Heavy Bottom spin opponent.

Actually no, its not a different motion using H3... its the exact same motion but using different body parts to generate the lifting motion.  And we're not calling you a noobie, we're just trying to make you understand.  It's not an easy concept to grasp.  It doesn't make sense to most people until you actually do it. 

Hi Kevin,

Hey thanks for all the great advice smackman!

Rack wrote: keven702 wrote: O so I wont need to lift the ball upwards with more with my arm, just my legs need a rising motion when doing a drive? If not with the H3 how would i lift the ball? Don't underestimate my power to pick up new things quickly !   With H3 you won't.  It's exactly the same thing as a drive.  The lifting motion is provided by your legs, waist, wrist.  You only really use a rising up motion with H3 in scenarios where you're super late to the ball and its dropped pretty far down and you need to safety it up.  If you're reasonably on time, its the same stroke just using different body parts to generate how much lift/spin you need.

Thanks man I'll give it a try in a few days when I play!

first off - i want to apologize for assuming that you weren't using footwork and solid core mechanics to setup your shot. my bad.

perhaps ironically, the advantages of more "meat and potatoes" gear (like a Yasaka Extra with Mark V both sides or a Primorac with Sriver FX both sides) would play to your strengths while providing much better control of opponent serve and push (your could afford to swing at 75% and still land balls on the table consistently and the gear would be far more forgiving against underspin).

equipment is no substitute for technique, but it can be a compliment.

and i personally think those pingskills videos are great for learning pushing fundamentals... but i don't recall if they talk about footwork (stepping in) for the shot. the two players in Maine who have the best pushes (consistency against service, safe placement, lowest unforced errors) use a stroke very similar. trust me when i say that it's shocking when your "deceptive" top-side pendulum serve is pushed low and flat short to your backhand.

Rack wrote: The reason why we say you probably dont know how to use your body is because thats what pulling underspin requires.�

This is simply not true. His balls are going into the net because his paddle is angled incorrectly.

Rack wrote: Use your leg power to give it the upwards momentum over the net

What are you talking about...?

Rack wrote: You also have to hit into the ball, it can't be a any form of passive shot.

Not true. Great players often lack the time and position for a full stroke and still produce a formidable return.

Rack wrote: Third, if you decide to FH it and assuming its heavy, you need to bend your legs low, and start with your blade close to your knees way under the table.

Again, this is certainly not necessary, particularly when playing close to the table.

Rack wrote: It's not an easy concept to grasp.

It is an extremely simple concept. It is only difficult because you have needlessly complicated it with questionable complexities.

Here is the simple truth: if you angle the bat correctly, the ball will clear the net and then land on the table. You can just place the bat in front of the ball with no movement at all (unless the ball is moving very slowly). 99% of work is gaining the instinct to angle the bat correctly.

Adding topspin causes the ball to fall more quickly, which enables you to hit the ball harder and more consistently with arc like trajectories.

You never really "lift" the ball. You angle the bat upwards so that the collision imparts an upward vector. The full body stuff does not provide lift; it provides topspin (and speed) which is important not for the lift but for the fall once the ball clears the net.

Lack of consistency due to occasional balls going long can be explained by failure to produce a strong enough stroke to generate the topspin required. If you have no arc, consistency is difficult, but this does not cause the ball to go into the net every time. If this is the problem, the ball goes long 50% and short 50%.

People on this forum love to over complicate things.   Trying to think about your legs and your abdomen and 20 other things will do nothing but decrease your consistency. You can be one of those fools who full body   loop strokes every ball, with no feel for the game, and has zero consistency or is producing such weak loops that every one can be slammed. Or, you can do what in my opinion is better for the causal player and focus on the    simple physics and develop feel for the game as your stroke improves incrementally. It is this feel which really counts.

Great players could just block and use other passive strokes to beat most of use here without ever utilizing a full body loop. They beat us because they are more experienced and talented, and form is a minor issue. Like equipment, we love to discuss it but the reality is that if you spend 40 hours a week training without the ideal equipment and with zero coaching you will quickly surpass they guy who gets coaching, plays 10 hours per week, and spends 30 hours per week reading mytabletennis.net

Here is the simple truth: if you angle the bat correctly, the ball will clear the net and then land on the table. You can just place the bat in front of the ball with no movement at all (unless the ball is moving very slowly). 99% of work is gaining the instinct to angle the bat correctly.

PONGTARDED wrote: Rack wrote: The reason why we say you probably dont know how to use your body is because thats what pulling underspin requires.  This is simply not true. His balls are going into the net because his paddle is angled incorrectly. Rack wrote: Use your leg power to give it the upwards momentum over the net What are you talking about...? Rack wrote: You also have to hit into the ball, it can't be a any form of passive shot. Not true. Great players often lack the time and position for a full stroke and still produce a formidable return. Rack wrote: Third, if you decide to FH it and assuming its heavy, you need to bend your legs low, and start with your blade close to your knees way under the table. Again, this is certainly not necessary, particularly when playing close to the table. Rack wrote: It's not an easy concept to grasp. It is an extremely simple concept. It is only difficult because you have needlessly complicated it with questionable complexities. Here is the simple truth: if you angle the bat correctly, the ball will clear the net and then land on the table. You can just place the bat in front of the ball with no movement at all (unless the ball is moving very slowly). 99% of work is gaining the instinct to angle the bat correctly. Adding topspin causes the ball to fall more quickly, which enables you to hit the ball harder and more consistently with arc like trajectories. You never really "lift" the ball. You angle the bat upwards so that the collision imparts an upward vector. The full body stuff does not provide lift; it provides topspin (and speed) which is important not for the lift but for the fall once the ball clears the net. Lack of consistency due to occasional balls going long can be explained by failure to produce a strong enough stroke to generate the topspin required. If you have no arc, consistency is difficult, but this does not cause the ball to go into the net every time. If this is the problem, the ball goes long 50% and short 50%. People on this forum love to over complicate things.   Trying to think about your legs and your abdomen and 20 other things will do nothing but decrease your consistency. You can be one of those fools who full body   loop strokes every ball, with no feel for the game, and has zero consistency or is producing such weak loops that every one can be slammed. Or, you can do what in my opinion is better for the causal player and focus on the    simple physics and develop feel for the game as your stroke improves incrementally. It is this feel which really counts. Great players could just block and use other passive strokes to beat most of use here without ever utilizing a full body loop. They beat us because they are more experienced and talented, and form is a minor issue. Like equipment, we love to discuss it but the reality is that if you spend 40 hours a week training without the ideal equipment and with zero coaching you will quickly surpass they guy who gets coaching, plays 10 hours per week, and spends 30 hours per week reading mytabletennis.net

Rack wrote:   From what I can see against heavy underspin....   Does his blade dip below the table near his knees?  Yep Does he actively hit INTO the ball?   Yep Is he using his legs?  Yep Is his followthrough forward?  Yep Is he consistent?  Yep

Pongtarded: I'm sure you're likely a reasonable and nice person, and perhaps you're highly skilled in table tennis. That being said, please don't take offense to the following.

I'm quite baffled by your response--not only that you disagree with Rack, but also to the extent you disagree with him. I have books, training articles, and have spent many, many, many hours in formal training with a coach. What Rack articulated so well was basically "Looping Against Back Spin 101". Nothing he said even remotely deviated from every lesson I've encountered, either written, spoken, or otherwise, regarding looping back spin.

Perhaps you could clarify your position and let us know your level of experience so that we can better understand where you're coming from?

PONGTARDED wrote: Rack wrote: The reason why we say you probably dont know how to use your body is because thats what pulling underspin requires.  This is simply not true. His balls are going into the net because his paddle is angled incorrectly. Rack wrote: Use your leg power to give it the upwards momentum over the net What are you talking about...? Rack wrote: You also have to hit into the ball, it can't be a any form of passive shot. Not true. Great players often lack the time and position for a full stroke and still produce a formidable return. Rack wrote: Third, if you decide to FH it and assuming its heavy, you need to bend your legs low, and start with your blade close to your knees way under the table. Again, this is certainly not necessary, particularly when playing close to the table. Rack wrote: It's not an easy concept to grasp. It is an extremely simple concept. It is only difficult because you have needlessly complicated it with questionable complexities. Here is the simple truth: if you angle the bat correctly, the ball will clear the net and then land on the table. You can just place the bat in front of the ball with no movement at all (unless the ball is moving very slowly). 99% of work is gaining the instinct to angle the bat correctly. Adding topspin causes the ball to fall more quickly, which enables you to hit the ball harder and more consistently with arc like trajectories. You never really "lift" the ball. You angle the bat upwards so that the collision imparts an upward vector. The full body stuff does not provide lift; it provides topspin (and speed) which is important not for the lift but for the fall once the ball clears the net. Lack of consistency due to occasional balls going long can be explained by failure to produce a strong enough stroke to generate the topspin required. If you have no arc, consistency is difficult, but this does not cause the ball to go into the net every time. If this is the problem, the ball goes long 50% and short 50%. People on this forum love to over complicate things.   Trying to think about your legs and your abdomen and 20 other things will do nothing but decrease your consistency. You can be one of those fools who full body   loop strokes every ball, with no feel for the game, and has zero consistency or is producing such weak loops that every one can be slammed. Or, you can do what in my opinion is better for the causal player and focus on the    simple physics and develop feel for the game as your stroke improves incrementally. It is this feel which really counts. Great players could just block and use other passive strokes to beat most of use here without ever utilizing a full body loop. They beat us because they are more experienced and talented, and form is a minor issue. Like equipment, we love to discuss it but the reality is that if you spend 40 hours a week training without the ideal equipment and with zero coaching you will quickly surpass they guy who gets coaching, plays 10 hours per week, and spends 30 hours per week reading mytabletennis.net

No.

mhnh007 wrote: tpgh2k wrote: i think that pongtarded is just talking about a heavy backspin ball that's high. so his choice of shot would be a upward flat smash or a safe 'lift' which is basically pushing the ball back (but you're actually just letting the spin catch on your rubber to send the ball back) and resetting for the next shot. i really don't think pongtarded was talking about any kind of loop technique. Re-reading his post slowly the 2nd times seem like he is talking about counter loop a top spin though, as he is more worry about the ball going long than hitting the net.  He is actually talking about generating the spin so the ball can arc down, or it will go long...

No. Don't even pretend to agree/condone his idiocy.

tpgh2k wrote: i think that pongtarded is just talking about a heavy backspin ball that's high. so his choice of shot would be a upward flat smash or a safe 'lift' which is basically pushing the ball back (but you're actually just letting the spin catch on your rubber to send the ball back) and resetting for the next shot. i really don't think pongtarded was talking about any kind of loop technique.

Yes. I see no validity in classifying returns as loops, drives, etc. It is all a continuum. What do you call a weak topspin stroke against heavy backspin that fails to overcome the backspin so that the return is still backspin (I find such returns effective in their deception)? What do you call a block against heavy topspin that makes a perfect loop-like return without providing single RPM of additional topspin? A loop?

I am not disagreeing that an ideal loop utilizes more than the arm. Just saying that an ideal loop is not always necessary and that for beginners not even the immediate goal.

90% of you are lying to yourselves if you disagree with my claim that the pros could beat you with just blocks, lobs, and other passive shots. You are also lying if you deny that pros can produce amazing returns while in a jam using compact movements because they dont have time to produce full strokes.

roundrobin wrote: Not always true.    Against world-class level underspin shots, unless you cushion the shot correctly after impact, the ball will clear the net and fly out of the table without landing, even if you used "perfect" angle on your blade.�� The same is true against world-class topspin shots.��

When saying that no bat movement at all is required, I was referring to what most would call a block. And yes, you can do this to virtually any ball that has enough momentum to make it back to the net. You seem to forget that with blade angle one can avoid the ball going    long by angling the bat even more upward (lob type return). This lob trajectory is only necessary against backspin. Or against topspin that you have allowed to drop low.

No one doubted that a PRO can beat any one of us with lobs, blocks and passive shots.  There are many high level players over 2000+ that still play a counter or lobbing game.  Thats actually a smart way to win to conserve energy.  Hell many Pros can beat us just by serves alone or even pushes... thats why they're called Pros.  They save energy by doing this because they are virtually a moving brick wall at that level with insane footwork.

PONGTARDED wrote: My basic position here is that one should allow the loop technique to develop gradually. Learn to hit and push and lob with a hardbat. Then switch to inverted. Transition from flat hits to hits with weak topspin. Every addition of increased topspin will be rewarded, and you will evolve a loop stroke gradually rather than all at once. I recommend this because the loop stroke is not the most essential skill. You can forgo it all together and stick with the hardbat and develop a very decent hitting based game. We all play best while doing what comes naturally at the moment. Significant improvements to technique come with an initial decline in performance followed by improvement. You do look like a fool when attempting full body loops before you have learned judge spin and flat hit the ball. Particularly with limited training hours, you can entirely stunt your development by focusing on form before learning the basics. At my club, there is a USTT 900 middle aged woman who attempts full body loops with no consistency. She yells at herself, "loop", "loop", "loop." She gets beaten by the occasional basement player who comes by for the first time and has never heard of the term loop. She is not improving because she is trying too hard. When focusing on the abdomen and the legs and 20 other things, you take too many hits to ever recuperate unless you are training more than a few hours per week. She looks like a fool, and actually has the audacity to offer her services as a paid coach. I am suggesting that you just relax and allow the development to proceed more naturally. After you have learned to hit and are beginning to topspin, you can watch loops on youtube, but dont overanalyze. Think of it as one fluid motion and try to replicate it without thinking about the individual components. I suggest that you start out like Timo Boll did as a 4 year old: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xzn4kv9NhxU . You can see that he gained a feel for the basics (hitting, judging trajectories, etc) before he even learned to hold the paddle correctly. There is a myth at mytt that learning this way permanently messes up your reflexes, but it is simply not true.

No, you're wrong.