With one or two rare exceptions European women are rather far below the level of the Asian female players. The last European country to win a women’s team event in the Worlds was Russia in 1969 with Z. Rudnova and S. Grinberg, who also won the women’s doubles. The last European woman in a singles final was Alicia Grofova from Czechoslovakia in 1973. Since this date there have been no Europeans in any singles finals or any team finals.
Over the last 20 years women’s table tennis has developed with many various styles and techniques, much more than the men’s game. We have in fact styles that exist in the women’s game which are not seen in men’s play or only rarely, we have styles that can be successful at top level with the women which would in no way have the same success in the men’s elite, (Ni Xialan). There are many more defence and pimple players even at the highest levels.
The Asian players generally have an active game and will open at the earliest opportunity. The hard attack ball is important in their table tennis philosophy. Over the years speed has been the dominant factor in their play and even now when direct attack with a strong spin ball is their usual method of opening, if they have to choose between speed and spin it will almost always be the former. They open as early as possible, directly after the serve for example and if they are compelled to play an intermediate stroke, they try to control the play so as to play positively on the next ball. Serve and the third ball hit are fundamental in their armoury and they spend much training time on this. They tend to take the ball at an earlier timing point than the European players.
The European game tends to consist of a variety of styles from defenders to fast attackers, players who prefer to open with spin and primarily on the forehand and fast tempo two wing attack players. The majority tend to fall nowadays into the latter category and it’s quite important in Europe to have enough strength on the backhand wing to keep pressure on the opponent. In the 60’s and 70’s the Asian fast attack overwhelmed the European spin game but in the 1980’s the men reversed this, culminating in team wins for Sweden 1989 — 93 and all-European men’s singles finals in the same years. If the men were successful with the two wing topspin type of game, why weren’t the European women?
To find the answer to this question perhaps we must look at the variety of different styles used in the women’s game and the various uses of techniques to create different specialties. The Asian coaches but especially the Chinese are always on the lookout for unusual even extraordinary techniques and styles of play. Trainers, coaches and administrators are always open in the mind to new ideas and possibilities. Players are also encouraged from an early age to be flexible in the mind and totally aggressive in play — ‘do it to the opponent before she does it to you’ is the usual maxim, in other words get in and attack first. The Asians are always aware that European players have great difficulty in getting to grips with their stop/start fast tempo game, especially as they take the ball at such an early timing point. If it’s absolutely impossible to open directly, they will control the play with an intermediate stroke to create the opening and then attack hard. The Asians also consider footwork training of high importance so they have a better opportunity to reach the ball with time to play a strong shot. They train much more intensively too on serve and the third ball and on receive and fourth ball — this and match play form a major part of every training session.
However rarely if ever are the Chinese afraid of the European serves and follow up ball. They consider that the Europeans have too few serves, are predictable in the way they use them and therefore usually limited with what they can do with the first attack ball. Often at the highest level against the Asians, European players aren’t allowed the opportunity to get their strengths in and are not able to use their strong spin early enough in the rally. With their serve and third ball and receive and fourth, the Asians deny them the time. Not enough European women are able to impose their game on the Asians.
Even if you watch top level matches between the best European women it’s often a matter of flowing, ‘nice-to-look-at’ rallies, the game looks like it’s being played at a high level. Examine the strokes in a little more detail however and you see it’s all so one pace and predictable, pre-planned and leisurely. By the way they play it looks as if many Europeans train far too much control play, loop to loop or loop to block, they don’t train to win the point! The result is that against the top Asians they just don’t have the time or the opportunity to utilize the stronger technical aspects of their game. Instead of playing further back from the table, perhaps the European women’s development should be directed more towards the importance of serve, receive and the first four balls and also towards methods of more effective and active play over the table. In this way they will have rather more opportunities to create attacking positions and earlier in the rally.
The European men in the 80’s were as good as the Chinese over the table and better at a distance, they were also able to play hard spin balls from both wings. As a result it was the Chinese men who weren’t able to play to their strengths in the first four balls and were then forced back from the table. The obvious question arises: why don’t European women play in the same way. If however you have ever watched top women competing against top men they have problems coping with the power but more especially with the spin, they lack the strength, speed and balance to play the same measure of hard spin.
Also most women don’t go back and loop to loop like the men, they return in a variety of different ways, blocking, drive, topspin or defence and often using differing materials. They also play closer to the table and are therefore able to play the angles or vary length and speed more easily, especially as they almost always face less power. If the European women want to play a strong spin game from further back with the bigger 40mm. ball which of course takes less spin, then it would logically appear that their chances of defeating the Asians become even more remote. They give their oriental counterparts more time to play and they give up the chance to control the over-the-table and short play.
European women must come to terms too with all the possibilities in the women’s game, with the many differing playing styles, work out which is best for them and develop their own character within the style. There are available to women players many more possibilities for success, many more different paths to the top levels, than there are for men. They only have to be open-minded about this, ready to accept that they need not be limited in their choice. They must also of course train in the right direction for their way of playing. Too often players, coaches and selectors are ‘blinkered’ when they look at women’s styles in Europe. They only really want to see one or two styles of play, it’s almost as if they think that only these styles have a chance to succeed at world level. Perhaps in Europe we should take a closer look at just how the top women in the world have played over the last 10 years, think about the variety of styles and why these players have been successful. Perhaps also we should stop trying to force women to conform to men’s styles of play, even those which have been successful!
European women must also appreciate that it’s not enough only to be able to play well one way, often you must alter your style to beat others. You must have the capacity to have other ways of play and to be able to cope with all styles. Above all the player and trainer should get together and think of a specialty which can make the player unique.
In China players have the opportunity all the time to compete against all differing styles of play; from the national and provincial squads down, all training groups have all techniques, defenders, short-pimple pen-hold attackers, long-pimple blockers, left-handers etc. Where the women don’t have a style to spar against they will ‘borrow’ a man player or even create a player with this style. In comparison in Europe often players meet only one or two styles in training and don’t know how to cope with many others. It is very noticeable in the World Championships that often a good European player may win over one or two Asians but then comes up against a style she doesn’t understand, such as long pimple defence or pen-hold attack and then loses easily. If the Europeans are to compete on a level playing-field then it’s probably going to be necessary for the women from various countries to have joint training camps together and to be provided with different sparring styles. There are just not enough good women of a high enough level in most countries in Europe.
There is also a rather different mental attitude in Asia and Europe. Many Europeans seem to lack the real competitive edge when playing against oriental players, often give up and appear to be resigned to losing. In China there are always reserves waiting. It’s very hard to get into the team and very easy to lose your place, never to return. It’s absolutely vital to a Chinese player that she takes the one and only chance she may ever have and makes the best possible use of it. Too often in Europe there are only one or two good women in the team and they are going to stay there win or lose. As a result there is no real incentive to keep raising their levels, they are already the best in their country and they are going to stay in the team because there is nobody pushing for their place, no competition! In such circumstances it’s very easy for players to let their game stagnate and to cease working at continued growth and development.
Finally Asian women train much longer and more professionally than their European counterparts. Six hours or so is a normal daily minimum with coaches in constant attendance to monitor performance and keep training in the right direction for the player’s individual style. (Many top players fit in extra sessions over and above this!) In the case of the Olympics or the Worlds, for the Chinese players we are talking about training camps in the country away from family and friends, a Spartan environment free from all distractions, to which the players willingly submit in order to achieve success. In fact the European women with a lesser number of good players, a lesser variety of sparring styles to train against, generally less extensive advice and information on the direction of their individual style and how to achieve their goals and much less daily training time, face a long, uphill battle if they are ever to dominate and take over from the Asians.
Many European girls need to be much more multi-dimensional. They tend to try to play positively but predictably and often too hard and without understanding the values of the incoming ball. The ball which bounces long on your side can be hit with power and spin, the ball bouncing mid-table can only be hit hard if you drive/kill flat and early; if you leave this ball late you must use much more spin.
They need to train multi-ball against a variety of lengths and spins till the reading of the incoming ball and the response are fully automated. Unfortunately we have very few feeders who can do this effectively. Another exercise which is very good for building automated responses and speeding up ‘reading time’ (developing adaptive intelligence) is to train v players who can play fast hard drive-play and also stop-block off the bounce with both heavy backspin and float. Again even in our National Academies we have few if any coaches/sparring players who can do this.
Further areas where girl players must develop dramatically to match the top Europeans and the Asians are in serve and 3rd ball and in short play. With serve I would suggest working much more with the high throw and trying to develop differing spins, speed and direction. Another multi-ball exercise to help with short play is as follows; one or two long push balls to BH, one or two short chop balls to middle or FH. Then change to one or two long to FH and again short etc. In the short ball situation players must try to do different things, short drop balls, flicks and long pushes with and without spin.
In all of this you have to bear in mind that in Western Europe we only aim to produce women in the top 80 to 300 in the world rankings and we don’t have any higher ambitions. We will never produce players in the top 30 in the world until we focus on the types of style which can get there and the requisite training methods. We also need to ensure that the appropriate sparring is available.
It is not possible to produce world class players in a vacuum but unfortunately few of our coaches are prepared to spend 100’s of hours studying the top women in the world and working out how and why they are successful. Instead many are locked into outdated methods which will only ever have limited success. Only one or two countries over the whole of Europe (mainly the Eastern bloc) are having any real measure of success with girls/women — Romania, Czech Republic, Russia and former satellites and Hungary. Some of their technical areas of development are quite radical and of course Western coaches in their wisdom refuse to accept that these can ever produce success.
The ‘proof of the pudding is however in the eating’ and over the last four or five years the only top youngsters (European born) to have gone on to world success in rankings are Pota (Hungary) and Dodean and Samara (Romania). More recently the Czech girls Vacenovska and Strbikova have had great success playing a more Asian close-to-table style. Interesting what?
Many girls give up with table tennis in their early years. Clearly many more boys continue rather longer with the sport. Internationally, especially with the women, England has slipped dramatically in recent years since the halcyon days of the late ‘40s and ‘50s when we were world champions in team and doubles and in finals in the singles events. Even in the ‘70s and 80’s we were a force to be reckoned with and one of the best 3 to 4 teams in Europe. Now we are nowhere.
So just how do we set about changing the position and getting back to the situation where we can at least be a force in Europe? Times are different now – we must first start by creating the situation where our girls have opportunities to progress. If we don’t have the economy to collect national training groups together, we must be creative and find other methods to evolve.
One method used by Donald Parker in 1988/89 and detailed under his Junior Training Policy document was as follows: ‘We have had some excellent training sessions at Grove, these will now continue but will be organised by the Grove Club and will operate on a self-financing basis. Clearly this sort of training is excellent preparation for players hoping to make the England Training Camps and the England Team’. Are we saying that now in 2009 we don’t have big clubs which could help in this type of venture?
The Association should also be prepared to look at training opportunities abroad and be prepared to support more of our girls in private training initiatives in Europe. We have a number of coaches and top players both in and out of the system in UK, who have good connections with National Associations and big clubs in Europe and in Asia. It is time that we should start to use such connections to help in organising training and exchanges abroad. But in most cases where possible players need to take advantage of such opportunities alone or in small groups – in this way they are faced with new ideas and learn to evaluate and understand for themselves when and where the training and development is suitable to them as individuals. If they are to grow as players they must learn to work things out for themselves.
Many things are changing in our sport and we must change too. That things happen is in most cases a matter of ideas and the ability and energy to translate ideas into reality. This applies to associations even at district and national levels. We cannot afford to be too traditional or parochial in our outlook. At the moment unfortunately it’s quite obvious that the top English girls are not getting the same advantages/input as the top junior boys. If the Association doesn’t have the finance or the know-how to develop our girls then it should be ready to let others have a go. Ignoring the situation and doing nothing is hardly an option.
One of the first areas to look at is the possibility of competing more abroad in both leagues and tournaments. Many of the top players in England have done this for a number of years. The more our young girls can compete outside of England the better for them and for the development of our table tennis. They will have much more varied opposition and their game will quickly gain in strength and maturity. Even if the Association cannot afford too many trips abroad it can certainly encourage players to compete privately in Europe or even further afield and support them with accreditation where necessary.
We must place a great deal more emphasis on setting up individual training programmes. Every player must without exception have their own personal trainer – even if this means daily contact on MSN or by e-mail. We must work much more with outside specialists, chiropractors, physiotherapists and sports injuries experts. It’s very important too that we have continuity in the National Teams and that we have a policy of working together with all who are involved with top players. The willingness to cooperate must always come from the top. We should think along the lines of the officials in the Football Association, who admit quite openly that they have major difficulties and problems trying to work with certain top managers, but that this is something they have to deal with if they are to get their cooperation and the access they require to the best club players.
If we look at the top men, women and juniors in the world do we notice any changes in the ready position and in the serve and receive tactics? Obviously there are individual style factors which affect the issue — some top stars such as Kreanga and Steff use the backhand side to open much more from the middle of the table and especially against the serve or on the third ball. What we are looking for however are more general trends either in the men’s, women’s or the junior game.
It would appear that the ready position in the men’s game is changing. Many of the top junior boys and the younger top men stand more square now so that they have more options in short play (the rear leg is not so far back as it used to be). Players such as Boll, Maze and Chuan Chih-Yuan fall into this category. If you look at the world’s best junior boys many have a relatively square stance – Zwickl, Süss and Asian players too such as Yang Xiaofu and Sakamoto. The main exception is with the Asian penhold players who want to play more forehands and receive with the right foot (for a right-hander) well back.
Even in the case of many players who do stand with the right foot back, often they come in with the right foot against the serve to use the forehand from the middle of the table. In this way they can keep control of the table with the forehand on the subsequent ball. The men used to take over 80% of the opponent’s serves with the forehand wing (however now there is an increasing tendency at top level to use the backhand receive). If top men can’t open against the serve, the main receive is the short push return with the forehand or nowadays more and more with the backhand even well over on to the forehand side.
In comparison with the top men over twice as many of the top women stand quite square – almost 60% as opposed to 25 – 30%. The women too use the backhand much more from the middle of the table on the service receives, both to push and to open. They in fact use the backhand receive almost 50% of the time. European players such as Steff and Struse and the junior Pota fall into this category and even Asian players use the tactic. Players such as Guo Yue, Zhang Yining, Niu Jianfeng (Ch), Lin Ling (H.K.), Jing Jun Hong , Li Jia Wei (Sin) and top world juniors such as Peng Luyang (Ch) and Fukuhara (J) all use the backhand from the middle.
In the service area we note a number of differences between the men’s and women’s game. The female players use the long serve more than the men, in a ratio of around 16 – 17% as opposed to 10%, but there is not such a great difference in the short and half-long serves at the very top level. Perhaps the most informative factor is in the difference between the junior and senior players of both sexes. Both the boys and girls use the half-long serve more than the senior players do and the girls use the long serve more than the women. At senior level the service game becomes noticeably tighter. The men almost exclusively use the forehand to serve, with one or two noticeable exceptions such as Primorac. Backhand service is however generally lower than 5% as opposed to nearly 20% in the case of the top women.
There is a noticeable difference in service tactics between the top Asian and the top European women. The Asian women serve more short serves, around 65% in comparison with 50% and significantly less long serves, 13% as opposed to almost 30%. The best girl in the world Guo Yue, number 15 in the women’s rankings at 14 years, serves around 97% short or half-long serves. The Asian women are generally better and much more confident in the ‘short’ game and at opening against a backspin ball even over the table. The European women usually serve longer as they wish to get their topspin game in at the earliest opportunity. However in many cases it is obvious that the Europeans have neither good enough serves nor a good enough first opening ball to obtain a real advantage.
If we look at statistics of rallies between top Asian and European women, the Europeans are struggling to hold their own in drive or counter-play but also they are not really dominant in spin play either. Unless their first opening topspin ball is of exceptionally high quality they almost always lose out when the game accelerates into fast counter-play. It is obvious too that counter-play is still the basic norm in the women’s game. We rarely if ever see the loop to loop rallies that we see in men’s play with both players well back from the table. Instead the first opening spin ball is blocked or hit and there is no time to spin again. Rather the top women come in so that they are in a better position to counter fast over or close to the table. After the first opening spin ball, the next is usually taken at an earlier timing point to pressure the opponent.
There seems to be little thought at top level to bring in any changes in the forehand service action or position to create a more positive advantage in respect of the new service law. Most top players just try to remove the free arm and serve as they did before. Few have thought to increase the rotation speed of the upper body so that the free arm automatically swings away, or to use a higher throw so as to have more time to rotate the body. Players don’t really seem to appreciate that without rotation the service action is often quite stiff and it can take up to three separate movements to get the body and feet in the right position to play the next ball. Few players too have thought to serve from a squarer stance so as to be more adaptable against the return ball. It is noticeable that the women particularly are sometimes a little slow now to get in the right place for the third ball, especially if this is played hard into the corners.
A number of top coaches and top women players in Europe seem to be of the opinion that if you can topspin the ball powerfully from both wings and get in the first attack, then the road to victory against the Asian players is open. The idea is often to develop the player’s style towards a two-winged topspin game similar to the men. It is also important of course to have the capability of attacking first and of using the serve to set up a third ball attack. These are keys to winning at top level. However is the concept of a consistent, strong topspin attack sufficient in itself in the women’s game? Perhaps it is necessary to examine the whole approach to this type of style in more detail! It can also be necessary to point out that we should see clearly what is happening and not what we would like to happen!
There is for example a noticeable difference in service tactics between the top Asian and the top European women. The Asian women serve more short serves, around 65% in comparison with 50% and significantly less long serves, 13% as opposed to almost 30%. The best girl in the world Guo Yue, number 5 in the women’s rankings at 15 years, serves around 97% short or half-long serves. The Asian women excel and are much more confident in the ‘short’ game and at opening against a backspin ball even over the table. They are superior in short play and Europeans must analyse the possibilities in this area and upgrade their technique and tactics.
It’s vital to have the advantage on the serve/receive and the ‘next two balls’. If we let this advantage slip away then we are on level terms or even a little behind with handling the 2nd and 3rd ball and this lack of dominance can lead to us losing the point. It’s also important to reinforce control and counter-control measures over the 4th, 5th and 6th balls so we maintain an offensive initiative and do not let the play drift into a stalemate situation.
The importance of the serve cannot be underestimated against the Asians. The European women usually serve longer as they wish to get their topspin game in at the earliest opportunity. However in many cases it is obvious that the Europeans have neither good enough serves nor a good enough first opening ball to obtain a real advantage. If we look at statistics of the rallies between top Asian and European women, the Europeans are struggling to hold their own in drive or counter-play but also they are not really dominant in spin play either. Unless their first opening topspin ball is of exceptionally high quality they almost always lose out when the game accelerates into fast counter-play.
Indeed it is of some importance that the point be won after one or two topspin balls. In longer rallies top European women often lose the point. This in fact emphasizes the difference between the men’s and the women’s game. In the men’s game with the longer rally the Europeans have an equal or better than equal chance of winning the point, as the Asians are a little behind in counter-looping techniques and are often weaker back from the table, especially on the backhand side. Therefore when the rally degenerates into a control situation they are at a disadvantage.
The reverse is the case with women’s play – women don’t counter-loop, they drive, block, hit or even chop and as a result it is the player who loops, who is at a disadvantage as the rally progresses. In the women’s game the longer a looping rally goes on usually the less chance the Europeans have to win as the Asians initiate speed or variation. There is just too much pace or variation on the return ball and it is difficult to maintain consistent pressure with topspin tactics. In the women’s game therefore it is the first one or two loops which are of prime importance and it is vital that the loop player makes the opening to ‘kill’ and wins the point as early as possible in the rally.
European women should bear in mind too that there are other alternatives when opening up against a backspin ball. The Asians often demonstrate the hard first-ball hit against backspin, which we would do well to work at more often. As women usually play closer to the table this is a viable alternative to the loop. It is feasible to either use the incoming spin or to create your own, but the most important factor is to take the ball at an early timing point to pressure the opponent.
Another aspect that strong women topspin players could work profitably with is counter-looping techniques. Give the opponent the half-chance to spin the 2nd ball for example and then pressure her directly with an aggressive topspin counter. This tactic is common in the men’s game but is rarely if ever used in women’s table tennis.
Often if you assess the European woman’s game plan she uses something like 60% drive or flick play and only 35% topspin. Does she fully understand how she should play? True short play may be the key but she must use the right tactics to get her spin in from a short play situation! If she puts the emphasis on speed and power she usually gets a faster ball back and it’s then more difficult to create good spin! As a result flicking and drive play over the table often work against what she is hoping to achieve – good spin on the first one or two balls so that she creates the opportunity to win the point. In other words spin one or two then hit!
If we also often use a fairly high ratio of long serves (over 30%) the result is again that we get a hard return and have problems in creating enough spin on the third ball. When we assess the backhand too in Europe we often see that women have not really such good spin capability or don’t try to use much spin – more often than not they drive the ball. Again as a result they get drawn into the counter-hitting type of game.
Not only must we work at developing better serves, but must use them to best effect. The priority (and here length is of particular importance) is to get the opponent to push so that we can loop strongly and with good spin on the third ball. We then have the initiative in the rally. The same applies on receiving. Subtle use of the push or of techniques such as the stop-block against the Asians will pay more dividends than trying to flick or open all the time, especially when our first opening ball is weak or has insufficient spin.
Often the tendency in Europe with a woman is to harness the strength element and to encourage her to play more like a man. This strategy ignores both the theory of the creation of spin and the differences between the men’s and women’s game. Top European women are often made to look very ordinary when they meet players who can control their hard loops and who pick the right ball to counter.
The theory of the creation of spin tells us that the harder you hit the ball with a closed racket, the more spin you will create. Women are not as strong as men and will never achieve as much spin as men. It’s of little use taking the view that a strong woman can hit harder than a man – compare Boros with Wang Liqin or Kreanga and there is little or no similarity in the power development.
Equally the return ball is completely different in the women’s game. Rarely if ever do women run back and counter-loop, they block, hit or defend. More often than not the loop player just has no time to loop more than one ball, as her loop comes back with so much speed – and in many cases the harder she topspins, the faster the ball comes back. Such players as Steff for example (top 10 world ranking) have the capability to topspin the first ball then come in and counter the next ball from a very early timing point. It is often in fact a better tactic in the women’s game to topspin slower and with more spin rather than faster and with more power.
The other critical point about the women’s game is that both because of the lesser topspin and the greater use of differing rubbers, players face a much more unpredictable reaction from the ball after the bounce than they do in the men’s game. This tends even to influence the technical development of the female topspin stroke. There is little point in developing the habit of starting the loop stroke too far back if you’re uncertain just what the ball will do after the bounce.
Overall in fact there seems to be very little point in women training to loop several balls in succession. Rather they should be training to loop one (or two) then smash. Spin rather than speed is of the utmost importance so they create the opening to hit hard on the next ball. In fact the single most important loop is the first opening against a backspin ball.
If you look at the top European women such as Boros and Steff you in fact perceive quite quickly that they do not run away from the table and loop several balls in a row. Indeed much of the play, over 50%, consists of flick or drive strokes. But they are capable of flicking the 2nd ball for example and looping the 4th. They are also accomplished in looping the 3rd ball if they have the slightest opening and they both have good serves and good variety in the service area.
One final aspect that we must of course stress is the importance of competing in Asia. It is necessary to play against Asian players and often, in order to learn what we need to work on to defeat them.
‘Four Chinese again’, is the comment I hear in the background. Once again a major international competition sees four female players from China contesting the latter stages, all three medals on offer will go to the same country.
It’s no good moaning, grumbling, complaining or feeling sorry for yourself; they deserve their success, they’ve worked hard and they’ve won; that’s why we compete, to try and win! So, if you can’t beat them then join them, or at least learn from them, they must be doing something right, they keep winning and the results from the World Junior Championships suggest that the dynasty is set to continue.
It was clear from their performances that nothing had been left to chance, attention had been paid to every detail of their game and they could expose weaknesses in their opponents that against other adversaries did not appear to exist. The European girls were impressive when the ball was long and they could topspin aggressively, the Asian girls, especially the Japanese were quicker close to the table; the Chinese were simply cruelly efficient in every aspect of their game. They were professional in the best meaning of the word, each player had her own style, her own strengths, but all were extremely consistent and when it came to the vital areas of serve, strong first attack and good receive of serve they were supreme.
Defeat for a Chinese female player against anyone from outside the country’s borders is a comparative rarity but it does happen. Kristin Silbereisen of Germany defeated Niu Jianfeng in the ITTF Pro Tour Danish Open whilst Midori Ito of Japan overcame Li Qian in the Girls’ Team Final at the World Junior Championships in Santiago. Splendid performances that no doubt gave the victors great confidence; however from defeat you should learn and it would seem that both Chinese girls learnt and learnt very quickly! A few weeks later Niu Jianfeng won the ITTF Pro Tour Grand Finals and four days after her reverse Li Qian was the Junior Girls’ Singles World Champion.
However, there is an adage that if you can do something once, you can do it again. The problem for many is believing that they can win, simply treating the opposition as a player and not someone from an extra-terrestrial planet, who has a range of skills not bestowed on earth’s mortals. Perhaps that’s why the Chinese girls win, they believe they can win and with some justification, they know that their technique will withstand the most intense pressure whilst their counterparts from foreign lands might well show signs of cracking as the intensity of the situation mounts.
Equally, they have their eyes focussed on the highest goals. I heard the comment in Santiago from some players and coaches: ‘That’s it, that’s her last match’. A strange comment perhaps but one that is heard all too often; the comment refers to the fact that it’s the player’s last match as a junior, the aim for too many girls seems to be to be selected for the national team as a junior and that is their ultimate goal. I can think of one country in particular where more girls have retired from table tennis after playing in their last European Youth Championships than have continued to play in the seniors, let alone progress to greater international heights.
However, the attitude expressed by Li Xiaoxia, Peng Luyang, Cao Zhen and Li Qian, the four members of the Chinese girls’ team in Santiago, was totally different. ‘It’s only the World Junior Championships’, explained Peng Luyang and Li Qian, the finalists in the Girls’ Singles. They showed a great deal of respect for the event and were modest when congratulated on their achievements but they saw their success merely as a stepping stone, they had climbed another rung on the ladder towards a golden goal at the very highest levels.
No doubt they will achieve success on the senior circuit, Cao Zhen has already an ITTF Pro Tour title to her name, the 2003 Malaysian Open; an achievement in itself but no doubt just a stepping stone towards a medal on the World and Olympic stage. The Chinese girls are a credit to the sport, well mannered, polite, gracious but determined and in every department of the game they are comfortable, competent and when necessary courageous.
They win and they deserve to win.
At the SOC there were no Chinese women playing with pimples, even though the female players of almost every other Asian country and many European and Americans used material. This could give rise to the thinking that perhaps Chinese women have moved past the pimples stage and no longer need the help of material. This is in fact far from the truth.
There are many pimple players within the National and the Provincial teams and in China it’s still popular and effective to play with pimples. In fact the national coaches are eager to develop another long pimple champion along the lines of Deng Yaping.
However the reason that the pimple players are not representing China internationally is that only very few players are selected to play in the big tournaments and selection is very much dependent on performance. Many pimple players have lost their advantage as they train against normal players every day and the normal players are very familiar with material techniques and tactics. The current results of the top 7 Chinese women (all in the top 10 in the world ranking and all playing with reverse rubbers) are at the moment very satisfactory and therefore the national coaches won’t take the risk of making changes just now.
As far as the youth policy is concerned China is still keen to develop the full range of women’s styles and pimple players of all types are welcome in the National Team. If such players are good enough, strong enough mentally and get good results nationally and internationally there is no way they will be overlooked.
It is interesting to note that the top Chinese pimpled racket player (defensive) Fan Ying is currently ranked 3 in the world U21 rankings (after 2 other Chinese) and 2 in the U17 ranking (after Guo Yue).
These things of course tend to go in cycles. China have very good reverse rubber women players at the moment, this could well change dramatically over the next 2 years. One factor that China must certainly take into account is the success of Song Ah Sim from Hongkong (only ranked 5 in her country and 46 in the world before the event) against the Chinese women in the SOC. Their coaches must pay close attention to how these results were achieved and evaluate whether they were the results of the rubber, the tactics, or the individual strengths of the player. Whatever, Hongkong has a very strong women’s team at the moment and presents a distinct threat to China’s overall supremacy.
The history
The reasons
Facts as they stand now
What can we do?
The women’s game
Understanding the women’s game
Style evaluation and which styles are more successful at world level
To produce top women players, the right system is needed into which to feed our young girls
The last European woman to win a World Singles Final was the legendary Angelica Roseanu in 1955, 55 years ago! The last European country to win a women’s team event in the Worlds was Russia in 1969 with Z. Rudnova and S. Grinberg, who also won the women’s doubles. The last European woman in a singles final was Alicia Grofova from Czechoslovakia in 1973. It is now 2010 and since 1973 there have been no European women in any singles finals or in any team finals.
Since Pak Yun Sung (PR Korea and the first left-hander to win a singles final) won her second singles in 1977 only Chinese women have won the singles event, with the sole exception of 1993 (Hyun Jung Hwa, Korea). In fact two players from China, Deng Yaping and Wang Nan have both won the title 3 times.
Why can’t we in Europe produce players to match the Asians? Is it that we don’t have girls with talent, that we don’t work hard enough, that life in the West is too easy and comfortable? Many millions are poured into sport over the whole of Europe and the Swedes for example have shown in the men’s game from the mid 1980’s up to 2000 that it is possible to match the Chinese and to beat them. So why not the women? Why is it that not over just a few years but over decades Europe has allowed the Asian countries to forge ahead in the women’s game until they are just about out of sight?
To my way of thinking there are a number of reasons:
• On the women’s side in the Western world, table tennis is largely a second-class sport and there is not enough funding overall, nor is there enough earning capability for those few women in Europe who reach the higher levels. Women’s table tennis has a low profile
• Many countries are quite backward in the coaching of girls and not much thought goes into their development. Over the whole of Europe coaches do not have enough technical knowledge and expertise in the women’s game. They don’t know how women play and far too often their coaching rationale is based on the men’s game. Even when they see that certain aspects may be important, such as the capability to produce spin, they don’t ask the right questions – such as what type of spin, how should this be produced technically and from where
• Women have many more different paths to top level than the men do and use much more material in their play. Coaches must be more fully informed as to the why, the how and the what. This also means that girls need to have much more individual development and their weapons have to be closely matched to their style and tactics. In the final analysis they must play in a way that is in complete harmony with their mind and body. Girls must have a training programme which allows them to ‘get closest to their full potential’
• We have to recognize that there are certain styles of play which can be more successful at world level than others in the women’s game and where possible (and if it suits the individual) these should be developed
• We do not from the start have a plan to develop our young players for the senior game. Instead we waste time trying to win cadet and junior events and developing techniques and tactics which will not help us at all to survive at senior level. Whatever we do then is too late and too little
Over the last 15 to 20 years just how close have the European women got to matching the Asians in depth? To be brutally honest – nowhere! Tamara Boros and Mihaela Steff came nearest, were both in the Top 10 in the World Rankings in the late 1990’s and Boros remained there till 2006. She actually attained No 2 at one stage, but Europe has never been anywhere near the Asians in large numbers.
Even now with our top ‘young’ players such as Samara and Dodean they are around 22 years of age and not in the top 30 in the world. The highest ranked European women on the October 2010 ITTF list are Toth at No 32 and Pavlovich at 34. Neither of these are exactly youngsters. China on the other hand has 15 year old girls, such as Zhu Yuling, who are beating women in the top 10 in the world!
The top young players in Europe are just not making any inroads against the Asian domination, in fact it’s the older women in Europe who are maintaining their world positions. On the other hand just look at what the Asians are able to achieve in the senior world rankings:
• Kasumi Ishikawa (Japan, 17 years of age) 420 on the world ranking in March 2006, No 18 in October 2010!
• Zhu Yuling (China, 15 years of age) 105 in July 2010, No 26 in October 2010.
• Gu Yuting (China, 15 in January 2010) 194 in June 2010, 93 in July, 68 in August and 38 in October 2010!
Is there actually anything at all we can do to produce players who have a chance to compete with the Asians? First we have to clean up our approach to coaching and producing our players. Let’s look at what the top coaches and high-performance directors in Europe have to say
Dusan Osmanagic: We all see that the situation in European table tennis is not very good. For me one of the most important reasons for such a situation is the problem with coaches - speaking of course generally as there are for sure exceptions to the rule - most of our coaches are not capable to meet the required standards.
Michel Gadal: We in Europe are much behind, we usually start later, we think in age categories and try to make from young players champions in their age category, not to follow from the beginning only the goal to make a top senior player - in that way we lose a lot of time.
Dirk Schimmelpfennig: All together in Yokohama it became obvious that the gap between Europe and Asia, especially of course China has become even greater. For this I see several reasons - one very important reason is that Asian players have a longer and better table tennis education.
Peter Sartz: Regarding women we do not have training programmes and methods only for women yet; that’s why European women mostly can’t play at top international level. Also in Europe many countries have done nothing to improve their women.
Mario Amizic: The Asian countries have adapted to modern table tennis, Europe has gone backwards. The last three years have seen a particularly rapid decline in Europe; at one time I believed that the younger generation would be able to step into the shoes of the older, but this is no longer a possibility. The present situation in Europe is a catastrophe but if we really think about it, it is in fact the reality we should have expected. The methods we had in place some years ago produced a superb generation of players but these are not working any more. We have lost our way, we are not adapting to new trends and our model is no longer up-to-date. We are trying to produce players of the future with the methods of the past.
The older coaches in Europe will tell you we are not educating our coaches and trainers properly or indeed in the right way. Young, talented, intelligent coaches see no future in table tennis, the money is poor and there is no acknowledgement of their work and achievements. As long as coaches see no real future in their job it will be almost impossible to drive table tennis forward. Instead we get a rapid turnover and little motivation.
We must also take steps in the first place to understand the women’s game, that it is completely different from the men’s and that training and development must be approached accordingly.
Too often the men’s and women’s games are not seen as ‘two completely different sports’ and this is the main reason why women’s play is currently at such a low level throughout Europe. In the women’s game it is almost always speed which wins over spin, which is exactly the opposite of what happens with the men. There are also many more material players among the ranks of the women and coaches must be more fully informed as to the why, the how and the what. Until we have top coaches (not ex-players who have been pushed into coaching roles), who understand how women really play, we are never going to produce top women players in Europe.
What we can’t afford to overlook is that top coaches possess enhanced awareness and intuition and that the basis for this is the accumulated knowledge and experience they have built up over countless hours of being involved with players. The really experienced coach sees cues in the preparation, movement build-up and stroke execution as well as in the physical and mental attributes which enable him/her to make informed decisions as to which road the player should take to reach full potential. The less experienced coach or the ex-player does not yet have this ability (and may never have it). Also this is not something you can teach in a classroom over a few weekends, it is an understanding which grows and flowers in the individual over countless hours (sometimes decades) of meaningful participation in a particular activity and it is selective to that activity and not a skill which can be transferred to other areas.
What do top European coaches such as Eva Jeler (involved in coaching at National level in Germany for many years) have to say about how women should play?
In my opinion it is a mistake to think that it is enough to adapt the men’s style of practice to the women’s game and assume that this will do. The result of such training methods can only be men’s table tennis at a lesser level. As I see it we need to find different solutions to the method of how to win points - normally with girls you cannot rely on power to win the point, so you have to accentuate placement, speed and safety in the rallies. In comparison, boys try to win points with powerful forehand topspins and everything in the rally is subordinated to the attempt of coming into the right position to use this main weapon.
Such a pattern does not work in women’s table tennis, points have to be won with adequate placement, speed, rotation and change of rotation. An ability to play a fast and secure backhand and to have an adequate answer when the opponent is changing from backhand into forehand is essential. This means that when working with girls we must spend most of the time playing different strokes and combinations near the table. Another problem in Europe is the lack of good foot-work techniques. The foot-work needs to complement all the other elements of play instead of being an obstacle to perfecting the different strokes.
I would like to see us develop a fast game on both wings but with a dominant forehand and the ability to use rotation. When we speak about rotation I don’t have the rotation produced by strokes which begin with a very low racket position in mind, but I’m talking about the rotation produced with fast strokes near the table. When you look back over the last decade you see that the only European women who were able to endanger the Asian dominance did not play "the Romanian style" of fast counterattack without spin, but played a powerful topspin attack fast and near the table.
• Back from table topspin player: Most women don’t go back and loop to loop like the men, they return in a variety of different ways, blocking, drive, topspin or defence and often using differing materials. They also play closer to the table and are therefore able to play the angles or vary length and speed more easily, especially as they almost always face less power. If the European women want to play a strong topspin game from further back with the bigger 40mm. ball which of course takes less spin, then it would logically appear that their chances of defeating the Asians become even more remote. They give their oriental counterparts more time to play and they give up the chance to control the over-the-table and short play. When coaching girls even at a very young age we must be very aware of the real dangers of allowing them to habitually drift away from the table
• Defenders: Defenders, even the old style ones were always able to get into the top 15 in the world even into the top 10 (Kim Kjung Ah is currently at No 4). However what all defensive players have now come to understand with the big ball and games to eleven-up is the necessity for attack. Often the older-style players will attack with drive play but nearly all the younger defenders have the capability to topspin the ball and to change the form of the rally quite dramatically
• Blockers and counter-hitters: This has always been a style which has been effective at the highest levels in world play, especially as many women play with different varieties of pimples. The Asian players generally have an active game and will open at the earliest opportunity. The hard attack ball is important in their table tennis philosophy. Over the years speed has been the dominant factor in their play and even now if they have to choose between speed and spin it will almost always be the former. They open as early as possible, directly after the serve for example and if they are compelled to play an intermediate stroke, they try to control the play so as to play positively on the next ball. Serve and the third ball hit are fundamental in their armoury and they spend much training time on this. They tend to take the ball at an earlier timing point than the European players. (Ai Fukuhara from Japan is a prime example of this style of play).
• Close-to-table attackers with spin capability: What we are looking at here, where players have the requisite reactions and feeling, is the ability to take the ball early and both spin and drive close to or even over the table. Many of the top Chinese in the last couple of years, Zhang Yining and Guo Yue and some of the young Japanese such as Kasumi Ishikawa have this capability. This is again a style which can reach the highest levels in the women’s game.
What we must also have in our mind is that within the above methods of playing there will be many sub-styles and players who may be generally categorised within a particular style, will of course develop to their own individual strengths. All players are individuals and will impose their own character on a style of play.
As Jeler has said too we need a system where girls know where they are going and do not have to face too many conflicting ideas. They should be able to work hard and profitably in an environment where there is no stress and where the developmental pathway is clear and without complication. Above all they must be able to feel that the way they are progressing is in harmony with their physical and mental capabilities. In view of the lack over the whole of Europe of coaches who can help them reach their full potential, girls must also be ready to take more responsibility for their own progress.
In women’s sport it is especially difficult to predict the development of a young player. Mentality and the psyche in general are even more important with regard to girls than to boys. Girls are more sensitive, much more self-critical and can in that way often be self-destroying. Equally working with girls is much more challenging and demanding for the coach and requires rather higher levels of background knowledge and expertise.
European women must from the start come to terms with all the possibilities in the women’s game, with the many differing playing styles, work out which is best for them and develop their own character within the style. There are available to women players many more possibilities for success, many more different paths to the top levels, than there are for men. They only have to be open-minded about this, ready to accept that they need not be limited in their choice. They must also of course train in the right direction for their way of playing. Too often players, coaches and selectors are ‘blinkered’ when they look at women’s styles in Europe. They only really want to see one or two styles of play; it’s almost as if they think that only these styles have a chance to succeed at world level.
Basically we simply start too late to work seriously with girls in Europe. In reality we should start to work with them even earlier than with boys, they mature faster than boys and should be ready to start their journey to the top sooner! It is very important for girls to develop their technical abilities fully before puberty - after that it is quite difficult to change many things. The problem is that the girls start too late to practise properly and are not educated in the right training ethics from the beginning. As a result they then have to backtrack and correct their techniques and concepts of the game first. They are by this stage 16 or 17 and instead of being at the top they are only at the beginning! We are here coming back once again to the "prime reason" - the girls start to have adequate training too late.
I am also of the opinion that most Associations in Europe need the rethink their systems and policies concerning the development of women in their countries. Make it a major priority to find more funding for the women’s game and get the right people involved in the development of girls at a young age. It is obvious that many of the real top coaches and high-performance directors throughout Europe are very much dissatisfied with the way coaching and player education as a whole is progressing and they feel that we are falling further and further behind Asia. However their thoughts and criticisms seem to carry little or no weight with European Associations and those responsible for running them. Nothing happens and most Associations seem to meander along as they have done for years if not for decades. Nothing new or innovative occurs.
We need movement and ideas from the top and we need these now; we are not going to produce players of the future with methods of the past. The one thing we have proved without any doubt over the last 20 to 25 years is that whatever we have been doing with women’s development is just not working or even producing satisfactory results. There is little or no point in continuing in the same vein, we must make changes.
As a matter of interest what has Martin Sorӧs, the Chief Executive of the new Werner Schlager Academy have to say about women’s development in Europe at the 3rd European Coaching Seminar in Vienna, November 2010: ‘In Europe nearly all we could do wrong in conjunction with women’s table tennis, we did wrong.’
Perhaps now is the time for the top-level private centre such as the Werner Schlager Academy in Vienna. With this type of venture we can collect a team of top coaches from all over the world and the Associations in Europe can leave the development of their top players to the real experts!
Let us finish with a quote from the man who put England’s rugby on the world map:
Clive Woodward (England Rugby Supremo):
Over the years we’ve encountered many different versions of inherited thinking, or tradition as some call it, in business, sport and government. The symptoms are always the same: blind faith in the ‘way’, nepotism to protect the institution and a culture that heavily discourages, even punishes, any questioning of authority and where change is an anathema. Often the establishment can’t take in the ideas of the visionaries because such an approach would shake up many of their own top coaches – the ideas are too far ahead of what these coaches practise, know and believe in and introducing substantially different ideas would expose their real lack of knowledge.
Usually it’s the establishment environment which is lacking. It doesn’t challenge the players. It doesn’t give the players the preparation they need, it doesn’t give them every chance. The selection system is inconsistent. The coaches insist on styles of play and training methods which are inadequate and behind the times. Players prepare for games at a level of intensity which indicates they are not doing everything possible, everything that needs to be done to win.
In the sports environment what we need is the basic fundamentals of sport managed with a strong business ethic. To win we have to create the right competitive environment and engage the best specialists in each fundamental area of our sport. The myth of sporting superiority is just that – a myth. The strength of the top sporting nations lies in their competitive culture and their high level of preparation, not in some magic gene. It’s no good having roughly the same tools as the other international team; you must be able to apply them differently and effectively.
• The result of adapting the men’s style of play and their training methods to the women’s game can only be men’s table tennis at a lesser level, without the obvious advantages, such as the power, spin and speed of movement, which men bring to the game of table tennis.
• European women need to find different solutions to the methods of how to win points - normally girls cannot rely on power to win the point, so they have to accentuate other aspects such as placement, speed, spin and safety within the rallies.
• When working with girls they must spend most of the time playing different strokes and combinations near the table.
• Instead of playing further back from the table, the European women’s development should be directed more towards the importance of serve, receive and the first four balls and also towards methods of more effective and active play over the table. In this way they will have rather more opportunities to create attacking positions and earlier in the rally.
• Boys win points with powerful forehand topspins and everything in the rally is secondary to the prime aim of being correctly placed to use this main weapon (plus the fact they have the speed to get to the right position). Such a pattern does not work in women’s table tennis; points have to be won with appropriate placement, speed, rotation and changes in these aspects.
• The ability to play a fast and secure backhand is essential (it’s important to have enough strength on the BH wing to keep pressure on the opponent) and to have an adequate answer when the opponent is switching from your backhand into your forehand side and vice versa.
• Another and major problem in Europe is the lack of good foot-work techniques, appropriate to the individual style of play. The foot-work needs to be right for the player's personal style and complement all the other elements of play, instead of being an obstacle to perfecting the different strokes.
• Women should try and develop a fast game on both wings but with a dominant forehand and the ability to use rotation on both sides.
• When we consider rotation this should be rotation produced with fast strokes near the table. When we look back over the last decade we see that the only European women who were able to put the Asians under real pressure did not play fast counterattack without spin, but played a powerful topspin attack fast and close to the table.
• Not enough European women are able to impose their game on the Asians. Rarely if ever are the Asians afraid of the European women’s serves and follow-up ball. They consider that the Europeans have too few serves, are predictable in the way they use them and therefore usually limited with what they can do with the first attack ball (this usually contains too little spin or is not strong enough). Often at the highest level against the Asians, European players aren’t allowed the opportunity to get their strengths in and are not able to use their strong spin early enough in the rally. With their serve and third ball and receive and fourth, the Asians deny them the time.
• It looks as if many Europeans train far too much control play, loop to loop or loop to block, they don’t train to win the point! The result is that against the top Asians they just don’t have the time or the opportunity to utilize the stronger technical aspects of their game.
• European women must also appreciate that it’s not enough only to be able to play well one way, often they must alter their style to beat others. They must have the capacity to have other ways of playing and to be able to cope with all styles.
• Above all the player and trainer should get together and think of a specialty which can make the player unique.
• Too often in Europe there are only one or two good women in the National team and they are going to stay there whether they win or lose. As a result there is no real incentive to keep raising their levels, they are already the best in their country and they are going to stay in the team because there is nobody pushing for their place, no competition! Under such circumstances it’s very easy for players to let their game stagnate and to cease working at continued growth and development.
It is interesting looking at current female World rankings that Japan is very much in the ascendency.
In the Women’s list the top 10 are all of Asian origin, with China having the 1 and 2 in Ding Ning and Zhu Yuling, with Chen Meng at 5 and Wu Yang at 10. Japan has only 3 in the top 10, Kasumi Ishikawa at 4, Mima Ito at 8 and Satoh Hitomi at 9 but Miu Hirano is at 11. However the Chinese players are collectively older with an average age of almost 25 (Ding is 27) while the Japanese girls average just over 19 with Mima only 16 and Miu just 17.
In fact Miu Hirano has only just won the Asian Championships beating Ding Ning 3 – 2 in the quarters (on her 17th birthday), Zhu Yuling 3 – 0 in the semis and Chen Meng 3 – 0 in the final, to become the first Japanese girl to win in 20 years.
What is also conclusive are the Under 21 Rankings where Japan has 8 out of the top 10, numbers 1, 2 and 3, 5, 6 and 7 and 9 and 10. China has no women in this category, the other two places are filled by Hong Kong at 4 and Singapore at 8. Japan is the number 1 ranked team in the World in Juniors (under 18), with 6 girls, ranked 1 to 4, plus the 6 and 10; China has 2 players at 5 and 7, Romania 1 and Puerto Rico 1. Even in the Under 15 Rankings, Japan out of 5 Asian players has 3 at 1, 2 and 8 with 1 from Hongkong at 4 and another from Korea at 9; there are 2 players from the USA and 1 each from Russia, Romania and France. China has no players in this category.
So just what is it that the younger Japanese players are doing that is making the difference? The clues are in Miu Hirano’s victories over the World 1, 2 and 5 in the current Asian Championships. She lost the first two ends against Ding Ning, the first 3 and the second only on deuce, but was already showing that she was faster and was capable of using the plastic ball better. From 0 – 2 down Miu won the 3rd to 9 and the 4th 16 – 14. In the 4th Ding was 9 – 5 and 10 – 8 up. Miu was not only faster taking the ball at times very early, but she was extremely strong on the BH and excellent at placement and variation; not only was she capable of playing very wide off the side of the table but also targeted the body well and played the line to perfection especially straight to Ding’s FH. Once in the rally she never gave Ding time to settle, kept moving her and was always prepared to improvise from time to time. In the 5th Ding was 6 – 4 and 7 -- 6 up but never lead after that and lost 10 – 12.
In the semis and final, against the World 2 and 5, Miu never looked like losing and won both 3 – 0.
Just what can we take from these results. On the Chinese side there were a number of obvious points.
● All their players drifted away from the table at times and as soon as they did this they were open to the wider angled ball and being moved from one side to the other
● All their players were outplayed and outmaneuvered by Miu’s BH which was invariably taken very early and close to the table
● They underestimated her serves and 3rd ball and how well she could use them
● They couldn’t cope with her speed and total unpredictability in placement
● They couldn’t cope with the wide angles
● They tried to use their FH from the BH corner and often got out of position
There were also areas in which Miu could have performed better and been much more dominant. This is understandable as she is still young, finding her own feet and learning what she can and can’t do. She could have:
● Handled short serves and receives better at times and used a bigger range of alternatives and more precision in placement early in the rally
● Changed the pace more often especially when the opponent retreated
● Considered her strategies more when forced back herself. She is relatively weak from a deeper position
● Thought more to use the block on the FH side to create openings and pull players in and out
Overall I felt that the Chinese players are still trying to play celluloid ball strategies with the plastic. Around 2009 to 2010 they had some of the fastest players in the world and the priority was speed (Zhang Yining and Liu Shiwen) but over the last 5 years or so they’ve moved away to more spin and often a little deeper positions. As a result they are still lifting and not playing through the ball enough. The Chinese players often looked slow and ungainly against Miu’s extreme speed and wide placement, but of course over the years they have played much longer with celluloid.
On the other hand the Japanese being younger (Ito’s another example) have adapted quicker to plastic techniques. They understand that spin is of much less value, especially off the table and they are prioritizing speed from very early in the rally. I am just surprised that the Chinese have not caught up especially in the younger age groups and are not producing players of this type and working more at closer-to-table play. However when you’ve been so successful for decades perhaps it takes time to understand that when the science changes, the techniques and strategies may need to change also.
It is also quite ironic that the Chinese women after decades of speed and closer-to-table stop/start play have more recently been prepared to develop a little more like the men, only to have the game change with the introduction of the plastic ball.
● The last European woman to win a World Singles Championship was Angelica Roseanu in 1955. This was over 60 years ago and should indicate to coaches in Europe that we are not working in the right way with women’s development in our sport.
● Over many decades speed has been the dominant factor in the Asian women’s game and if they have to choose between speed and spin the choice is almost always speed.
● Asian women conventionally take the ball at a much earlier timing point than their European counterparts and control the rally with speed or pace variation until they can win the point.
● Asian women open as early as possible and the serve and 3rd ball are fundamental to their tactics.
● European women have always played further from the table and have prioritised spin which has worked in the European men’s game. To compete on a level playing field the European women need to be better closer and use more alternatives over the table.
● Women have never been capable of achieving as much topspin as men off the table due to lesser power, slower dynamic movement and around one third to one half less upper body strength.
● With the new plastic ball the maximum spin revolutions per second have almost halved in comparison with the small celluloid ball, therefore scientifically there is less point in women working at spin off the table.
● Asian women also consider footwork training of high importance as this gives them a better opportunity to get to the ball with more time for alternatives: to select the best stroke and play with power when they can.
● Asian and especially Chinese coaches are well aware of the multiplicity of styles (and the use of materials) in the women’s game and that many of these can be highly successful at international level. They focus much more on individual development and the use of differing techniques to strengthen unusual specialties peculiar to specific players.
● Coaches in Asia firmly believe in development for the senior game and many of their young girls never compete in the cadet or junior game. In Europe far too often we chase medals in mini events and develop strategies which we then need to change so the player can compete against senior players.
● Asian coaches see the Europeans’ service game as inadequate. They are viewed as having too few serves, being predictable in the way they use them and therefore limited in alternatives for the next two or three balls.
● When analysing matches between top Asians and Europeans it appears that the Europeans train far too much control play, too many rallies with drive to drive or spin to block, but too little emphasis on winning the point and if there is, too late in the rally. Against top Asians the Europeans have neither the time nor the opportunity to utilise the stronger technical aspects of their own game.
● European women need to be much stronger over the table with more alternatives in short play. Particularly important is the receive of short serve and the ability to flick, drop short or push mid-table from a very early timing point (with or without spin).
● To be successful European women must understand the key strategy with the new plastic ball, which is CHANGE. And this is change in all its aspects; change of speed, placement, length and spin; use of angles, straight shots down the lines, balls to the body or crossover; touch play and slow roll balls; use of sidespin (most advantageous spin with the plastic). The new creed has to be total unpredictability in play and the use of one’s own strengths at every opportunity.
● European women must compete hard against Asians and not just assume they will lose if the opponent merely looks Chinese.
● Japanese girls are already showing the way with the plastic, currently 8 of the Top 10 under 21 women are Japanese and none from China. Japanese girls are also holding the number one position in the World Junior Girls’ Team ranking with 6 players in the top 10 (including 1 to 4) compared to China’s 2.
During December 2003, at the World Junior Championships, China and Japan were in the girls’ Team Finals and China in the last 4 places in the girls’ singles.
Hui Jun, captain of the Hong Kong’s women’s team, commented as follows – ‘In Asian countries we have a better training system and a more advanced training system. We place a greater emphasis on developing good technique early in a player’s career, it’s like building a pyramid.’
‘We concentrate much more on the high level players. Also we have specific periods in the calendar that we devote specifically to training and other times where we concentrate on competition.’ In Asia the training schedule is given a high priority when determining the calendar, in other parts of the world it has to often fit around what is at best a chaotic schedule of matches and tournaments.
European players are strong when topspinning but Asian players are stronger when playing over the table – also they have better touch and feel in returning service and are aggressive on the serve and third ball. Countries like China organize their National League to have time for training and preparation for major tournaments – this is a definite advantage. They prepare better and bring a larger number of support people with them to take videos etc. of the opponents. Their approach is thorough and completely professional at all times. Often top coaches in Europe are hampered in their work by the domestic calendar.
The problem in Europe is that in many instances the emphasis is on accruing ranking points and in competing in as many events as possible to achieve this goal. The end result is that in the later teenage years too many players retire from the sport, their technique not good enough to enable them to progress further and they fall victims of a congested calendar that affords minimal time for training and development. Competing with Asia will always be tough but early emphasis on good technique, professional training methods and radical changes to the calendar would certainly be steps in narrowing the gap.
(One year, 1937, both finalists disqualified)
| HUNGARY | CZECHOSLOVAKIA | U.S.A. | AUSTRIA | ROMANIA | TOTAL |
| 10 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 6 | 21 |
| CHINA | JAPAN | KOREA | TOTAL |
| 14 | 7 | 3 | 24 |
| GERMANY | CZECHOSLOVAKIA | U.S.A. | ENGLAND | ROMANIA | JAPAN | TOTAL |
| 2 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 5 | 2 | 16 |
| CHINA | JAPAN | KOREA | RUSSIA | TOTAL |
| 14 | 6 | 2 | 1 | 23 |
Over the years I’ve encountered many different versions of inherited thinking, or tradition as some call it, in business, sport and government. The symptoms are always the same: blind faith in ‘the way’, nepotism to protect the institution and a culture that heavily discourages, even punishes, any questioning of authority and where change is an anathema. My unspoken thought is always – Why is our sport so far behind? Why are we so ridiculously amateur?
Some people say the present situation in European table tennis is a catastrophe, for me it is the reality we could have expected. Last 3 years table tennis in Europe has rapidly gone down - I believed that the young generation will be able to step into the shoes of the previous generation, but now I cannot see that they made any progress.
Concerning the women I am not very optimistic, we have really a very difficult situation in Europe.
In past some young European players came very fast to the top in Europe, like for example in their time Olga Nemes, but then they did not develop further. We never analysed why it happened to several European talented girls and if we do not start now to make it better the same will happen to the present young generation.
Our juniors are too long playing only in the juniors; we do not put them into senior teams where the competition is much stronger.
In my opinion table tennis situation in Europe regarding women is bad. I think that Europe is wrong in letting numerous young and old Chinese women play in European national teams.
I think Clive Woodward hit the nail on the head. We live and think too much in the past. If we are to succeed in today’s world we need to be totally professional in everything we do – the Associations need to be professionally run, coaching and selection need to be professional and above all we need to have the right people in the top jobs. Many Associations in Europe are unfortunately quite backward in girls’ development. Because of poor salaries we do not get top coaches in the girls’ game. Girls are often treated as ‘second class’ and if there is any shortage of funding they are the first to suffer.
If for example we are not producing numbers of top girls and girls who can achieve real results outside of Europe, do we really think that this situation is going to change dramatically if we keep the same old coaching and development staff, doing the same old jobs, in the same old way? In Brazilian football you are National Coach only for the 4 years from one world cup to the next and then you step aside for the next management team. Brazil is always in search of new ideas and fresh impetus to keep things moving forward, no matter how good they are or what they have just won.
What we really need with the girls in Europe in the case of many Associations is a completely fresh start. No-one can tell me that we don’t have girls with talent because we do, neither do I subscribe to the view that our girls are not committed and are not prepared to work hard enough. With the right guidance and handling we can have a dozen top girls in most European countries within one year. It is not the basic ‘clay’ that is the problem; unfortunately it’s the way the clay is moulded and developed over the years which results in substandard pottery. We need the professional approach; we need to produce winners, as one or two countries in Europe such as Romania and Germany succeed in doing.
So what do we need to do? ‘First of all, the players must be in focus and not the coaches. We need to look at every player as an individual and understand that two players cannot be coached in the same way depending on their different needs’. These are the words of Emanuel Christiansson (Sweden) and no truer words can be spoken in the case of girls’ development. In the women’s game there are many more ways of playing and many more paths to the top than there are in the men’s game. Training top women demands a great deal more from the coach than working with men. This is not only in communication,attention/favouritism, the physical and mental aspects of training, but also the detailed knowledge of the varying materials and techniques/tactics used in the women’s game. Your role too as a women’s coach is often just as supportive as it is tactical.
Far too often in the development of young girl players we are just not professional enough. We ‘play’ at it and wonder why we then don’t get top level players! The first question we must ask of our coaches is not even to do with table tennis – it is this: ‘Have you had teenage children of your own, are you able to get on the same wavelength as young ‘adults’, can you get the best out of them without just wielding the ‘big stick?’ Because if you can’t, you will find it next to impossible to help your players to attain their full potential.
The next aspect too is of major importance – coaching is a two-way process, with coach and player working together to move forward. This is where one of the prime qualities of the coach comes into its own – that of being a good listener. The world’s best players, whether young or old, are often strong characters, who have instinctive ideas as to just how they should play. The last thing they need as a coach is a dictator or someone who insists on forcing them into a mould of his/her own choosing. This is not the way to develop potential but too often unfortunately it is hard for experts to withhold their expertise sufficiently to coach well!
On the same lines at national level just how many coaches work with ‘the inner game’? The awareness of bodily sensations is crucial to the development of skills. Unfortunately the majority of coaches persist in imposing their technique from the outside. The coach should instead try to identify a new way forward with players working from their own experience and perceptions rather than his own. How can the coach decide how positive the player will be at 8 – 10 down or 15 all? Does the coach know just when and where the player is comfortable playing backhands or forehands and exactly where the ‘cut-off’ point is at the crossover? A number of conclusions have to come from inside the player – the coach can prompt, stimulate and inspire but an attempt to dictate will lessen the player’s input and usually water down the long-term potential.
One of the single most vital factors in maximising potential with the young girl’s development and rather more important than with the male is ‘direction’. Girls need to know where they are going and how to get there. It is important to them to understand how they play now and will play in the future. Winning is often not the overriding priority but continual progress and a clearly defined career path are fundamental to their development. Far too often even in National Centres the girls do not get the required individual attention.
At least once a fortnight the coach and player should have an assessment meeting to talk about direction and to ensure the player is satisfied with progress. If a number of coaches are involved with the same player (as unfortunately occurs in many national setups) then each should update information daily on the computer so that other coaches and the player are all equally aware of progress and changes. It goes without saying that the player should have complete access to the information at all times and be allowed to add her own updates as often as she wants. The schedule should not only cover technique and tactics but also mental and physical programmes even if these are handled by outside experts.
It is particularly important that the physical and mental areas are focused on at an early age. Many girls are often less ready to work hard at physical aspects and need to learn good habits from the outset. Girls too usually need more support on the mental side as they often lack self-confidence and can lapse into negative attitudes more easily than their male counterparts.
We said earlier there are many more ways of playing in the women’s game — we only need to look at world champions over the last twenty years to see the variety of styles. The evaluation of, guidance towards and development of an individual playing style are particularly necessary in the case of young girls and should be introduced at an early stage in the player’s career. In many cases this will require from the coach specialist knowledge of rubbers, sponges and techniques/tactics and often some experimentation from the player. After all in the final analysis it is the player herself who must feel comfortable with her ‘weapons’ and with the tactics these weapons will facilitate.
As Li Yan Yun has said, in the past good European girls quickly reached a level, but then did not develop further, a problem which must be analysed and resolved. If we look back over the last several years out of all the top (European –born) juniors probably only G. Pota (Hungary) has continued to progress after attaining top junior status in Europe to reach the top 30 women in the world. Dodean and Samara are now getting there, both in U21 and Women’s rankings, but unfortunately as far as competing with the Asians and as far as numbers are concerned we have just too few top girl players.
What then should be the first step to redressing the situation and getting our training for girls on the right lines? Obviously as a start go to the ‘fountainhead’ of knowledge! Romania produces top girls who continue to develop to the next level in the women’s game. Send our coaches to study the approach and the methods, send our girl players too, to train and learn. If one country is able to produce the goods let’s swallow our national pride, ‘climb on to the bandwagon’ and find out how it is done!
One very important point here however, is which coaches are we going to send? Unfortunately in a number of countries in Europe the tendency is to isolate top young players from their own coaches, presumably on the premise that only the National Team Trainers have the required knowledge for further development. Yet strangely enough when you talk to top coaches in Europe and discuss the way forward in terms of developing top talent and trying to compete with the Asians, more often than not the coaches stress the vital importance of individual development and that players should come to select high-level training camps in Europe not with their National Trainers but in fact with their own personal coaches. They stress the importance of having the coaches on hand who are actually working on a day to day basis with the players.
This perhaps underscores the importance of teamwork in any administration. Unless the majority of your association, players, coaches, organisers etc. are working together and pulling in the same direction, you will indeed struggle to progress and to move forward. Unfortunately many associations are bad in communication and neglect to keep, even in the case of their top youngsters, parents and personal coaches ‘in the loop’. This only gives rise to a considerable amount of ill-feeling and discontent.
One other aspect which requires some deep thought is the logistics of a number of European countries working together to beat the Chinese. We cannot allow any power struggle, which country will be in charge, which coaches will oversee the programme etc., to get in the way of the development and the progress of the players. It is the players who must be in focus!
Another vital factor too is size. The single most vital factor in terms of restricting innovative thinking is size — train players in large groups and nothing happens. Everyone thinks the same thing at the same time, there is a pressure to conform whether it is intended or not, a group uniformity. Put three people on a committee and something happens, ten and it gets harder, fifty and nothing gets done. Any biologist will tell you that small groups in isolation evolve fastest. Put 150 birds on an ocean island and they evolve fast, put 10 million on a big continent and evolution slows and stops.
For the human species evolution occurs mainly through behaviour — we innovate new behaviour to adapt and change. The effect of large groups, of mass media, is to restrict behavioural change. Mass media swamps diversity, all differences vanish, even humanity’s most necessary resource, intellectual diversity, disappears. If we accept that the way forward is to work together in Europe, then the way we do this and how we retain the individual focus are areas which must be addressed first.
So just what will Europe do to get the ball rolling in the case of our girls? Unfortunately, probably nothing! In many countries bureaucracy and politics continue to rule and the interests and needs of the individual athletes, the only ones who can produce the results, come a rather poor second or third. Associations are more often than not reluctant or even afraid to use the resources they do have and tragically this applies even at levels higher than National Associations.
Countries like Great Britain for example simply chose to ignore their former Olympic gold medallists in contributing to prepare for Beijing. Instead the real ‘greats’ of the past, like Daley Thompson and Seb Coe are helping to train rivals from other countries! As Thompson said in a recent interview – ‘It’s down to the British athletics regime. The country’s most under-utilised resource must be our experience.’