Larry they screwed me!
marco
And thank God that Paul Kovac was the umpire!!!!
O.k., phweeww I'm breathless. How can we change it? Paul is my witness.
He was the umpire. I beat that guy 3 straight!!! They wrote it down as a
loss 3 straight.
YES!
marco
Larry Hodges
news:nZr38.7718$JT5.2...@news1.rdc1.az.home.com...
Then you contact Fran Boardman at USATT, rat...@usatt.org. That's why I
wrote:
> Unless you are going to claim that the posted results are incorrect,
It still doesn't quite match up with your claims, however! But you are
getting closer.
-Larry Hodges
marco
hadn't lost to felix. But part of being 2000 is being steady so I guess
that 1950 is a good rating for me, at least it is accurate and I agree with
it.
I claimed I would be 1950 and that is what it should be. When they add this
win it will be 3 good wins. The 1796 guy was tough and I'm very surprised
that he apparently didn't do very well. Actually, Ragmar told me that he
sucked and I didn't understand it at all. Guess it had to do with styles.
I had trouble with his serves, he killed my slow openups, and blocked well.
He had antispin on one side. Oh well. Also, I never expected to lose from
my training partner felix. At the least I thought that felix would go all
the way in the u1800 and get adjusted but as you know the sandbagger Sergie
Gutkin won that event along with the u1700 event though his rating is over
1900 right now. But I'm not that mad at sergie, at least it wasn't as bad
as those 500 points underrated puerto ricans in florida.
All in all there weren't too many sandbaggers this year except for certain
doubles teams in the u3700.
When I get better and start training I will take it to a new level and as
soon as I get under 200 pounds I will be 2000 level. If I get to 175 this
year I will be playing close to 2200. You heard it here first. And despite
what you say, I'm not that far off the mark with my posts. I told you I
would be 1950 when I was rated 1796. I think I came very close, especially
since you guys said that it would take 2 years to get 200 points.
marco
"Larry Hodges" <la...@larrytt.com> wrote in message
news:5Js38.11239$067.4...@news1.rdc1.md.home.com...
FengYue
> When I get better and start training I will take it to a new level and as
> soon as I get under 200 pounds I will be 2000 level. If I get to 175 this
why? there maybe tournaments that have over 200 pounds event.
> year I will be playing close to 2200. You heard it here first. And despite
> what you say, I'm not that far off the mark with my posts. I told you I
> would be 1950 when I was rated 1796. I think I came very close, especially
> since you guys said that it would take 2 years to get 200 points.
why is this silly usatt rating so _important_?
marco
It prevents staying low during the point for one thing. It makes the
preparation for a loop sluggish, and takes some of the "snap" out of the
execution. Try putting a 25 pound napsack on your back and see how it
limits you. Every 10 pounds is 25 rating points.
marco
"FengYue" <fen...@bluerose.windmoon.nu> wrote in message
news:T6t38.2444$Kt4....@rwcrnsc51.ops.asp.att.net...
FengYue
you 11-5 easily. all he does is blocking.
besides, you're what? 33 years old now? You're pretty much finished
as a looper. If you are still 13, i'd say, yeah yeah maybe you're
talent enough so that 13 is not considered too late to start being a
looper.
the weight, look, marco, ever heard of transfering your body weight
into the loop stroke? the heavier you're, more powerful loops you
will be able to do. :)
oh yeah, i've been trying to put up some weight, never successed.
what's your secret?
marco
if I lose I'd rather lose trying a reasonable technique rather than an
impossible one.
As for weight, in this sport you better be light enough to throw your weight
into the ball and then be able to recover for the next ball. And you have
to be able to do this relative to the speed of most balls. That means you
better be rather light. Or extremely talented. Me being neither I'm pretty
much screwed but If I can get down to 175 I think I can reach 2200.
If you want to gain weight it depends mostly on your body type. To do it
properly takes years and really good and rigid habits. If you just want to
get fat then go to a lot of bars, drink up, then get to a diner around
midnight and put down 2 cheesburgers and some french fries that are dripping
with country gravy and melted cheese. Don't ever drink diet pop. Carbs
carbs carbs the weight will go on sooner or later.
marco
"FengYue" <fen...@bluerose.windmoon.nu> wrote in message
news:c3u38.10019$l61.46406@rwcrnsc54...
Neil Highams
guess Larry must be a "freak" (as you have frequently posted), as most
people would have told you to shove it! Is 18 years a record for the longest
time anyone has spent in puberty?
Neil Highams
:-)
Neil Highams
> when your technique is sound then the weight becomes the limiting factor.
> It prevents staying low during the point for one thing. It makes the
> preparation for a loop sluggish, and takes some of the "snap" out of the
> execution. Try putting a 25 pound napsack on your back and see how it
> limits you. Every 10 pounds is 25 rating points.
>
push you up? Or do they have reverse gravity in Marcoland? :-)
Neil Highams
watersl...@erols.com
>
> when your technique is sound then the weight becomes the limiting factor.
> It prevents staying low during the point for one thing. It makes the
> preparation for a loop sluggish, and takes some of the "snap" out of the
> execution. Try putting a 25 pound napsack on your back and see how it
> limits you. Every 10 pounds is 25 rating points.
The math is a little fuzzy here.
You are 210 lbs now, and claim to be 1950 level
You said "If I get to 175 this year I will be playing close to 2200".
210-175 = 35 lbs.
If 10 lbs is 25 rating pts, 35 lbs is 87.5 points.
That would still put you under 2040.
That's 160+ points below 2200.
marco
recently figured out how to put heavy spin on a serve. I figure the
improved serve is worth 50 points at least. Now for the other 100 points,
hmmm, I'll have to get back to you on that.
marco
<watersl...@erols.com> wrote in message news:3C4EC5...@erols.com...
watersl...@erols.com
take to MAINTAIN a 2000+ rating, let alone 2100, let alone reaching
2200. I hope you at least break 2000. That's an accomplishment right
there. If I did it at 44, you should be able to at 34. Of course I went
right back down again, so watch out. Good luck.
Beavis and Butthead
> You are 210 lbs now, and claim to be 1950 level
> You said "If I get to 175 this year I will be playing close to 2200".
>
> 210-175 = 35 lbs.
> If 10 lbs is 25 rating pts, 35 lbs is 87.5 points.
> That would still put you under 2040.
> That's 160+ points below 2200.
That's math in Marcoland. Let's hope he's not teaching it to those kids at school.
B&B
Musashi
> Every 10 pounds is 25 rating points.
>
>marco
>
Holy buckets! Now all I need to do is get down to 105 pounds and I
will have accomplished my short term goals! lol
;)
FengYue
> ;)
well, i personally guarantee that if marco gets down to 70 pounds,
he will not be rated higher than 1200.
ZeroEffect25
ha ha ha, that happened to me so many times. They messed me up and I lost
points like in 5 tournments but, thats cool cause I get to play more events.
garbage....
Djgambeat
What does it take to be 2200? How can you tell if someone is playing 2200? So
many times in the past, I've had conversations where someone would say that
he/she/I is/was playing in a particular USATT level. I really can't tell. All
I can see was that the person has good strokes but awful footwork for example.
But they can estimate that they are in particular rating range.
Sir, in your case, what did you do to break 2000?
Thanks and more power.
Diego
marco
2000 but I came close.
marco
"Djgambeat" <djga...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20020123170845...@mb-cg.aol.com...
watersl...@erols.com
If you are asking me, I had been gradually improving and had started to
beat some 2000+ players. Practicing against better players deifintely
helped. I was in the mid 1900s for a while and then had one good
tournament (Columbus) where I beat a number of people around 2000 and
some over. I don't recall exactly, but I think one was about 2100 and
one about 2200. I jumped or was adjusted up to 2060 or so. I guess at
that tournament I was playing at least 2000 level, maybe a bit better.
However I did not maintain that level afterwards. A few weeks late a
played a tournament and lost about 100 ponts and went back into the mid
1900s again. This is the way the US rating system works. It rewards
people who play well and it penalizes people who play badly *in a given
tournament*. It does not really reflect your true level, only how you
played in the last tournament. On the other hand, some people's level
can fluctuate. They can blow a little hot or cold, depending on focus
and other factors. I am a bit like that. Over the last couple of years
my rating has fluctuated from the high 1800s to the low 2000s. My normal
level is probably not more than somewhere in the 1900s.
There are a number of factors which are needed to reach any rating,
whether it's 2200 or whatever. But it depends on style. You could reach
that mark by being a very offensive and powerful looper, or perhaps a
very consistent chopper, or whatever. I don't think you can say that
2200 level players have mastered xyz techniques. It depends on style.
Another wrinkle -- A player whose rating was gained in a geographic area
dominated by one style, (eg clean two wing looping) may have difficulty
if he goes elsewhere or to a national tournament and has to play
choppers or blockers hardbatters or whatever.
Others may have better answers. Anyone?
Julian
Alan & Erin Williams
Envelopes to Colorado Springs addressed to 'Ratings Coordinator' and stuffed with
postal money orders made payable to 'Cash'.
Alan
'yes, ferchrissakes I'm kidding'
Larry Hodges
> when your technique is sound then the weight becomes the limiting factor.
> It prevents staying low during the point for one thing. It makes the
> preparation for a loop sluggish, and takes some of the "snap" out of the
> execution. Try putting a 25 pound napsack on your back and see how it
> limits you. Every 10 pounds is 25 rating points.
Not quite. Last year I went from 190 lbs to 172. My rating dropped 100
points. You are way exaggerating. The connection is obviously there, but not
nearly this much. If you think all you have to do is drop to 175 pounds and
you'll be 2200 (as you posted), then you have a major surprise when you find
losing weight only helps a few aspects of your game, and doesn't help your
serve, return of serve, blocking, pushing, etc.
-Larry Hodges
Larry Hodges
> first, why loop? that peter guy with a long pips can beat
> you 11-5 easily. all he does is blocking.
>
> besides, you're what? 33 years old now? You're pretty much finished
> as a looper. If you are still 13, i'd say, yeah yeah maybe you're
> talent enough so that 13 is not considered too late to start being a
> looper.
I'm not sure if 33 ends a person's looping game, but I'm 41 and age has
affected my loop. My refusal to switch to a less athletic game is the
primary reason why my rating went down 100 points recently. (I don't expect
to stay down that low, but my level is a bit lower. Off course, I don't ever
really practice.)
-Larry Hodges
Larry Hodges
> If I play Peter chen I will imitate Dave Sakai not Gerge Braithwaite.
Even
> if I lose I'd rather lose trying a reasonable technique rather than an
> impossible one.
>
> As for weight, in this sport you better be light enough to throw your
weight
> into the ball and then be able to recover for the next ball. And you have
> to be able to do this relative to the speed of most balls. That means you
> better be rather light. Or extremely talented. Me being neither I'm
pretty
> much screwed but If I can get down to 175 I think I can reach 2200.
This won't help you in returning my serve, stopping my third-ball attack,
handling my receive, blocking my loops and smashes, etc. If you'll remember,
I wrote an article about how so many players believe that they'll go up a
level by improving one aspect of their game. That's your thinking here. You
yourself claimed your receive was about 1400 recently (again, wild
exaggeration - it's better than that), but you won't beat 2200 players very
often with a 2000 receive, unless the rest of your game is 2400. You don't
have anything close to a 2000 receive, and none of your game is 2400, so you
have a long way to go. Until you understand just what the journey is to
2200, and what you have to do to make that journey, you'll waste a lot of
time, probably break 2000, but will have difficulty moving past 2100.
-Larry Hodges
Larry Hodges
news:1011786009.13282....@news.demon.co.uk...
Actually, Marco is correct here. Heavier players have to keep their knees
relatively straight to carry their weight. Lighter players can bend their
knees more, stay low, and so their center of gravity is lower.
-Larry Hodges
marco
see larry if you read the whole post before you argue life will make more
sense.
:)
marco
"Larry Hodges" <la...@larrytt.com> wrote in message
news:QlH38.12572$067.5...@news1.rdc1.md.home.com...
marco
looping game for a long, long time. Look at Musa and George Braithwaite as
obvious examples. I believe proper diet and care of body will be essential
as I get older, not to mention flexibility. But I stretch a lot already- I
can touch my palms to the floor with my knees straight, can almost do the
splits scissor ways, not the van dam way, etc. Besides that I'm not really a
"looper" but more of an all around player.
marco
"Larry Hodges" <la...@larrytt.com> wrote in message
news:inH38.12573$067.5...@news1.rdc1.md.home.com...
marco
here? Is larry the one trying to upset me tonight? What do you guys think.
I won't even bother with him for the rest of the evening. Maybe tomorrow
I'll give him a fresh start and see how he sounds.
marco
"Larry Hodges" <la...@larrytt.com> wrote in message
news:TqH38.12580$067.5...@news1.rdc1.md.home.com...
FengYue
> O.k. folks, am I the only one who doesn't like the tone of larry's response
> here? Is larry the one trying to upset me tonight? What do you guys think.
> I won't even bother with him for the rest of the evening. Maybe tomorrow
> I'll give him a fresh start and see how he sounds.
> marco
what he said was true. losing some weight won't make you a 2200 player.
I've a co-worker here. he's much like you. he's about 1300 and he really
believes that he practices seriously for about 6 months, he could be a
world top player or even world champion. I'm sure he won't think that
way anymore if I take him to a local tournament.
you're hopeless, marco.
FengYue
> That's why I said "when your technique is sound then weight becomes ...."
> see larry if you read the whole post before you argue life will make more
> sense.
> :)
> marco
define 'sound' technique? Didn't you say that chopping block is
a weird stroke? what strokes are not considered as 'weird' by you then?
sgordon
: am I the only one who doesn't like the tone of larry's response here?
It's not great, but it least it's not loaded with obscenities and
vulgarities like many of your responses to him (and me and others).
I'd much rather receive a message like Larry's, than ones like I've
gotten from you where you call me all sorts of names.
Scott
marco
it's awesome. And the fact that I did it without lots of coaching or great
players to learn from makes it even more significant.
I think maybe you are the one who is hopeless. How much has your level
increased in the last 6 months? How about in the last year?
marco
"FengYue" <fen...@bluerose.windmoon.nu> wrote in message
news:QRH38.1860$T2.2300@rwcrnsc54...
marco
we'll talk.
Until then you go on ignore.
marco
"FengYue" <fen...@bluerose.windmoon.nu> wrote in message
news:LXH38.1885$T2.2164@rwcrnsc54...
marco
the most annoying posters in the history of posting was a well-liked person.
Other than that I don't know you and I have no reason to call you anything
other than "scott". By the way I thought you were 21 years old someone just
told me that you are about 40.
marco
"sgordon" <sgo...@sonic.net> wrote in message
news:QjI38.12368$TI3.1...@typhoon.sonic.net...
Bruce H. Liu
marco wrote:
>
> I only called you a name because of a gut reaction when you said that one of
> the most annoying posters in the history of posting was a well-liked person.
Therefore, it makes sense to call people names? What's your rank? (the
most
annoying posters in the history)
/Bruce
Alan & Erin Williams
> marco wrote:
> >
> > I only called you a name because of a gut reaction when you said that one of
> > the most annoying posters in the history of posting was a well-liked person.
>
> Therefore, it makes sense to call people names? What's your rank? (the
> most
> annoying posters in the history)
>
> /Bruce
Congratulations, Bruce. You have identified a skill area where marco truly *is*
2400.
Anyone who can manage to start a flame war with Scott Gordon has the social
skills of a lemur, in my opinion.
Alan
Bruce H. Liu
marco wrote:
>
> I went 200 points in 6 months. You think that's insignificant? I think
> it's awesome. And the fact that I did it without lots of coaching or great
> players to learn from makes it even more significant.
>
Marco, it is pretty good.
> I think maybe you are the one who is hopeless. How much has your level
> increased in the last 6 months? How about in the last year?
I think you barked at the wrong person. I know this guy who
jumped over 500 points in six months and he is not a junior.
Jumping over 200 points is not usual, even in one tournament.
However, staying at higher level is even more challenging.
Hope you can stay there. Of course, with your 2400-level tactic and
world-class block, I don't see any problem.
/Bruce
marco
do I have to do to get you to stop making your comments towards me at every
chance you get? Do you want cash? Let me know.
marco
"Alan & Erin Williams" <will...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:3C4F586C...@mindspring.com...
marco
if I lose weight and work on a few flaws I can hit 2100 rather quickly. I
think given my current living conditions I can get to 2200. But that is an
upper limit of what I can accomplish here. However, if I ever move to a
place that has truly good table tennis, who knows? For sure, I would be
satisfied with 2200 as a life goal.
marco
"Bruce H. Liu" <bl...@htmlcom.com> wrote in message
news:3C4F5A1F...@htmlcom.com...
FengYue
> I went 200 points in 6 months. You think that's insignificant? I think
> it's awesome. And the fact that I did it without lots of coaching or great
> players to learn from makes it even more significant.
notice that 200 points from 1600 to
1800 is totally different than 2000 to 2200, not to mention that you're
not even 2000 yet.
> I think maybe you are the one who is hopeless. How much has your level
> increased in the last 6 months? How about in the last year?
I went from 1600 down to 1100 in 6 months. 500 points difference.
Am I hopeless? Very likely:) but who cares, I'm playing this sport for
fun not for that silly USATT rating.
> marco
FengYue
> I think you barked at the wrong person. I know this guy who
> jumped over 500 points in six months and he is not a junior.
oh gosh...Bruce has successfully identified me. i guess
it's time for me to go back to practice my backhand loop.
FengYue
> place that has truly good table tennis, who knows? For sure, I would be
> satisfied with 2200 as a life goal.
You will be a world champion if you move here (palo alto,ca area).
You will be the first world champion weighted over 200 pounds if you
keep your current weight.
Sorry that I made you a little upset in my previous posts. I hope
this one will make you happy.
Berndt J. G. Mann
Marco'd be the second world champion dressing out at over 200 pounds
if he kept his current weight. Ferenc Sido, last hardbat man to win a
World's Singles Title (1953), went about 6'4" and 220 lbs.
Berndt Mann
Iskandar Taib
Alan & Erin Williams <will...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>Anyone who can manage to start a flame war with Scott Gordon has the social
>skills of a lemur, in my opinion.
Lemurs are actually pretty social animals, and have great social
skills. Grizzly bears, on the other hand.. Or honey badgers..
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Iskandar Taib | The only thing worse than Peach ala
Internet: nt...@steel.ucs.indiana.edu | Frog is Frog ala Peach
Home page: http://bigwig.geology.indiana.edu/iskandar/isk2.html
watersl...@erols.com
> Marco'd be the second world champion dressing out at over 200 pounds
> if he kept his current weight. Ferenc Sido, last hardbat man to win a
> World's Singles Title (1953), went about 6'4" and 220 lbs.
Exactamundo. Hey Berndt, as you know, the Columbus tournament has a 220+
lb event at their tournament in March. It's tempting, but gaining 20 lbs
in a couple of months would be quite a challenge. ;-)
sgordon
: I only called you a name because of a gut reaction when you said that one
: of the most annoying posters in the history of posting was a well-liked
: person.
Another poster said that *nobody* likes him, and I reported that in
my club, he is well-liked. So for that, you are somehow justified to
jump in and call me the following: "little twit", "but-pirate"[sic],
"bend-over buddy", as well as make reference to my "bunghole". Now
you say that's OK since you had a "gut reaction". Haha!!! And you
honestly expect people to join you in condemning LARRY's posting style?
I don't think a team of comedy writers could come up with this stuff.
: Other than that I don't know you and I have no reason to call you anything
: other than "scott".
I would appreciate that, given the alternatives you select.
: By the way I thought you were 21 years old someone just
: told me that you are about 40.
41, in case for some strange reason that matters. Just a suggestion:
it isn't generally considered to be a smart idea to go around calling
people that you don't even know all sorts of juvenile names. Someday,
you could really piss off the wrong person... someone who is on the
other side of a very important bridge that you just burned... someone
who won't be impressed with your "gut reaction" explanation, or who
by contrast might have another way of expressing HIS "gut reaction".
Scott
Tong Lee
It could be better, it could be worse, or worst.
Better:
Marco, I think that going from about 1900 to 2200 requires more than
just losing your weight from about 220 lb down to 175 lb. Merely losing
weight won't help you against a 2200 player in returning his serve,
stopping his third-ball attack, handling his receive, blocking his loops
and smashes, etc. Many players believe that they'll go up a level by
improving one aspect of their game. In reality, the probability of
these players succeeding to do so is very low. Let's look at it another
way: if you have a 1900 receive and a 2000 serve, you need other
aspects of your game to be, say 2400, to compensate, in order to beat
2200 players more often than not. Or, all aspects of your game must be
at least 2200 in order to do this. Thus, a better approach for you
might be to identify several aspects of your game that you want to
improve on and concentrate on working hard at them. Picking those
aspects of your game that can be facilitated by a concomitant reduction
of your weight would also be helpful and help you achieve your goal
faster. All the best!
Larry
Worse:
Be realistic, Marco. You have no chance of ever coming close to 2200 by
just losing weight. I am a 2200 player and I know what it takes to be a
2200 player. How can losing weight help you in returning my serve,
stopping my third-ball attack, handling my receive, blocking my loops
and smashes, etc.? I have written an article about how so many players
believe that they'll go up a level by improving one aspect of their
game. You are making the same mistake here (What's new?). You yourself
claimed your receive was about 1400 recently (again, wild exaggeration -
it's better than that). O.K., I'll be generous and say that you have a
2000 receive, but you won't beat 2200 players very often with a 2000
receive, unless the rest of your game is 2400. The fact of the matter
is that you don't have anything close to a 2000 receive, and none of
your game is 2400, so you have a long way to go. Until you understand
just what the journey is to 2200, and what you have to do to make that
journey, you'll waste a lot of time, probably break 2000, but will have
difficulty moving past 2100. Remember, you heard it from me first.
Larry Hodges
USATT National Coach
Worst:
Marco, I marvel at your stupidity, and I really feel sorry for your
students. How the hell can you go from 1900 to 2200 merely by losing
weight? If what you shamelessly claim were true, Jenny Craig would be
able to help USATT increase the average skill level of its members from
1400 to 1600 in 18 months as 80% of the U.S. population is overweight.
Anyone who believes Jenny can do this needs psychiatric help. I am
speaking authoritatively here. I have written an article about how so
many players believe that they'll go up a level by improving one aspect
of their game, but I have yet to meet such a person in my 25 years as a
player, a coach, and a writer of table tennis articles. You are making
the same mistake in your wild assertion. This has been a problem of
yours on this newsgroup. You yourself claimed your receive was about
1400 recently. I have never come across a 2200 player with such a
pathetic receive as yours, and you won't be the first one, after you get
down to 175 lb. O.K., I'll be generous and say that you have a 2000
receive, but you still won't beat 2200 players very often with a 2000
receive, unless the rest of your game is 2400. The sad fact is that you
don't have anything close to a 2000 receive, and none of your game is
2400, so you have a long way to go. Until you understand just what it
takes to be a 2200 like me, and do what it takes, you are dreaming if
you think you can reach 2200. My guess is that you will probably break
2000, and perhaps reach 2100 - that's the max, and I am being generous
again here. I know you don't like to hear this, but it's the truth.
Accept the truth, and the truth will set you free.
Larry Hodges
Mensa Member, Certified USATT Coach, USATT Magazine Editor, Author of
dozens of table tennis articles, etc.
:-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-)
Tong Lee
Alan & Erin Williams
Standing applause!!
That's funny stuff Tong. Do you always get two birds with one stone?
Admiringly,
Alan
Alan & Erin Williams
> In article <3C4F586C...@mindspring.com>,
> Alan & Erin Williams <will...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
> >Anyone who can manage to start a flame war with Scott Gordon has the social
> >skills of a lemur, in my opinion.
>
> Lemurs are actually pretty social animals, and have great social
> skills. Grizzly bears, on the other hand.. Or honey badgers..
>
Sorry to have maligned lemurs, Iskander. Baboons are social animals too, but are
in no danger of forming universities or producing a new form of pasta.
Alan
Larry Hodges
news:20020123170845...@mb-cg.aol.com...
> Question:
>
> What does it take to be 2200?
To maintain any rating, in theory you have to be able to beat players
rated
200 points lower than you roughly 39 out of 40 matches. This may seem
extreme, but if you lose to someone 200 points lower, you lose 40
points; if
you win, you gain 1 point.
In reality, it's probably not quite that high a ratio. But if you
can't beat
a 2000 player 18-19 times out of 20 in a tournament, you're not 2200.
That's
why I find claims by people about how they could be 2200 with a little
training or losing weight rather amusing. They don't realize how
difficult
it is to beat a 2000 player that consistently - basically, you win
unless
you are very, very off and the 2000 player is very, very on.
Players who think they can reach 2200 relatively easily should think
that over: are they really that close to being able to beat a 2000
player 18 or 19 times out of 20 matches?
You also have to beat 2100 players about 5 out of 6 times, for the
same
reasons. That's not easy!
And, of course, you have to break even with other 2200 players.
By using the reverse math, you can see that, surprisingly, beating
higher-rated players isn't as important to maintaining a rating. It's
beating the lower-rated players steadily that's important. But if you
can't
beat them, you won't beat many stronger players.
As to technique, a 2200 player has strong technique, makes few
careless
mistakes, is generally efficient at putting the ball away, is not
afraid to
play either offense or defense, doesn't give many easy third-ball
attacks to
players with their level attacks, can control play with their serves,
and
can attack pretty strongly for 3-4 shots against a good blocker. They
don't
miss their opening loops against backspin much, unless they are going
for a
difficult putaway.
The difference between 2200 and, say, 2400? 2400 players can
third-ball
against the 2200 receive, they can play at a faster pace, their
techniques
are more advanced or ingrained, they can counter-attack better, and
make
even fewer mistakes.
The difference between 2200 and 2000? Again, much is serve & receive.
About
2000 is where players stop having glaring weaknesses, but they often
don't
have anything that really threatens a 2200 player - they may have
strong
shots, but can't consistently get them into play. A 2000 player
usually can
attack strongly for 2-3 shots against a good blocker, and most 2200
players
can block them down by splitting the short points, and winning the
long
points.
-Larry Hodges
John Starr
<> Exactamundo. Hey Berndt, as you know, the Columbus tournament has a 220+
> lb event at their tournament in March. It's tempting, but gaining 20 lbs
> in a couple of months would be quite a challenge. ;-)
OOH, OOH, OOH!!! Berndt who would be my competition and can they play
against hardbat?
JTR (rotund)
Larry Hodges
> o.k. Alan, I give up. You win. White flag is up, I'm saying Uncle. What
> do I have to do to get you to stop making your comments towards me at every
> chance you get? Do you want cash? Let me know.
>
> marco
Marco,
It's not just Alan. Haven't you noticed just about every regular
poster has been on you? When will it register on you? Just do the
following for now: 1) Post less - the table tennis world doesn't
center around you; 2) Read carefully what you are responding to before
responding: 3) ***Think*** before you post; 4) Stop flaming people
like a little kid.
-Larry Hodges
P.S. But I'll take the cash, if it's all the same to you! :)
Alan & Erin Williams
> "marco" <cacc...@aol.com> wrote in message news:<K1J38.8385$JT5.2...@news1.rdc1.az.home.com>...
> > o.k. Alan, I give up. You win. White flag is up, I'm saying Uncle. What
> > do I have to do to get you to stop making your comments towards me at every
> > chance you get? Do you want cash? Let me know.
> >
> > marco
>
> Marco,
>
> It's not just Alan. Haven't you noticed just about every regular
> poster has been on you? When will it register on you? Just do the
> following for now: 1) Post less - the table tennis world doesn't
> center around you; 2) Read carefully what you are responding to before
> responding: 3) ***Think*** before you post; 4) Stop flaming people
> like a little kid.
>
If I do it 'every chance I get' (even though you are killfiled!!) then maybe you give me too many
chances.
Try posting less than ten times an hour, four hours a day. Try omitting the profanity. Try not
claiming to know more than everyone else, because you don't.
There.
That's more wasted bandwidth.
Alan
Larry Hodges
> I went 200 points in 6 months. You think that's insignificant? I think
> it's awesome. And the fact that I did it without lots of coaching or
great
> players to learn from makes it even more significant.
Few players go up smoothly in rating. Most go up in jumps. Nearly every
regular tournament player has had jumps of 200 points in 6 months. I've done
it a number of times, as have just about everyone on this board. So that
means the large majority of USATT members are "awesome," correct?
Now, if you can keep doing this, rather than fall back on your pervious
pattern of staying the same rating for most of the 1990s, that'll be
impressive.
By the way, you keep going on about the advantages we have in Maryland. I
moved to North Carolina in 1979 and spent two years there. Although I had
been rated over 1900 for a short time due to one great tournament, I was
about 1850 rated when I moved there, and I stayed about that my first year.
I went over 2100 the second year. My practice partner was rated 1750; I was
the best player at the club most of the time I was there, with one 2000
player coming by occasionally once a week. I simply knew what I needed to
work on, and practiced those techniques. I believe you have a better setup
for practicing in AZ then I did in NC. So if you want to impress me, you
have to go over 2100 this year. (Note - I didn't just go over 2100, I've
stayed over 2100 now for 21 years nearly continuously, except for two times
in the 1980s when I was injured and played anyway.)
-Larry Hodges
Bruce H. Liu
Alan & Erin Williams wrote:
>
> "Bruce H. Liu" wrote:
>
> > marco wrote:
> > >
> > > I only called you a name because of a gut reaction when you said that one of
> > > the most annoying posters in the history of posting was a well-liked person.
> >
> > Therefore, it makes sense to call people names? What's your rank? (the
> > most
> > annoying posters in the history)
> >
> > /Bruce
>
> Congratulations, Bruce. You have identified a skill area where marco truly *is*
> 2400.
Is it before or after he loses weight?:-) In fact, I like Marco's theory
of losing-weight-equal-to-higher-rating. Both you and I can benefit
from that, probably more so than Marco. However, my technique is not as
"sound" as Marco's.
/Bruce
Larry Hodges
news:3C4F8178...@amerexinst.com...
> Larry Hodges
> Mensa Member, Certified USATT Coach, USATT Magazine Editor, Author of
> dozens of table tennis articles, etc.
DOZENS??? Actually ... 672 published articles to date! (645 on table tennis,
19 on non-table tennis/non-fiction, and 8 fiction stories.) But who's
counting? :)
Great posting Tong! I wonder which one I was ***thinking*** of posting, but
restrained myself? :)
-Larry Hodges
Larry Hodges
> That's why I said "when your technique is sound then weight becomes ...."
> see larry if you read the whole post before you argue life will make more
> sense.
> :)
Your technique is not at the 2200 level; therefore, losing weight isn't
going to make you a 2200 player.
-Larry Hodges
Larry Hodges
> tell me what your current rating is, and what it was 1 year ago and then
> we'll talk.
> Until then you go on ignore.
What a genuinely irrational statement! Let's examine it.
First, until the Nationals, Marco's rating had not gone up much in the past
year. Therefore, we should have all ignored him before the Nationals. Yet
that didn't stop him from posting 100,000 notes about table tennis technque,
etc.!
Second, how much a person improves over the past year is arbitrary in that
it depends on when you asked the person. Based on this logic, Cheng Yinghua,
who has dropped in rating this past year, should be put on ignore.
If what the current rating is what's important, than I'll put Marco on
ignore, since he's rated a lot lower than me. (I can imagine dozens of
people saying, "Yes! Do that!")
However, I don't think it's smart to judge a person's posting by their
rating or improvement over the past year. An intelligent person with good
judgement but a low rating often ***knows*** his limitations, and so when he
does post, he knows what he's talking about. A higher-rated player may not
have this judgement, and so instead posts every cotton-picking thing that
happens to pop into his head. (Hint hint.)
Third, if you do consider FengYue beneath you in terms of table tennis
knowledge (rather silly thing to believe), then isn't it appropriate that he
ask you questions - which is what he did? And yet you responded by insulting
him.
Now, as to the question you so obnoxiously responded to, FengYue asked:
> > define 'sound' technique? Didn't you say that chopping block is
> > a weird stroke? what strokes are not considered as 'weird' by you then?
What was wrong with this question?
-Larry Hodges
marco
laugh. It really hurts. Tonight I was watching King of the Hill and I had
to walk out of the room because I was doubled over in pain and I was afraid
that my stitches would come out. Did I really write all that? Jeez, must
have been the codeine.
By the way I am deathly afraid of sneezing. It hasn't happened yet but just
thinking about it gives me the shivers.
marco
"sgordon" <sgo...@sonic.net> wrote in message
news:ALK38.12395$TI3.1...@typhoon.sonic.net...
marco
example, if a person is too fat they cannot be on their toes and they are
susceptible to fast deep serve followed by a short serve. They will get
aced on the fast one and they will be late to the short one. Also, we have
already discussed the importance of staying very low to receive serves. Now
I'm not sure if there are world class players who receive serve standing up
but it appears to me that having your eyes close to table level like Lou
Gouliang is an advantage. So losing weight helps with serve return.
As for blocking, I have already written a huge post on blocking and being
thin is very important for reflexes and also moving into position. And
again, as with everything else- staying low really helps. Now I'm sure
there are exceptions such as that lefty penholder blocker from the 80's
Kalinic who seemed to be standing up pretty tall all the time however I
think most will agree staying low helps to see the ball at high speeds.
Therefore being thin helps blocking.
In fact, being thin helps overall cardiovascular fitness- and one cannot
concentrate when one is dripping sweat all over the place. If one is dizzy
from tremendous effort and huffing and puffing one may lose one's
concentration. The sound of hyperventilating tends to distract the mind
from 2400 level tactics.
marco
"Tong Lee" <mark...@amerexinst.com> wrote in message
news:3C4F8178...@amerexinst.com...
marco
that I think I can get to 2100 by just fixing up a couple of weak spots and
losing weight. I then went on to say that I see 2200 as an upper limit to
what I can accomplish if I stay in Arizona.
Now we are into tomorrow so I am responding to you again. However, if you
don't improve the way you post I'm afraid I'll have to start ignoring you
until friday.
marco
"Larry Hodges" <la...@larrytt.com> wrote in message
news:370b291b.02012...@posting.google.com...
> "Djgambeat" <djga...@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:20020123170845...@mb-cg.aol.com...
marco
around me yet you continue to respond to EVERY SINGLE POST I WRITE even when
it is not written to you. This post was addressed to alan. Why not let him
respond first?
Luckily I've been trained to handle kids like you with infinite patience.
marco
"Larry Hodges" <la...@larrytt.com> wrote in message
news:370b291b.02012...@posting.google.com...
marco
allowed to post. Especially now that I'm not doing anything except waiting
for my surgery to heal. If I want to post 100 times an hour I am allowed
to. However I have made an effort to omit the profanity and I don't claim
to know more than anyone else. I have offered some thoughts up for
constructive criticism and I welcome CONSTRUCTIVE CRITICISM whenever I can
get it.
Some of you people don't realize it, but this is about the only place that I
can get some coaching.
marco
"Alan & Erin Williams" <will...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:3C4F9BC4...@mindspring.com...
marco
predict that I will play a 2100 level by this next vegas. It is a fact
though that rating follows skill level, or trails it by around 50-100
points.
marco
"Larry Hodges" <la...@larrytt.com> wrote in message
news:a2o815$ir$1...@bob.news.rcn.net...
marco
> "marco" <cacc...@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:2rI38.8349$JT5.2...@news1.rdc1.az.home.com...
> > tell me what your current rating is, and what it was 1 year ago and then
> > we'll talk.
>
> > Until then you go on ignore.
>
> What a genuinely irrational statement! Let's examine it.
No Larry, let's NOT examine it because it was not written TO YOU. Get that
through your thick skull.
Now Larry, I have given you your fair share of posts for you to examine.
Let the other kids have their turn. If you show me that you can share the
bandwidth, I'll write a good note for your teacher when she comes back next
week.
marco
Larry Hodges
> I can never predict what will happen in terms of rating, however I can
> predict that I will play a 2100 level by this next vegas. It is a fact
> though that rating follows skill level, or trails it by around 50-100
> points.
And to reach the 2100 level (not temporary rating fluctuation, but actual
level), all you have to do is be able to beat 1900 players 95% of the time,
and 2000 players 5/6 of the time! Piece of cake.
-Larry Hodges
marco
few weaknesses and improve fitness.
marco
"Larry Hodges" <la...@larrytt.com> wrote in message
news:a2oeg3$lrk$1...@bob.news.rcn.net...
Larry Hodges
enough to bring a player up as much as you believe. Ever play John Jarema?
You'd think he'd have trouble receiving and blocking, since he way, way
out-weighs you. But he returns serves and blocks a couple of levels better
than you. If you lose weight, you still won't match him until you improve
your techniques and abilities. In other words, one-dimensional improvement,
such as losing weight, only leads to marginal improvement. It's like having
a link in a chain, but missing the other links.
-Larry Hodges
"marco" <cacc...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:2IO38.9191$JT5.2...@news1.rdc1.az.home.com...
Larry Hodges
> what I find amusing is that I never said this. What I remember saying is
> that I think I can get to 2100 by just fixing up a couple of weak spots
and
> losing weight.
Given a choice between trusting your memory, or reading what you actually
wrote, shouldn't you read what you wrote? Your memory is in error. What you
wrote was:
> When I get better and start training I will take it to a new level and as
> soon as I get under 200 pounds I will be 2000 level. If I get to 175 this
> year I will be playing close to 2200.
You have directly linked losing weight to going up in level. You've stated
point-blank that if you get down to 175, you'll be playing close to 2200.
That's what I and others contested, and you incorrectly remembered above.
> Now we are into tomorrow so I am responding to you again. However, if you
> don't improve the way you post I'm afraid I'll have to start ignoring you
> until friday.
Oh, the horror! I've ignored half of your really belligerent posts this past
day, and I find I've still responded to way, way too many. Readers, I do
apologize, and will attempt to moderate my responses to the resident ...
never mind. Most of his postings speak for themselves.
-Larry Hodges
Larry Hodges
>
> "Larry Hodges" <la...@larrytt.com> wrote in message
> news:a2o8t5$483$1...@bob.news.rcn.net...
> > "marco" <cacc...@aol.com> wrote in message
> > news:2rI38.8349$JT5.2...@news1.rdc1.az.home.com...
> > > tell me what your current rating is, and what it was 1 year ago and
then
> > > we'll talk.
> >
> > > Until then you go on ignore.
> >
> > What a genuinely irrational statement! Let's examine it.
>
> No Larry, let's NOT examine it because it was not written TO YOU. Get
that
> through your thick skull.
Then go to email. This is a public newsgroup, as in *P* *U* *B* *L* *I* *C*.
It doesn't revolve around you. When you post on a public newsgroup, it's for
anyone to join in. If you want a private discussion, then go to private
email. You know, *E* *M* *A* *I* *L*. As it is, you posted a really silly
thing, and I commented on it on this public forum.
> Now Larry, I have given you your fair share of posts for you to examine.
> Let the other kids have their turn. If you show me that you can share the
> bandwidth, I'll write a good note for your teacher when she comes back
next
> week.
Juvenile thinking. When are you going to let others have their turn, since
you out-post everyone, and ignore the huge outpouring of people asking you
in various ways to PLEASE SHUT UP for a change!
-Larry Hodges
marco
hardbat win was official. The sponge was unofficial. But at this point
john is no longer so much better than me that he can guarantee he will win
every time. I can hit the ball pretty well when I'm in position. Ask tahl.
If I lose a little weight and get some legs I think a lot of you will be
impressed with just what kind of power I have in my forehand.
marco
"Larry Hodges" <la...@larrytt.com> wrote in message
news:a2oen8$mc6$1...@bob.news.rcn.net...
Larry Hodges
> I believe I have the tools to do just that. All I need is to sharpen up a
> few weaknesses and improve fitness.
Don't talk. Do.
Good luck.
Let's end this thread.
-Larry Hodges
watersl...@erols.com
at Larry Bavly. He's 2150 and has been higher. He doesn't have big
problem returning serve. I've seen Bavly beat plenty of young skinny
athletic players, including some over 2200. Despite his impressive size,
he has a major weapon, his brain.
Larry Hodges
> I don't think it is fair for you to put a limit on how many times I am
> allowed to post.
There's a disconnect. No one is putting a limit on how many times you are
"allowed to post." What many people are doing is suggesting you do so
yourself.
> Some of you people don't realize it, but this is about the only place that
I
> can get some coaching.
Then talk less, listen more.
-Larry Hodges
marco
2400. He has incredible talent, very good hands. I don't have any such
talent. JJ also has very good hands, very good court sense. Both of these
guys know where to put the ball and their shot selection is fantastic. If
either of these guys would get under 190 pounds they would be 2400 for sure,
but especially Larry he has more weapons than JJ.
marco
<watersl...@erols.com> wrote in message news:3C500E...@erols.com...
marco
IT'S NOT YOUR THREAD. IIIIITTTT'''SSSSSS NNNNNOOOOOOTTTTTT
YYYYYOOOOOUUUURRRRRR TTTTTTTHHHHHRRRRREEAAAADDD!!!
Find another thread to chirp in parot man. This ain't your thread. Get
out.
I excorcise yeee DEMON!!!!!!!!! OOOOOOOUUUUUUUTTTTTT!!!!!!!
marco
(blaahhhhhhhhh!)
"Larry Hodges" <la...@larrytt.com> wrote in message
news:a2pa36$80m$1...@bob.news.rcn.net...
Larry Hodges
> Larrry, Larrrrrrrrrrrrry, LLLLaaaaaaarrrrrrryyyyyyyyy, it's not your
thread.
> IT'S NOT YOUR THREAD. IIIIITTTT'''SSSSSS NNNNNOOOOOOTTTTTT
> YYYYYOOOOOUUUURRRRRR TTTTTTTHHHHHRRRRREEAAAADDD!!!
>
> Find another thread to chirp in parot man. This ain't your thread. Get
> out.
>
> I excorcise yeee DEMON!!!!!!!!! OOOOOOOUUUUUUUTTTTTT!!!!!!!
>
> marco
> (blaahhhhhhhhh!)
I beg to differ with you. You say it is not my thread. Please recall that it
started with you asking ***me*** a question, and that you put ***my*** name
in the thread. I don't see your name in the title. :)
-Larry Hodges, owner and propietor of this thread. Don't like it? Go to
email.
marco
business butting in to a conversation that didn't involve you. Next time
I'll have to start each new conversation with a new thread title just so
that you don't go butting your big nose in there.
Poor larry, what's he gonna do next week when marco goes back to work?
marco
"Larry Hodges" <la...@larrytt.com> wrote in message
news:a2pb49$bid$1...@bob.news.rcn.net...
Djgambeat
I really appreciate all your inputs. At least now I have a fairly good amount
of information on how I can improve my rating, I mean my skill level.
Here's a few that I have in mind. I would appreciate some input.
Service reception - I believe one of the worst part of my game. It's not that
I pop up my returns, it's just that I cannot return the ball the way I wanted
it to be. I believe this is partly because of my poor anticipation.
FH and BH transition and vice versa - I have pretty decent FH and BH loop.
I'm just having problem transitioning during a rally.
Counter Attack - right now my counter attack is limited to block/smash from my
FH. What I wanted to add to my game is to be able to counter attack slow loop.
Which brings me to a problem that recently surfaced in my game. When faced
with a slow loop, especially on my FH, instead of counter attacking it, I
usually block it and most of time the ball will either pop up or just go out.
I want to concentrate on the 3 that I mentioned above. Hopefully this will
improve my skill level.
Thanks.
Larry Hodges
> drat he's right. It did start out his thread. But you still had no
> business butting in to a conversation that didn't involve you. Next time
> I'll have to start each new conversation with a new thread title just so
> that you don't go butting your big nose in there.
>
> Poor larry, what's he gonna do next week when marco goes back to work?
If this means you will post less, then the whole newsgroup will celebrate.
You still can't quite fathom the difference between email and public
newsgroup, can you? It's not that hard.
-Larry Hodges
watersl...@erols.com
Otherwise it's just speculation. Yes, weight is a factor, but only one
of many.
marco
guy is solid 2250 and has been for years despite being close to or exceeding
300 pounds. He has all the tools- serves, serve returns, very consistent
and spinny loops, drives, and knowledge. In addition he has great hands.
So he's definately my pick for 2400 if he ever got serious about the game.
marco
<watersl...@erols.com> wrote in message news:3C5029...@erols.com...
FengYue
> If this means you will post less, then the whole newsgroup will celebrate.
don't speak for the whole newsgroup yet. i don't mind to see marco
around. it's fun.
ofcoz, the condition is that you stay, too.
keep it up, my 33 and 41 year old kids
Kagin
Yet he goes on with his defensive self, immobile and unadaptable,
blocking everything back.
Will marco learn what humility is? Will larry learn to use his
killfile? Will marco stop posting his kneejerk reactions? Tune in
two hours from now for the next installment!
Alan & Erin Williams <will...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> Larry Hodges wrote:
> > "marco" <cacc...@aol.com> wrote:
> > > o.k. Alan, I give up. You win. White flag is up, I'm saying Uncle. What
> > > do I have to do to get you to stop making your comments towards me at
> > > every chance you get? Do you want cash? Let me know.
> >
> > It's not just Alan. Haven't you noticed just about every regular
> > poster has been on you? When will it register on you? Just do the
> > following for now: 1) Post less - the table tennis world doesn't
> > center around you; 2) Read carefully what you are responding to before
> > responding: 3) ***Think*** before you post; 4) Stop flaming people
> > like a little kid.
>
Larry Hodges
news:df1cf36a.02012...@posting.google.com...
> To me, the sad thing is that just about everyone trying to help marco.
> Yet he goes on with his defensive self, immobile and unadaptable,
> blocking everything back.
>
> Will marco learn what humility is? Will larry learn to use his
> killfile? Will marco stop posting his kneejerk reactions? Tune in
> two hours from now for the next installment!
I'm a slow learner! I've never used the killfile. With Sjan, it was
pointless since he changed his name so often. But I'm toying with it. On the
other hand, it's been like a soap opera the last day or so! And remember,
soap operas have good guys and bad guys! :)
-Larry Hodges, soap opera hero
Kagin
Teams with 16 wins and 4 losses, with my worst loss being to a
2087 player. Everyone i lost to ended up over 2100 after the
tournament. I'm currently 2059 because of one loss in san diego.
From my point of view, 2200 is a level i do not expect to reach
without real work on several aspects of my game.
When i was in the 1600s, the 2000s were in my sights, and i was able
to break 2000 a year or two ago without reworking my style or
technique; i just had to play my game with higher consistency.
To play 2200 without a breakthrough in some part of my game, i'd have
to be playing extremely well on that day and be lucky on top of that.
kagin
la...@larrytt.com (Larry Hodges) wrote:
> "Djgambeat" <djga...@aol.com> wrote:
> > What does it take to be 2200?
>
> The difference between 2200 and 2000? Again, much is serve & receive.
> About 2000 is where players stop having glaring weaknesses, but they often
> don't have anything that really threatens a 2200 player - they may have
> strong shots, but can't consistently get them into play. A 2000 player
> usually can attack strongly for 2-3 shots against a good blocker, and most
> 2200 players can block them down by splitting the short points, and winning
> the long points.
Larry Hodges
> Teams with 16 wins and 4 losses, with my worst loss being to a
> 2087 player. Everyone i lost to ended up over 2100 after the
> tournament. I'm currently 2059 because of one loss in san diego.
> From my point of view, 2200 is a level i do not expect to reach
> without real work on several aspects of my game.
>
> When i was in the 1600s, the 2000s were in my sights, and i was able
> to break 2000 a year or two ago without reworking my style or
> technique; i just had to play my game with higher consistency.
> To play 2200 without a breakthrough in some part of my game, i'd have
> to be playing extremely well on that day and be lucky on top of that.
And the fact that you realize that means that, if you put in the work and
time, and are in decent physical shape, you can go up another level. Those
who don't realize the difficulties in going up a level don't know what it
takes to reach that level, and so rarely do so.
This applies to me as well - I'm very aware of what I would need to do to go
up a level, but simply didn't have the time to make the committment when I
was younger and more athletic, and now, at one year older than Cal Ripken
Jr., it would take an extradinary amount of work and effort to have a chance
at it. The higher you go, the harder it is to go up a level!
There is one thing anyone can do - and that's occasionally have a tournament
where you play a level stronger than your normal level. I might make it my
life's goal to have ***one*** more tournament like that, where I knock off a
few 2400 players! :)
-Larry Hodges
AJain17
Although, I still think that you think too much as a mathematician and pick
everything apart, instead of reading into context :)
ashu
>> What does it take to be 2200?
>
>To maintain any rating, in theory you have to be able to beat players
>rated
>200 points lower than you roughly 39 out of 40 matches. This may seem
>extreme, but if you lose to someone 200 points lower, you lose 40
>points; if
>you win, you gain 1 point.
>
>In reality, it's probably not quite that high a ratio. But if you
>can't beat
>a 2000 player 18-19 times out of 20 in a tournament, you're not 2200.
>That's
>why I find claims by people about how they could be 2200 with a little
>training or losing weight rather amusing. They don't realize how
>difficult
>it is to beat a 2000 player that consistently - basically, you win
>unless
>you are very, very off and the 2000 player is very, very on.
>
>Players who think they can reach 2200 relatively easily should think
>that over: are they really that close to being able to beat a 2000
>player 18 or 19 times out of 20 matches?
>
>You also have to beat 2100 players about 5 out of 6 times, for the
>same
>reasons. That's not easy!
>
>And, of course, you have to break even with other 2200 players.
>
>By using the reverse math, you can see that, surprisingly, beating
>higher-rated players isn't as important to maintaining a rating. It's
>beating the lower-rated players steadily that's important. But if you
>can't
>beat them, you won't beat many stronger players.
>
>As to technique, a 2200 player has strong technique, makes few
>careless
>mistakes, is generally efficient at putting the ball away, is not
>afraid to
>play either offense or defense, doesn't give many easy third-ball
>attacks to
>players with their level attacks, can control play with their serves,
>and
>can attack pretty strongly for 3-4 shots against a good blocker. They
>don't
>miss their opening loops against backspin much, unless they are going
>for a
>difficult putaway.
>
>The difference between 2200 and, say, 2400? 2400 players can
>third-ball
>against the 2200 receive, they can play at a faster pace, their
>techniques
>are more advanced or ingrained, they can counter-attack better, and
>make
>even fewer mistakes.
>
>The difference between 2200 and 2000? Again, much is serve & receive.
>About
>2000 is where players stop having glaring weaknesses, but they often
>don't
>have anything that really threatens a 2200 player - they may have
>strong
>shots, but can't consistently get them into play. A 2000 player
>usually can
>attack strongly for 2-3 shots against a good blocker, and most 2200
>players
>can block them down by splitting the short points, and winning the
>long
>points.
>
>-Larry Hodges
>
>
>
>
>
>