The Minutes for the USA Table Tennis Jan. 10, 2011 Teleconference
Here they are. As usual, they got a lot done. As usual, I don't see anything that'll lead to the large membership increase so needed by our sport. At the USATT Strategic Meeting 17 months ago, our 8000 membership was deemed a "round-off error," and there was a consensus that drastically increasing it was our top priority. That won't happen without a nationwide system of leagues and the systematic development of junior programs (i.e. recruit and train coaches to set up and run them). Or we can sit around and wish for it to happen really hard.
I did notice that at a recent meeting they finally did what I pushed so strongly for at that Strategic Meeting: set up a League Task Force, as opposed to the "Grow Membership Through Added Value" (I'm not making that up) Task Force which implemented nothing and is no longer active. The very people who pushed for the "GMTAV" Task Force instead of a League Task Force back then now seem to make up the members of the League Task Force, so I'm a bit . . . peeved.
=>Message to USATT: Naming new task forces isn't going to solve our problems if nothing useful is implemented. As I said over and Over and OVER at the Strategic Meeting, you need to 1) set goals, 2) work out a plan to reach those goals, and 3) implement the plan. We have yet to reach 1). So, League Task Force . . . what are your goals, what is your plan to reach those goals, and will USATT implement that plan?
Obligatory Groundhog Day joke: Did a USATT official see his shadow, and so we're stuck with six more decades of futility? Just kidding, USATT!!! :) Actually, six decades ago was 1951. At that time, Marty Reisman and Dick Miles were two of the very best table tennis players in the world. One year later sponge would come out, and no U.S. player has really challenged the world's best since.
New York Times
Got a call last night from a reporter from the New York Times. He's putting together a story about Chinese-American table tennis players and their experiences in America. We talked for over an hour. Right now two types of Chinese players dominate in the U.S.: former Chinese National or Province Team Members who are well into their 40s or 50s (such as Cheng Yinghua, Fan Yiyong, David Zhuang, Gao Jun, Amy Feng, Lily Yip), and Chinese-Americans who developed in the U.S., with parents who immigrated from China (Han Xiao, Adam Hugh, Tim Wang, Peter Li, Justin & Alex Yao, Ariel Hsing, Lily Zhang, many more). We also discussed the Great Chinese Exodus, i.e. the proliferation of Chinese coaches (i.e. former top players) to all parts of the world, spreading table tennis technique to the masses, or at least to those willing to pay for lessons. There are probably 50 full-time professional table tennis coaches in the U.S., and probably three-fourths are Chinese. I put the reporter in contact with about a dozen top Chinese-American coaches and players. I'll post a note here when it comes out.
On Sunday, Oct. 14, 2007, these four all-time greats gathered at Dick Miles' house in New York City. The slideshow is now out! Sadly, Miles died on Oct. 12, 2010, and Pagliaro on July 14, 2009. Here is Miles New York Times obit, and Pagliaro's. Here's the USATT homage to Miles (by Tim Boggan and Marv Leff).
Is this, or is this not, the single greatest reverse tomahawk/reverse backhand serve ever done in the history of the world?
Here it is - tell me if you agree. That's a heck of a serve; I'm going to develop one like it. Next time I play a lefty, he better beware! Here's the tricky part - as hinted at in the title, is this a reverse tomahawk serve or a reverse backhand serve? They really are the same thing, except the tomahawk serve (both normal and reverse) is done from the forehand side of the body (with contact on different sides of the racket), and the backhand (normal and reverse) from the backhand side (with contact on the same side of the racket for both). Most players don't learn the reverse versions, which is too bad. Unless, of course, you have to play someone who doesn't have them, in which case it's very good . . . for you.
Send us your own coaching news!