Hardbat "European Championship"?

[Francis]

In my association, we're thinking about the organisation of a kind of hardbat "European Championship" which could gather several teams coming from countries where we know hardbat players. I have contacts in Belgium, Italy, Switzerland, Germany, the Isle of Man... and England ;) . Maybe some of you have contacts in the rest of the UK and Ireland, and why not in other european countries.
This first event could be held in Belgium, which is more central according to the countries where I have contacts. It could last a whole week-end, maybe from friday evening.
About the system, there are several solutions I thought about (see poll), with 2 or 3 players teams, and why not a single title if we have time enough.
What do you think of that? Do you think it would be possible to organize it in 2010?

[Jay Turberville]

I'm not European, so I won't participate in the poll. But that sounds like a great idea and potentially a great event. I hope that you can get lots of participants and make it work.

[Francis]

Thanks for your post Jay, but I think that, even if you're not European, you can participate in the poll. It's also interesting to have the advice of "non-European players". ;)

[Tinykin]

Also use the 38mm ball and play each game to 15 with 3 serves.:rocker:

[Werewolf]

21 with 5 serves surely

[Francis]

Also use the 38mm ball and play each game to 15 with 3 serves.:rocker:
38 mm balls : OK if we can find some, but why "each game to 15 with 3 serves"? :confused03: For me, it would be better to play in 21 points with 5 serves.

[Tinykin]

Because to players and spectators, 21 game can be laborious. Even in local league, I noticed that the good players only got going when the scores were about 11 or so.
11 is a bit too short and 21 too long. Best of 3 to 15 in the early rounds is a nice compromise. It's easier for the organisers too as it's shorter than the best of 5 to 11. My opinion only of course.
Oh, and one other thing, No Time outs.

[Francis]

OK, I understand now. Anyway, I don't think it would be easy to impose that to hardbat players, who are generally used to 21 points games.
BTW, I found another formula, used in the "Deutsche Tischtennis Liga" (German 1st League) with teams of 3 players :

1 against 2
2 against 1
3 against 3
1 against 1
One double

Total max. : 5 matches
No 1 of each team plays two singles, No 2 and 3 play one.

[Jay Turberville]

38 mm balls : OK if we can find some, but why "each game to 15 with 3 serves"? :confused03: For me, it would be better to play in 21 points with 5 serves.

Check with Scott Gordon for the 38mm balls. I understand he has a gazillion 38mm 3* balls that he scarfed up when the opportunity presented. I think he purchased them for exactly your kind of event. I think he's traveling right now, but check with him in a week.

And yes, 21 point games.

[FallenAngel]

Having played in hardbat tournament recently I would vote the current scoring system best of 5 up to 11.

Up to 21 when there was gulf in standard between the players just dragged on.

Up to 11 makes EVERY point important and adds excitement.

Out of interest what rules do have on type of bats and pimples?

Fallen Angel

[Francis]

Out of interest what rules do have on type of bats and pimples?
In France, Germany and Belgium, for the moment players use every hard rubber they want, there's no authorised rubber list, like in the USA. Some tournaments are played like the "Elite" Competitions in Harlow (same model of recreationnal bat for everyone), but the playing level is generally not very high. The only european hardbat event I know, that's played with the US rules, is in Cervia (Italy).

[Jay Turberville]

Because to players and spectators, 21 game can be laborious. Even in local league, I noticed that the good players only got going when the scores were about 11 or so.
11 is a bit too short and 21 too long. Best of 3 to 15 in the early rounds is a nice compromise. It's easier for the organisers too as it's shorter than the best of 5 to 11. My opinion only of course.
Oh, and one other thing, No Time outs.

My wife, who is not a table tennis fan, made the observation to me at the recent USATT Nationals that the hardbat matches - all played to 21 points - were the most interesting to watch.

A typical 21 point modern hardbat match lasts about ten minutes. That seems to be about the typical interval between TV commercial breaks. When they last longer, it is usually because the match is unusually compelling with long rallies and a close score.

[Crispione]

In my association, we're thinking about the organisation of a kind of hardbat "European Championship" which could gather several teams coming from countries where we know hardbat players. I have contacts in Belgium, Italy, Switzerland, Germany, the Isle of Man... and England ;) . Maybe some of you have contacts in the rest of the UK and Ireland, and why not in other european countries.
This first event could be held in Belgium, which is more central according to the countries where I have contacts. It could last a whole week-end, maybe from friday evening.
About the system, there are several solutions I thought about (see poll), with 2 or 3 players teams, and why not a single title if we have time enough.
What do you think of that? Do you think it would be possible to organize it in 2010?

Francis, as you know from our dinner conversation when you where in Harlow, we at HEATT would be all in favour of something like this.

[Crispione]

In France, Germany and Belgium, for the moment players use every hard rubber they want, there's no authorised rubber list, like in the USA. Some tournaments are played like the "Elite" Competitions in Harlow (same model of recreationnal bat for everyone), but the playing level is generally not very high. The only european hardbat event I know, that's played with the US rules, is in Cervia (Italy).


We're back to the vexing question of equipment!

My personal opinion is that when using modern blades & rubbers then it is not being true to the principles of hardbat.

I would liketo see that only pure wooden blades + cloth/linen-backed rubbers being allowed.

This still leaves a lot of choice, with plenty of variation in blades due to the number of plys & the hardness/softness of the wood. There are still several rubbers being made with cloth/linen backing to add even more choice & variation, without resorting to the modern "mutant hardbat" equipment!

[Crispione]

:soapbox:
The make up of teams is also one of my pet soap-box subjects and here are my thoughts:

2 man teams - 4 singles + 1 doubles, 3 wins to secure the match. I have never understood why anyone considers this to be a genuine team format. If you have one particularly strong player then they can win the match on their own. Their 2 singles & doubles represents 100% of the wins needed. THIS IS A SINGLES COMPETITION DISGUISED AS A TEAM EVENT! ggrrrr!!!!!!

3 man teams - 6 singles + 1 doubles, 4 wins to secure the match. The same applies here as with the 2 man team, but to a slightly lesser extent. One player can win 2 singles & 1 doubles which represents 75% of the wins needed. Still not satisfactory enough to be considered a genuine team event.

3 man teams - 5 singles (#1 & 2 play 2 singles each, #3 plays 1 singles), 3 wins to secure the match. A little bit more like a genuine team event (but only a little!) with one player still able to contribute 67% of the wins needed.
But a much bigger objection here is the unfairness to the player playing at #3, who travels just as far & pays exactly the same as the others but only gets half the games. I know from personal experience how frustrating and annoying this is.

Basically, the larger the team (but still restricted to 2 singles each) the better team event it is - the best I've experienced is a 6 man team playing 12 singles which generates a great atmosphere and lots of excitement if it's a close match. But obviously there is a limit to the team size due to the constraints of time & the size of the venue.

My preference would be for 4 man teams playing 2 singles each totalling 8 games. The match finishes as soon as one team gains 5 wins. If the match ends in a 4-4 draw, then a sudden-death doubles is played to decide the match. One player can only contibue 50% of the necessary singles wins although it could rise to 60% with the doubles.
Having played in this format, there are three definate pluses.
The first is that because they are larger teams the atmosphere generated is far better and generally the banter & camaraderie between the teams is great making it much more FUN.
The second is the excitement & tension generated in the game at 4-3 when the match could finish either 5-3 or 4-4 & the atmosphere with both teams cheering on the players is terrific.
The third plus is that when it reaches 4-4, there is even greater excitement & tension than before with the sudden-death doubles - and with both teams + supporters cheering their players on even louder than before, it is something like a penalty shoot-out atmosphere. Wonderful, wonderful drama!!

Ok, now I'll stand back & try to dodge the bulletts!!!!

[Jay Turberville]

We're back to the vexing question of equipment!

My personal opinion is that when using modern blades & rubbers then it is not being true to the principles of hardbat.

I would liketo see that only pure wooden blades + cloth/linen-backed rubbers being allowed.

This still leaves a lot of choice, with plenty of variation in blades due to the number of plys & the hardness/softness of the wood. There are still several rubbers being made with cloth/linen backing to add even more choice & variation, without resorting to the modern "mutant hardbat" equipment!

This would make some real classic blades with real Leyland rubber or clothless ATP rubber illegal, while a modern blade with Butterfly Orthodox, Yasaka A-1, or Andro Classic would be quite legal. Which is the "mutant hardbat."

I used Butterfly Orthodox to fairly closely simulate the fast and spinny rubber on the Hardbat Classic blade when playing in USATT tournaments in preparation for the Hardbat Classic. If you want lots of spin and a more spongelike feel, Butterfly Orthodox is a good choice.

When I put Andro Classic (fiber backed) on my Valor American Chopper, I got lots of errors from some high level players. This rubber is tacky (and fairly transparent) except on the tops of the pips because the texturing tops eliminate the tackiness. It is very soft and has somewhat higher aspect ratio pips as compared to other short pips rubbers. The result is that it has a mile "long pips-like" reversing effect. But it can also spin the heck out of the ball when strongly stroked. My opponents had a much harder time figuring out spin with Andro Classic than when I play them with Dr. Evil.

I consider ATP rubbers (with or without cloth) as well as Dr. Evil and Gambler PeaceKeeper to have playing characteristics (effects on the ball, but not necessarily "feel") pretty similar to the Leyland rubber that I have. Butterfly Orthodox and Andro Classic are more noticably different in their effects on the ball - though they do have a softer and more Leyland-like "feel."

And what about blades? Does my handmade 7-ply, balsa core and quite fast all-wood Tim Wright blade with a very Hock-like shape add mutant qualities, or is my 5-ply, flexible but slow LKT Instinct freshly made from China with a modern flared handle and smaller size more of a mutating influence?

I understand that many people want modern hardbat play to result in a style of play similar to what we saw in the 40's and 50's. But restricting the rubber to only those with fiber backing won't do that. IMO, the last 60 years of table tennis play has introduced new styles, strokes and attitudes to the game and the presence or absenced of cloth on the backs of our rubbers won't affect how the game is played one bit.

BTW, tossing in the pejorative "mutant hardbat" just muddies the waters of the discussion IMO.

It doesn't take much research to find that many sizes and shape or blades were used and that the rubbers available varied significantly in pips size and spacing and in softness/hardness. And who knew how old or dirty your rubber was? But nobody really cared. That kind of variation was easily dealt with by player talent.

I think it is obvious that the game would have evolved even sponge and sandwich rubber were outlawed from the beginning. There would have been new variations on strokes and even new strokes as well as new tactical approaches to the game. Change was inevitable.

I think that what we see today when modern players like myself pick up a hardbat and play with it is a glimpse of that direction. And as players like myself continue to work at adding the classic stokes to our games and continue to refine and adapt the modern sandwich strokes to hardbat play, we'll be coming closer to the kind of play that would have evolved and not as much like the kind of game that was being played in the Golden Era.

[Jay Turberville]

I posted this recently in the About.com table tennis forums. It is from Jack Carrington's 1950 book, "Modern Table Tennis." It, and the accompanying illustration give a glimpse into at least one person's perspective on spin and forehand shots back around 1950 and how the game was evolving at that time and before the advent of sponge.

His [Garrett Nash] philosophy was new too. He cared nothing for building up the rally or for the state of the score. He was concerned solely with the problem of hitting the ball so hard that his opponent must lose his balance or position early in each rally. Nash might then deign to play a drop-shot, but preferred to settle the matter with another sharp drive.

This gambling philosophy is now apparent in the recent American teams. They play the ball, not their opponent, and rarely change tactics when the outlook (to normal observers) is black.

It is for this reason that I rank Richard Miles, five times U.S.A champion, as the most skillful, but not the greatest, player of table tennis ever seen. He may yet develop the qualities of greatness - the domination of opposition and of circumstance - but so far he has not had enough varied experience to do so.

In his three World Championship attempts to date he lost twice to Johnny Leach (present Champion) and once to Vana, and seemed to be too easily discouraged.

Nevertheless, if Miles has not been especially wise, neither has he been especially lucky, and he remains a potential champion of the next few years.

He is an all-round player, producing very sever strokes with little bodily effort. The most obvious feature of his play is the tremendously fast-kicking forehand drive, and I cannot do better than reproduce here the analysis which I prepared for Table Tennis, the official English magazine.

Timing in Attack - The American Way
(Reproduced from Table Tennis)

Recently I referred to 'Miles and the Americans, and Barna in good form' as early hitters.

Can it be that they have something in common, the suave and debonair ex-Hungarian and the nervous, jack-in-the-box Americans?

Yes it is there, the mark of the ball-genius, the ability to take the ball aggressively or defensively just a little earlier in the bounce than ordinary players.

Victore Barna shook the table tennis world of 1929 by showing hte new approach to the game; the Yankee Miles and Reismann shook our 'world' of 1948 by showing us another new approach ... the all-out method of forehand hitting which I will now discuss.

Now the special interest and importance of the American Style, to my mind, is that almost anybody can follow their technique. It is rather different from what we have tome to regard as correct hitting in England recently. We have been inclined to preach CONSISTENCY, with Righard Bergmann as the great example, followed by Johnny leach, but our trans-Atlantic rivals preach VENOM!

It may make my point clearer if I quote the remarks of Garrett Nash, the shock-attacker whom the Americans call "The Dizzy Dean of table tennis."

"It seems to me, " said Garrett, "that when you Englishmen see a big ball, you hit it NOT TO MISS, but when we see a big ball, we hit it NOT TO COME BACK."

There, in those few single-syllable words, is a wealth of philosophy.

Almost it sums up the difference in temperament between the two nations. Is not the Englishman mostly the compromiser, the middle-course man; is not the American still mostly un-subtle, brave, and a chancer?

Now those who adopt the all-out system will not all make good. The road is littered with unsuccessful "bashers" steadily defeated by our consistent Englishmen. But the top few of the "bashing school," those with a champion's blood in them, will make good and come through with a weapon capable of out-gunning the consistent though worth Englishman.

Already they have come through in America; their names are Miles and Reismann, whom we have seen, and we are told that there are others hot on their track.

"O.K.,"I can hear you say. "That's enough philosophy. I'd like to join this ALL-OUT SCHOOL. What do I have to do to hit that ball so that my opponent retires hurt?"

For the answer to that one, we will go to the American captain, the quiet-spoken buddy of the garrulous Garrett - Bill Price.

Bill himself is the most English-looking American, both on and off the table (Please note, Bill, that's a compliment, really!) A model of style and orthodoxy, a clever student of table tennis, and he says:
"We've lots more big hitters like these two back home, and the secret is ... RACKET-HEAD SPEED"

And of course he's right. what he means is that you must train your muscles, concentrate every effort, on having hour bat-head moving at the fastest possible speed upwards on the surface of the ball at the moment of striking

Take a look at many strong English hitters: do you not see the arm maintaining its speed, almost accelerating, AFTER they have struck the ball? The American light-weight hitters have economized that effort, by

(a) ensuring that their swing is accelerated to FINNISH on the ball, not a half-a-second later! and (b) taking the ball on the rise so that it does some of the work for them.

And for those who lightly dismiss the American style as "mad flat hitting," here is the trajectory of their hits, showing a much safer state of affairs than with other styles.

Illustrations from the book:

http://www.jayandwanda.com/tt/Carrington_forehands.jpg

[HarryBelafonte]

Crickey,I thought modern rubbers and blades were complicated.
also big discussion on scoring system and ball size....
To me ,when i came into the game ,hardbat players were " the old boys with the barna bats" tremendous skills.jim Jackson pat tindale,excellent.
hard bat, should be 21 up best of 3 38 mm ball with a barna bat...

[Jay Turberville]

Crickey,I thought modern rubbers and blades were complicated.
also big discussion on scoring system and ball size....
To me ,when i came into the game ,hardbat players were " the old boys with the barna bats" tremendous skills.jim Jackson pat tindale,excellent.
hard bat, should be 21 up best of 3 38 mm ball with a barna bat...

Sure. But where are ya gonna get the Barna bat? They stopped making that rubber along with Schlazenger and Leyland years ago. If those rubbers were still available, most of this discussion would go away.

Berndt Mann did some research using old advertisements as resources a few years back, and what he turned up was that there used to be all sorts of blades with different ply counts and with different rubber softness and with different pips sizes that were available in the "Golden Era." The main difference back then was that people didn't really discuss gear that much. People picked a bat based mostly on what felt right to them, not on some wonderful innate performance benefit. And that's what I do today. I'm not looking for anything that is "supercharged" or "tricky."

Today, when I'm actually hanging around and playing hardbat with other hardbat players we don't talk much about gear either. And to the extent we do it is usually mostly a matter of general curiosity. We just aren't very concerned whether the other guy's gear is giving him a performance advantage or not. The limited rubber selection available pretty much takes care of that. We mostly talk about technique and strategy and perhaps about how a certain blade feels.

Most of the gear talk that occurs online centers around the fundamental question, debate and disagreement of whether or not the stuff we are playing with is really appropriately classic or not. If we could just buy a classic Barna bat or a Hock with Leyland the discussion would be mostly moot.

As for the 40mm vs. 38mm ball. Blame that on the ITTF. :)