Greg is now running the About.com
Table Tennis site, and as such a number of these articles
will be transferred over to About.com. Please feel free to
join me at About!
After over 20 years at the top, is Waldner feeling the
strain?
Photo by: Charlie Lee, courtesy www.ittf.com
Do you agree? Disagree? Have a comment you'd like to add to this
page? Email me and I'll add your
two cent's worth below.
Hi, I really liked your article on how different styles are
dying out because of faster and spinnier technology. I too miss
watching a variety of styles especially defenders(I'm a penhold
inverted hitter). It seems unfair that short and long pips have
many restrictions when those styles are at a disadvantage. I think
the original idea is that non-TT players would be more interested
in the sport if they saw longer rallies and more looping, making
the sport more physical than technique/strategy driven. I'm not
all together sure how looping became the ideal and all other strokes
became inferior. I'm not sure if non-TT players saw looping rallies
if this would really get them interested in the sport, I do want
the sport to become more popular. For americans I think the ping
pong ball and the table dimensions are too small for them to bother
with, compared to football, basketball, baseball. As a player, I
know for me having less styles makes the sport less interesting
because it's the learning that keeps TT interesting for me. I guess
my vote is not to try to cater to non-TT players as I don't think
that they can be convinced to like TT more and to keep it interesting
for people who are already playing. I did like the idea of limiting
the speed and spinniness, just as there are limitations on pips
to bring back variety and make a level playing field. How does one
determine what equipment is okay and others not? What about not
having restrictions on equipment?
17th March 2005
Jip Man Voung wrote:
I wonder what you think about an article I found on the ITTF site
My own opinion is that the ITTF shouldn't stop technology, if rubbers
are getting too fast, or long pips getting too irritating, WHO CARES?
This way they are ruining the whole sport, isn't it cool to see
someone with ButterFly Long Feint chop a ball that comes back to
you zig zagging. I think people like to see nice or cool ball returns,
not just hard looping a ball, but also a zig-zag chop.
They also say that if they don't do anything about development
of better rubbers, the sport will be too technical, but that's the
way it goes, things won't stop growing, they will evolve further.
Take computers for instance, they also get better all the time,
why not let that happen to tabletennis?
I think the main reason because the do all this is money, they
introduced so much things to slow down the gameplay, like 40mm balls,
11 point games to keep the excitement, so the public won't get bored
so fast. But isn't it the sport itself that matters, it's wrong
to change a sport just for the public and I don't think that the
public's going to care if rallies won't take long, sure, in lower
class tabletennissing this will be the case, but on top classes
I bet people sure can handle fast balls and you will see much nicer,
faster and longer rallies. I for myself love the 38mm's and 21 point
games, because this way it's much better to tell if someone's really
better than you are. Because handling smaller balls requires more
skill of the player because the balls go faster and 21 points make
sure noone gets lucky and wins 5 points by luck and is already half
way up to winning the game (hope you understand this).
Also, new and better material forces the player to get faster,
react faster and hit faster himself, that way, the player has to
train in order to stay in the competition. And as a final note.
If I want to win, I'd rather win in a rally of 2 balls than instead
of 10.
I'm sure you have more experience in tabletennis than I have so
I am wondering what you think of the ITTF's policy on restraining.
Best regards,
Jip Man Vuong
18th March 2005
Greg's reply to Jip Man Voung:
I must admit that I tend to agree with the ITTF's policy - but
there are two main problems which they have admitted. Firstly, it's
very hard to test the rubbers and blades that you have restricted,
and secondly, it's difficult to decide what type of table tennis
matches are the best, in order to choose your restrictions.
I agree that all sports naturally evolve - but I guess that
I personally don't like the way I see the sport heading it terms
of spin and speed. There will come a point where the technology
becomes more important than the player - and I think we are rapidly
approaching that point where the sport will be table tennis in name
only.
My next point would be that if there are to be limits on the
technology in any sport (such as the red/black rule or the 4mm sponge
rule etc), then these rules should be there to provide a desired
and agreed upon result, and if they don't work, then they should
be scrapped.
Finally, I think the main problem is this - most of us know
good table tennis when we see it - but making the corect rules and
restrictions to give us more good table tennis and less bad table
tennis is not an easy job.
Greg
12th August 2005
Michael Kovacs wrote:
I like your basic idea, that is to make TT more interesting. However,
restricting progress never helped anything, nor any sport. Seemingly,
tennis handles this subject better. ITTF pitianer rules on pimples
and the like degrade the sport and the issuing organisation makes
itself a loughing stock.
If any restriction could be applied I would vote against speed glueing.
Not because it is faster or spinnier, but because it creates a wide
gap between the spectators, that is the TT playing public, and the
performers. Ask the guestion, who is looking TT as a spectackle.
The majority are those who play or played the game. Anything that
alianates them is a shot in the foot.
The idea to make TT a spectackle for coach potatoes and cash in
100's of millions of dollars for TV rights is utopistic. It would
be nice but it will never happen. Better would be if the international
TT federation would make efforts not to reduce, but enlarge the
grass root basis. What was the result of their new rules? I did
not see anything positive! Would a ping pong ball as big as a luftballon
help in reducing speed and making easier fun for those who never
played the game? If the size of the non-playing TV audiance is the
measure, ITTF would be better off to forget to regulate pimple length,
wood percentage, blade thickness, etc. and take care about the real
show business. But it has nothing common to TT which is a real sport
in its true classical (greek) meaning.
Monday 31st October
Milan Nigam wrote:
Hi Greg,
First of all, thanks for the awesome site. After reading this
article I shamefully admitted to being one of the power loopers
you were talking about. However, I do have great appreciation for
other styles and I admit that it gets boring playing always against
other power loopers. I find it refreshing to play against the occasional
chopper or blocker, etc. and it really keeps me on my toes. As for
banning long pimples rubber i think that it is pure ludacris for
the reasons mentioned above. I feel that variety is what makes table
tennis interesting, and indeed many players i knjow quit simply
because they got bored of playing the same type of people all the
time.
Thanks for taking the time to read this,
Milan Nigam
Wednesday 14th March 2007
Stephen Easterling wrote:
Greg,
First off, great website and great articles! Keep up the good work!
I wanted to comment on an article you wrote regarding "Table
Tennis Styles - Where Are They Now?"...
I would like to make three comments regarding the evolution of
table tennis and playing styles. First, I think one thing that has
changed the is the same thing that has changed other sports, and
that's athleticism. More and more emphasis is placed on athleticism
with each successive generation. I think this is responsible for
the growing number of "power loopers" in the game as opposed
to technical or defensive players. The idea of a power game makes
more sense to someone of tremendous athletic ability rather than
teaching him/her to win with chops or blocks.
Another comment is related to the first in that much of the sport
is now (as opposed to more than a decade ago) heavily influenced
by the world of information in which we live, specifically as it
pertains to marketing and marketing hype from the manufacturers.
Not that the equipment description is false advertising, but that
it always creates a lust for something faster and with more spin,
and the technology is there, and the manufacturers feed from that.
The limits are always being pushed higher and higher with faster,
lighter, spinnier equipment. (The same can be said for golf clubs,
golf balls, softball bats, etc.) If the ball size is increased again,
don't think for a second that the blades will have a speed rating
of 13 (on a 1 to 10 scale!) and the harder sponges will get more
popular.
Lastly, the sport is called "table tennis," or table
"tennis." Since I first played tennis prior to table tennis
(and many tennis players I knew in college were tenacious TT players,
as well), my TT game is similar to how I play tennis with a good
mix of F/B drop shots, soft well-placed touch shots around the net,
and as many F/B drives and loops that I can create opportunities
for during a rally. I love playing at mid-distance, but don't get
as many opportunities as I'd like. For those "power loopers"
and aggressive "mid-distance" players out there just doing
what they do best, I think their style is actually more true to
the name of table tennis compared to those styles that are predominantly
blockers, choppers, etc. An all-around attack stategy with emphasis
on power looping is more true to the table "tennis" name
and makes more sense to progress in this direction.
Regarding ITTF's enlarging the ball, banning speed glue VOCs, and
restricting blade composition, the only one I have a problem with
is the ball diameter. It should remain at 40mm indefinitely so as
not to cause older equipment to become antiquated. The VOC ban makes
sense from a health perspective, and if the blade composition isn't
regulated it will get out of control and the manufacturer's will
get crazy (most have already!). And for the "senior" players
at my local club, let's leave the pip-out players alone for a change.
Respectfully,
Stephen
USA
Wednesday, 4th July 2007
Der_Echte wrote:
Greg, you will tell from my writing style that I am Der_Echte,
no secrets there. I bet you get a gazillion e-mails. Just wanted
to comment and you do what you see fit with this one. For the record,
I am an offensive inverted player, but I sympathize with how a lot
of defenders feel about changes in rules and equipment specs. Below
are my warped comments on the ITTF
The main argument the ITTF pushes is changing rules to make
games more enjoyable to watch, therefore getting more people to
appreciate table tennis and thus increasing the sport. I cannot
argue against the goal of such an endstate. I also have no objection
to changing equipment standards and rules to reflect changes in
time and technology. My contention is the manner in which ITTF wishes
to achieve this. I think that on a strategic level, they have it
all wrong. The rule changes, especially the equipment changes (banning
certain Long Pip Rubbers) create the opposite effect - they will
cause numerous players who will use only this equipment to stop
playing table tennis. This also contributes to the downfall of established
playing styles - ITTF is making several styles extinct with their
rulings, not a good thing in my opinion. In many areas of the world,
table tennis is not very popular and many people must go a long
distance to find other (serious) players. Losing these players seriously
affects the ability of others to find players.
I will present a controversial, yet simple strategy to achieve
the goal of increasing the sport. Why not funnel all that effort,
time and money into something much more productive, like getting
lots of people actually playing and loving the sport. If more people
participate at even the lowest levels, they will certainly appreciate
high quality table tennis and would be more likely and effective
in recruiting more players. This makes it more likely for table
tennis to be appreciated and viewed. Increasing the number of players
is the way to go. There must be a better infastructure in place
across the world. If there were better and more places to play real
table tennis, new players could get right to work. Convincing institutions
on the value of table tennis and getting them to start programs
is a must. When more schools have teams, parents get more interest.
Parental interest is an undervalued and underutilized asset. There
must be a lot of table tennis players willing to coach for little
pay to start it out and companies would benefit themselves by donating
more equipment, which would get more players interested in buying
more table tennis equipment when they dedicate themselves to the
game. We all know how much an equipment junkie buys, yes? I say
increase the base of players (and the infastructure as well) and
when there are enough serious players, the sport will be more appreciated
and the the players themselves will contribute to the growth and
viewability of the sport.