June 6, 2012

Why coaches teach nearly everyone almost the same style

If you watch the top players, and especially up-and-coming juniors, you probably noticed something: they all seem to play pretty much the same. There are, of course, differences, often subtle, but in generally they mostly serve forehand pendulum serves (regular and reverse), they pretty much loop everything on the forehand (unless it's an easy smash, though some loop those as well), and they all loop on the backhand (though some will also hit). In generally, nearly every top player and top junior these days is a looper of some type. If you watch closely, you'll realize that many elite juniors aren't really hitting their backhand much anymore; they are looping them off the bounce. You'll even notice emerging trends, such as how they all seem to receive short balls whenever possible now with their backhands, using the newly popular "banana flip," which is basically an over-the-table backhand loop, often with sidespin. Why are they all playing so much alike?

Except at the highest levels, there are many styles that are successful. In fact, one of the strangest things about table tennis is that just about any style can succeed below the national level, say up to 2200-2400 level or so. There really aren't any disadvantages below that level for choppers, blockers, hitters, pips-out penholders, Seemiller grip players, long pips blockers, or just about any other semi-regular style. Given the chance, in fact, many players with these styles probably could nearly reach the top, even becoming, say, the best in the U.S. or top 100 in the world.

So why do so few coaches teach other styles?

Think of it from the point of view of the coach. He has a new player. Let's suppose that one style is slightly better than another at the higher levels. Why would the coach choose that particular player to develop a style he knows is slightly less successful than others?

Sure, some players may be more talented at one style than another, but these tendencies don't really show up early on. It's hard to tell if a new seven-year-old player might someday be better as a chopper than as a looper. And so he is trained early on to be a looper, the "default" style in the modern game. And when I say the default style, it's basically the style of nearly every player in the top one hundred in the world. The few exceptions I know on the men's side are chopper/loopers, who chop, but are highly aggressive loopers as well.

I don't know everyone in the top hundred, but I don't think any are pips-out penholders left, for example - a style that once dominated the sport. And yet I believe that if half of all new players were trained as pips-out penholders, probably a few would reach the top hundred.

But why would a coach put a new player at a disadvantage right from the start by developing them with a style that puts them at a disadvantage? And so, if there's a 1% advantage with one style over another, rather than have 1% more play that style, you get nearly 100% playing the 1% better style.

This is even true for serving. Players see that most world-class players use pendulum forehand serves (regular and reverse), and so they copy them. Coaches teach the most successful techniques, and so these are the serves they mostly teach. Backhand serves? Tomahawk serves? Windshield wiper serves? These serves all have potential, and many are used as "backup" serves, even by world-class players. But what coach wants to teach them as the primary serve, and later on risk have to explain to the junior why he taught them a less successful serve?

There are, of course, exceptions. Three top junior players from China recently moved to Maryland, and one of them is a 17-year-old chopper/looper with a rating now of 2567. Why did his coach choose to train him as a chopper? Perhaps I'll ask him. One of the three juniors is a 14-year-old penholder who loops from both wings, with a 2388 rating. In the U.S. and Europe, few coaches teach penhold, starting everyone off as a shakehander (there are more shakehanders at the top then penholders), but in China many players are trained as penholders - but with modern reverse penhold backhands so they can loop just like a shakehander, like Xu Xin and Wang Hao, #3 and #4 in the world. (The third junior is a 12-year-old rated 2306, a conventional two-winged looping shakehander - but he's a lefty.) 

Even among the seemingly identical loopers there are subtle differences. Some serve mostly backspin or no-spin; others serve more sidespin and topspin. Some like to mix up their serves; others keep them short and simple. Some loop nearly everything on the backhand; others both loop and hit. Some loop close to the table; others move back to loop. Some favor the forehand every chance; others are more two-winged. Some back up to counterloop, fish, or lob when the opponent attacks; others mostly stay at the table and either block or counter-loop off the bounce, though nearly all counterloop just about everything on the forehand side. Some mix in short receives against a short serve; others only push long or flip. But these are, to the average observer, subtle differences, and overbalanced by the similar serve motions and mostly all-out looping styles. 

As a coach I face these problems regularly. There are beginning junior players I'm tempted to train as, say, chopper/loopers, or to use pips on their backhand, or to be pure hitters. I've always thought that the Seemiller grip would be rather successful in the women's game, where there is more emphasis on speed and quickness (advantages of the grip) rather than backhand looping and counterlooping abilities (disadvantages with the grip), with the added advantages of the grip (great blocking, strong in middle, lots of wrist motion when looping, an alternate surface). But what junior girls should I choose to test this theory? Five years later they are going to ask me why, and I'm not sure I will have an answer. And so they are trained as loopers.

Poor Sportsmanship at the Easterns

In the interest of full disclosure, early this morning the person I wrote about in my Monday blog for his bad sportsmanship at the Easterns responded with four (4!) long, rambling, disjointed, and obnoxious comments, attacking Derek and me with numerous accusations, making excuses for his behavior and for why he lost, and basically pushing my patience to the limit. I'm not going to get into a point-by-point argument with all the things he wrote about and accusations made; suffice to say he thought people were laughing at him because he was losing to a "small boy" when of course they were laughing at him because of his on-court antics. I have a low tolerance for this type of thing, so I deleted the four notes and he is banned permanently from this site. (After nearly a year and a half, he is only the second person banned, other than advertising spammers.) I haven't named him, but I have received numerous emails and Facebook notes from people, most of whom were not at the Easterns but who recognized the behavior. So far 100% of them have correctly identified the person. My Tip of the Week this next Monday will be how to deal with poor sportsmanship and cheaters.

The Daily Visits Spin New York

"Pingpong has become the latest social sport, so The Daily's Olivia Zaleski went to Spin New York to perfect her game." Here's the video (4:18) with ping-pong host (and Spin co-owner) Frank Raharinosy.

It's Derek versus Goliath!

Here's a table tennis cartoon I liked. The caption is in Spanish, "A veces la fuerza no es la major arma," which my online translator translates as, "Sometimes the force is not a major weapon."

Top Ten Angry Moments in Table Tennis

And here they are! (4:41)

***

Send us your own coaching news!

Larry,

When I see players who have unusual styles that often include poor mechanics and most often gaping holes in their game (we all know who they are) but yet have what can only be described as unwarranted success, I have to ask myself; Is this player being successful despite his unusual style and how much more success could that individual have had if he/she had learned proper fundamentals when they first started playing?

You are 100% correct to teach the same fundamentals and basic offensive style to all juniors. If differentiation occurs, and it will, it should occur after a solid base has been achieved. Recently here in Minnesota, I have seen the progression of three strong junior players over the last few years, now each playing between 2000-2150. Initially, I could hardly tell their games apart, but when their rating got to 1950 or so, suddenly there emerged three distinctly different playing styles; a close to the table attacker, a mid-range looper and a defensive topspin player. The styles match not only their personalities, but there physical abilities as well; the defensive topspin player is a tall lanky and agile 16 year old, the mid-range looper is strong and terrifically fit 15 year old, while the close to the table attacker is slight and short but extremely quick 12 year old.

I am curious if there is forced differentiation used by the Chinese coaches, and if so, what criteria are they using to make their decisions on the fate of an 8 year old player...

In reply to by deriderj

We have the same experience in Maryland, that as kids get older they begin to develop individual styles. We pretty much teach them all the same at the start, though there are some exceptions. I have one kid who developed an aversion to looping, and so never learned looping the first year, and even now refuses to loop except against backspin, so even though he's only 11 and played 1.5 years he's already pretty much a close to table pure hitter.  (I didn't see your comment until this morning - I'm supposed to get an automatic email whenever someone comments, but strangely the email about your comment from ten days ago came this morning, ten days late.)