3 Thresholds in Table Tennis

ONE: Weight threshold

Not enough finesse, too much racket (mass)

An inescapable, it seems, threshold the table tennis industry imposes upon us can be represented by the equation 90 + 50 + 50 = 190 grams (or 88 + 51 + 51). I struggle to understand why Butterfly, Tibhar, Victas and Yasaka think gluttony weight-wise is the way to go. Take my 2 Butterfly rackets which are equipped with rubbers from the aforementioned brands - even though a 5ply wood Primorac and a 7ply Viscaria Super ALC couldn't be more different, they both sit at 190g even after rubber and heat optimization. The first is actually already vintage, having the metaphorical potency of rusted metal if carbon-reinforced blades are now the battlefield standard. The second I call an unruly tyrant, giving you all the finesse of a carved stone dagger. Too bad lightweight rubbers don't go well with the Super ALC. Sheer mass can be a first dealbreaker for a racket seeker because for every gram above 185g, the strength and skill threshold for playing really good table tennis increases exponentially. 

TWO: Threshold of Pain

An endurance sport, table tennis was never meant to be

Some treat table tennis as an endurance sport. But true connoisseurs play table tennis to alleviate their pains. Growing physical pains are a sign of inefficient or excessive training. In a match, the player with a higher threshold of pain tends to win after multiple deuces. Perhaps that's why "win by service" continues to be a thing for those at the lower end of this spectrum. 

THREE: Threshold of a Conclusion

The highest stage of TT

When do you know in the course of a game you've reached the threshold of a conclusion? That you are in the position to secure the point through a final offense or a series of moves sure to put you at such an advantage you might as well have won the point? The threshold of a conclusion could also be a transition point between the defensive / neutral phase and the offensive phase. Getting to the threshold often involves careful touch play, the feminine side of TT. If one is a poor judge of when the threshold of a conclusion has been reached so that one launches attacks when it would be wiser to wait or first get oneself out of a trap set by your opponent, loss is almost certain. If a player with the necessary skills and agility also has a great sense of the threshold of a conclusion, and is always readying oneself to execute a win upon reaching the threshold 44 times in a match, the highest stage of table tennis would have been reached. Hugo Calderano beating Lin Shidong in this year's World Cup is a great illustration of this threshold principle - physical prowess and a superior intelligence always favoured Calderano, what he did was simply wait patiently and calmly for the threshold of every mini conclusion, until the final one. 

Five common pitfalls in table tennis (updated)

Having set myself the task of finally writing about tactics, I’m suddenly filled with self-doubt. How do I know the advice I'm about to proffer are general enough to be useful to all kinds of players - be they of the Chinese style, European style, or of big, medium or small stature? The fact is I cannot be totally sure because being all those at the same time is physically impossible, but after pondering some real-life experiences and profiles, I think some fixed concepts can be shared:

 1. Not knowing how to end a point 

This issue stems from indecision, misjudgement and a lack of understanding of the mechanics of table tennis. Some kinetic energies are simply too great to be passively blocked by an out-of-position opponent. Conversely “ending a point” might mean an unconventional flicking shot whose energy is unexpectedly small / weak, causing the opponent to err. You need to know to decisively execute the extra energy transfer or energy change, to win the current point or the next one.

2. Overreliance on a single winning stroke

This might seem like a warning for amateur players only but complacency only ends when one is constantly challenged by “high hands”, a situation not many easily find themselves in. And so you see an example of this player launching seemingly robust offensives against other mediocre players, only to be soundly defeated when their “signature” winning stroke, such as the backhand slap, is neutralised by someone who is quite pro. When that happens, one likely enters an open rally where the predictable single act succumbs to a series of unpredictable counterattacks.

3. Possessing a flawed system (of massive loss avoidance instead of victory-seeking)

This pitfall I recognized soon after a fairly tight game with a player who struck me as being traumatised into being sufficiently good rather than being actually good. Yes, he started out in the realm of the 11-0s. His serves have the very precise quality of being unattackable, his third balls tend to be precise and well-practised, and his top spins are fast and hazy enough to trip up opponents. But that’s all; high-speed attacks and active defense are non-existent. He has a system to beat only mediocre players and which comforts rather than facilitates improvement; even if a skilled modern player who is typically offensive matched with this player, their errors would bring the scoreline to something like 11-2. The dreaded 11-0 is avoided but a system like that - designed for massive loss avoidance - is locked outside victory because it does not seek it. That is a fundamental flaw, a pitfall that should be more commonly recognized and avoided.

4. Not knowing to change / improve one's racket

This pitfall can be divided into two categories. The first is when one is too stingy to change one's old and degraded rubber, and the second is when one's game circle is too small for one to realise one's setup isn't all that great or versatile. Perhaps most of one's club members aren't skilled enough to pose a threat even with their newer racket setups. Or the usual people one plays with at the club aren't challenging enough to prompt the discovery of better setups that suit one's playing strengths better - against a broader range of styles that exists out in the wider arena. 

5. Neglecting physical strength and agility

Quick body movement plays such an important role in table tennis that the muscles responsible for strong impulse generation need to be well-developed. The legs have to be limber for step-arounds, especially within the rapid fire of the first 3 balls which are so crucial in the modern game. It would help that one's overall body weight is kept in check, for increased agility.

TT: Of fads and more on my main setup

Adding inner carbon fibre layers to table tennis rackets. Randomly adding "sea salt" or "salted caramel" into beverages. Adding fake exhaust fixtures to cars. What do all these additions in the modern world have in common? They are all fads - fads that will eventually be recognised as the gross excesses they are.

Arguably, more is really not more when it comes to table tennis equipment - if not rightly applied. Whereas adding salt onto meat before cooking can enhance flavor and texture, putting it in coffee is just boneheaded. So then we can say having a fairly elastic carbon fibre as an outer TT blade layer can make one's game a lot faster and easier. But what does an inner carbon fibre layer actually do? Sure it improves power over all-wood blades but it also has a deadening effect and does nothing positive for ball feedback. In other words, it is hard to use - perhaps in general even more than having it as outer-layer. Is it worth the addition when an outer carbon fibre layer can increase power much more effectively, so that with an inner carbon blade, the speed disadvantage still exists? Probably not.

Now the irony: I've bought into the inner carbo fad. I've chosen the hard and fancy over the safe choices like Viscaria or FZD ALC (I'm assuming inner carbon user Ma Long is no longer the fad maker). My main racket which is what survived, among other competing setups, rounds of elimination, is the Tibhar Dynamic JC, considered inner carbon. It is one of the hardest (most difficult) setups I've ever tried because when paired with DHS Hurricane 3 forehand rubber, it changes my playing style - what I'm used to - quite dramatically. Especially on loops, the direct / guided style must now change to a frictional style, which is typically used by Chinese players today. And which can be a quite tricky way to play indeed, what with the precision needed to achieve spins of a low-kicking and hazy quality for more skilled opponents. If hard is a two way street, the best setup must then be less hard for me than it is for the recipients of the shots it produces. 

My Current Set-up (April)

Main Racket

Tibhar Dynamic JC (Darko Jorgic) (blade) + [ DHS NEO Hurricane 3 Provincial (Blue Sponge) + Yinhe Mercury II ]

178 g, 1/2 sidetaped

2nd Racket:

Victas Quartet AFC (blade) + [ Victas V>22 Double Extra + Tibhar Evolution MX-D ]

187 g, sidetaped

First impressions

Main:

Great control, spin and moderate power. An excellent all-round setup if you're willing to exert yourself for an offensive game. 

2nd:

There's really nothing to complain about when it comes to using the V>22 for the forehand; it's stable and powerful with flat strokes. On the backhand, the blade offers excellent feeling for a spin-oriented game but can take some time to get use to as it lacks the crushing power we've come to expect from other modern offensive setups. 

TT: Does the perfect setup exist?

What is the ideal racket setup for table tennis? Of course it's the one going for the highest price on the market right? The first question is a little like asking if there's an ideal home out there in world, just waiting for you to move into. I love watching home tours of various interesting houses online and some might even tempt me to say "this one" but there's always something about the interior design short of perfect, something superfluous, too artsy-fartsy or "not me" enough. (With the possible exception of this humble 58 sqm apartment in Seville; yet though I think it's perfect, I'm sure in time I'll find it too small). Perhaps it's like that for table tennis rackets too, there's no perfect, only as good as can be. Just as a good home / interior design would have to pass my 3 tests of Functionality (or architectural soundness), Taste and Character, I think the best setup has to pass these 3 ratio tests: Weight-to-Power, Power-to-Spin and Durability-to-Stiffness. You want it powerful but not too heavy, able to generate great spin but not be weak/soft, and you want durability but the materials, wood and rubber, to not be too stiff. If all 3 ratios are excellent, there would be no need to change setups any longer. But the joy of testing, feeling the solidity of a newly minted racket in the hand, the "sorry, new racket" apologies as you clumsily try to get use to it - those things would also be missed.

Everywhere, all the TT final bosses don't exceed 172

Tall is difficult in competitive table tennis. Everywhere you go where there aren't Europeans with a pro background, 172 cm seems to be the highest they go. The final boss at every club is always around that height. 

Why? How do great players of this seemingly optimum height use it advantageously? The optimum height to play table tennis might not be as exact as 172, as the successes of 175 Ma Long or 182 Wang Chuqin prove otherwise. The natural advantage over much shorter players is obvious - fewer steps needed - so we needn't say why not shorter. But why not taller?

Because at 172 one has the advantage of being in the most comfortable zone vertically with respect to the 76 cm tall table. As long as a 172 or even 170 does the basic drill and vary their attacks to prevent initiative-taking by taller opponents, very wide ball angles can be prevented. Then they can move comfortably from side to side without too much danger even if their shorter arms aren't optimized for defensive counters. Another one of their secrets is that they often naturally excel at keeping the ball very low - which they do - so the opponent has to lift. That creates opportunities to attack an opponent's high balls. The more strongly and accurately they can attack, the more likely they're the unbeatable one at the club. Lastly, it's the backhand. Every final boss appreciates the importance of a good and sufficiently dangerous backhand in achieving a low-ball game and even win crucial points outright.

Ping Pong Doubles: a provocation

 "Among all my recollections, among all the numberless sensations of my life, the memory of the lone murder I committed weighed heaviest on my mind."  — A great russian author

Imagine you had a long day at work. As you tuck into bed, a gentle breeze blows into your room. And then the noise. The relentless shrieks from the all-night table tennis community club building adjacent to your apartment, making it hard for you to sleep. You look out the window and it's the same ragtag gang playing ping pong at an hour close to midnight. You slam your window shut and curse these horribly inconsiderate players.

Table tennis began as a relatively silent gentlemen's parlour / spectator sport, save the applause of course. It's only when it started to popularize, when the amateur blowhards, hacks, hags and randos started getting together for doubles, when you get something more akin to the noisest booth at a fun fair. So imagine having to deal with complaints as a community leader because of people making too much noise playing four people ping pong.

I don't know about my female counterparts but I now have a working hypothesis for why some men like to play table tennis doubles despite its lameness. It's this: they were once traumatised by losing a singles game 11-0, perhaps in straight sets, in front of an audience to add to the humiliation. Doubles, where the blame for the rare occurence of 11-0 can at least be shared and diffused, then became a permanent refuge. A refuge from each they never returned, to real table tennis. (Just to be clear, I do enjoy mixed doubles and at its best, it's no less enjoyable than singles).

But if my hypothesis is valid, then I would have contributed to the popularization of the men's doubles format which is arguably the worst way to play ping pong, especially when there's no prize money to win. You can always see the look of utter boredom on the face of a real male table tennis player when compelled to play doubles in a non-competitive setting, with any number of bygone talents and mediocrities. The takeaway then for every skilled player at 10-0 then is this: don't do it. They - your vanquished opponent - might start to play doubles.

If all the wood disappeared from the world

I have met and known people who are so passionate about a sport - and here I'm thinking about badminton and soccer, the national sports of the my home country - that they could scarcely live without it. Both are such completely engrossing sports that one wouldn't be surprised that if all the things that make up badminton and soccer disappeared from the world in an instant of magic, people would still be kicking around makeshift balls or whacking bottle corks with hard objects across rooms.

But rarely do I meet, in person, individuals who have a real passion for the much more underrated sport of table tennis. Until recently. It was unmistakable she now knows just the beginning of a lifelong passion, and just as her girl friends would busy themselves with frivolous pursuits like marathon running / walking or meditation, she would be able to say: "I play table tennis" and then humbly add,  "quite well", meaning she can beat 95% of all the guys she knows. She is currently at Lvl 3 according to my system of gauging players. I cannot wait to see her reach Lvl 5 or 6. 

A good test of whether one has what it takes to reach a sense of real proficiency is the question: If all holdable woods and plastic balls disappeared from the world, would you be very sad?

Notes

The 7 levels of table tennis players are as follows:

1. Fully relaxed and easy  (-0/1)
Amateurs with no formal training.
2. Easy and unthreatening (-1/2)
Typically players with minimal training.
3. Annoying but not threatening (-3/4)
Typically players with some training and tricks up their sleeve.
4. Threatening but not dangerous (-4/5/6)
A skilled but rusty / not professionally-racketed player or a moderately trained female player.
5. Annoying and threatening (-6/7/8)
Talented players with recent training or special rackets e.g. pimpled.
6. Threatening and dangerous (-8/9/10)
Highly experienced players with customised rackets.
7. Dangerous and unpredictable (will lose)
Professionals.