by the impulse/force in stroke already.

Therefore, based on my experience and logic, the separation of contact from follow through is dangerous for didactic reasons and may not even be fully correct in reality because a stroke is not just about contact but in part about the path before and after.  After all, you don't have path without plotting the trajectory before and after!

NextLevel wrote: 2) I am able to serve heavy backspin on my forehand but I was having problems replicating the same success on my backhand side.  I asked my coach why and he told me that I was curving around the ball and pulling it upwards on my forehand but that on the backhand, it seemed that I was just trying to brush the bottom of the ball rather than going around it.  This insight fixed the problem instantly.

power7 wrote: "I could teach you that, but can you use it in a game?"

pnachtwey wrote: power7 wrote: "I could teach you that, but can you use it in a game?" The question is good.  However, I would ask, "can you show me how to win?"

power7, pnachtawey tends to disregard the human element of the game ALWAYS. don't mind him. he just posts here to feed his ego. all the while im still waiting for him to post a video on how he loops. he hasnt posted it for about 3-4 months now since i challenged him? or maybe he purposedly not post it because maybe he is still practicing his stroke or he is afraid his stroke will get criticized =)

You're right, Yogi_bear!

The anonymity aspect on this forum is comical.

TT is a relatively small community and the skills we have to learn and the understanding we have DOES depend on one's skill level and experience. It is very difficult to understand the thoughts of someone when their skill level is not clear. It is even worse trying to correct or suggest a different point of view. Some are just very thickheaded and defensive during discussions.

power7 wrote: Depends on the ball one is hitting.  Most curved paddle swings are caused because the player is making micro adjustments as they are swinging.  Usually trying to return balls on the edge of their skill level.

NextLevel wrote: power7 wrote: Depends on the ball one is hitting.  Most curved paddle swings are caused because the player is making micro adjustments as they are swinging.  Usually trying to return balls on the edge of their skill level.   Curved strokes are to place more spin on the ball.  Whether this is safer or riskier is context dependent.   If you return an easy ball for your skill level, you know exactly what swing and place of contact should be for the desired return shot.  As the topspin gets heavier and faster, more experience players still know how to return those balls while their swings are still compact during training.  Less experience players start guessing and their swings become erratic as they "guess" at the contact point, trajectory of the ball, and paddle speed for a return they want. Sure they take a "full" swing at the ball during a game.  But they are usually trying to finish up the point.  If you're calm and skillful enough, a simple block or punch block return to the proper placement will result in an easy point.   Again, curved strokes often result in more spin and this increases safety and consistency if the shot is made properly.  Remember, the curved stroke is not about the size of the stroke, but about the trajectory.   Yes, there are alternatives to spinning the ball.  My point is that when teaching a student how to loop   1) focusing on the point of contact and not the complete trajectory of the stroke can lead to less spin being generated than is possible (see my example on heavy underspin serves) 2) focusing on the point of contact and not the complete trajectory leads to underestimating the importance of follow through and what its true meaning is (see again my example on heavy underspin serves).   It is point 2 that led me to repost here: I realized that when people say "cover the ball", what I think they really mean is arc your stroke.  For those people who learned by imitating better players, some of this probably came instantly.  But for people who try to think through what they do, the "cover the ball" aspect of a stroke sounds like wasted motion.  I now have an explanation for why it is not.

Edited by power7 - 10/03/2012 at 1:07pm

yogi_bear wrote: power7, he tends to disregard the human element of the game ALWAYS. don't mind him. he just posts here to feed his ego. all the while im still waiting for him to post a video on how he loops. he hasnt posted it for about 3-4 months now since i challenged him? or maybe he purposedly not post it because maybe he is still practicing his stroke or he is afraid his stroke will get criticized =)

Edited by power7 - 10/03/2012 at 3:11pm

It is obvious that there are lots of ways to produce great loops.  One of the more significant aspects is how to do this and still be in great position to hit your next shot.  Also, how to maximize power of your shot and minimizing overall effort needed to do it.  I think the things that make Ma Long and ZJK so amazing happen long before their blade hits the ball -- and also what happens immediately after they hit the ball.  Same for anyone else in the top 100 in the world for that matter.  So getting back a bunch of pages to the title of this entire thread, about the "myth of the Chinese vs Europe loop", I think it is completely correct.  What is not a myth is the depth and intensity of Chinese coaching for talented kids from a ridiculously young age onward.  That's just not easy to find anywhere else. 

i was referring to pnachtawey. sorry for not making my statement clear hehehe

Anderni wrote: assiduous wrote:  The same person will always have more power if he opens the arm in the elbow. But it's more difficult to hit the ball, so many people abandon a good stroke only to make sure they hit the ball.  What about Liu Guoliang, do you think he abandoned a good stroke? Btw some people do think it's easier to hit with a straight arm. I see this with kids playing badminton. It's got to do with body coordination, some people have a better feel for their arm position when it's straight, rather than when the elbow is bent in varying degrees.  If you keep your arm straight out from your body, your hand will be at the same distance from your body every time. If you bend your elbow you have to trust the feel in your elbow joint. Maybe that's natural for some, but it's not natural for everybody.