Popps turned out Terry, John and Peter for this return match against Ram 2. To cut a long story short we lost 2 sets to 7 and, although this was an improvement on our first meeting with Rams when we lost 1 – 8 last October, it was a slightly disappointing result. I think it is fair to say we should have one at least one more set and maybe even more. But we didn’t, of course. The Rams team was made up of mainly experience and a bit of (relatively speaking) youth. Youth -  in the form of Scott – simply outplayed us with only John  flattering to deceive by taking a single game off him. Terry got close in another losing 12 – 14 in the 3rd game, having lost the first two, but Scott was just too strong. He was a good attacking player with the happy knack (or unhappy for us) of being able to play hard drives into the midriff area where, Terry in particular, would lose sight of the ball completely as it disappeared into the rarely seen (by him) area below his tummy. Donald and Rodney, by contrast, relied on age, experience and low cunning to beat us. Their game was largely defensive and they contented themselves with pushing the ball back with back spin and waiting for us to make errors. Usually they didn’t have too long to wait! Don won all three of his sets with Peter taking a solitary game off him, the first one, 12 – 10, eventually losing 1 game to 3 although the 4th and last went to 11-13. The other 2 games were very close too so if the set could have been forced into a 5th game there would have been a good chance of securing another valuable victory. Rod played a similar game to Don but gave a few more opportunities to attack him. John’s game came good here, his serve which is very hard to return when it is going well, came on song and he managed to beat Rod 3 games to nil – our first win of the night!  Terry also secured a win with a number of good attacking shots, some rarely seen patience, but also copious deployment of his more specialised net cord and edge shots. This match went to 5 games with Rod taking the 2nd and 3rd games but fortunately Terry winning the 5th. And hence the final match score of 2 sets to 7.  As always the match was played in a splendid spirit (despite some discussion on the finer points of legal serving!) . It was encouraging to see Peter play a little more aggressivelyy at times and Terry exercising a little patience for a change. Slowly but surely experience is helping us get a bit more balance and consistency in our game. However, knowing what to do and actually doing it are two different things.

Playing: Terry/Peter/Derek

Game 1: Peter/Derek v Dave/Shamir

Knowing that this team were currently third in League 1, we approached the match with an inevitable bucketful of trepidation, tempered, only slightly, by the fact that they, like us, had lost their first round match. Both Peter and Derek struggled initially to get into the game at all, the main barrier being Shamir’s impossible to return top-spin service; one got the ludicrous impression that the first bounce of the serve was behind  the server’s bat! Equally, Dave’s forehand smashes were unerringly accurate and played with terrific pace. We limped to a disappointing 42-11 defeat despite finding our own game late on.

42-11

Game 2: Peter/Terry v Frazer/Shamir

More of the same with Terry also finding Shamir’s serve impossible to respond to. Few returns of this serve actually hit anywhere near the table! This was a difficult game, with our opponents, having briefly checked our credentials or otherwise in the first game, already beginning their confident and efficient push to the finish line. The speed of their replies was a notable factor in preventing Peter and Terry gaining any kind of rhythm or system in their own game, enforcing basic errors. Confidence was sinking without the intrusion of anything resembling an iceberg!

42-6

Game 3: Terry/Derek v Frazer/Dave

Without the unplayable distraction of Shamir’s serve, Terry and Derek at least managed to save a few extra points in this game, focusing more realistically on their own game rather than merely repelling the opposition with inadequate ammunition. Reactions were sharper and Terry and Derek built some confidence but were still comprehensively outplayed in every department.

42-18

Game 4: Peter/Derek v Shamir/Frazer

This was a ‘typical’ game for us all in this match. Every time we saw a chink of light providing a tiny iota of confidence, within a split nano second and with devastating speed and ruthlessness, we discovered that this pin-prick of brightness and hope was an out of control forty ton truck, a monstrous, steaming and relentless locomotive or an unstoppable and searing inferno; we weren’t simply singed but burnt to a crisp.

42-11

Game 5: Terry/Peter v Shamir/Dave

A strange game with points lost by Terry and Peter simply through our usual lack of consistency and care but complemented, at other times in this game, by some impressive smashes by Terry and good control by Peter. With the now expected gargantuan struggle to get any of Shamir’s serves returned to the other side of the net, never mind on the table, the game ended disappointingly.

42-11

Game 6: Terry/Derek v Shamir/Frazer

Certainly this was one of our worst games: emotionally drained and physically becoming too body aware in terms of the distance beteen our strategy and the reluctance of relevant bits of our anatomy to keep up with the flow. Effectively we had little to offer in this game and the opposition were smiling far too much for our liking. We waited, with anxiety, for them to start licking their lips and polishing their whiskers as we slowly lost the will to live!

42-9

Game 7: Peter/Derek v Dave/Frazer

So, the strategy worked! What strategy you ask? To lull them into such a sense of security, protected by their own perfection in the previous game, that they actually made mistakes in this game! No, really! Derek had by this time adapted to serving to the ‘wrong’ side of the table and was, occasionally, making them pay (although no money actually changed hands!). Peter was more in control at the back of the court and on at least two occasions Daave’s and Frazer’s smiles ebbed away to the further recesses of their widow’s peaks and there was a suggestion that they were actually having to breathe for the first time in the match. Good focus from Peter and Derek made this probably the most hopeful game that we played all night: perchance to dream……….?……….maybe not!

42-21

Game 8: Peter/Terry v Dave/Frazer

This was a strange game that highlighted our inexperience in doubles. Our inability to drag ourselves quickly enough from one side of the court to the other, our usual lack of consistency and our change-over tactics during shots and our over-ambition in attempting non-percentage shots only added to the service errors that were part of our game throughout this match. Peter and Terry worked hard to rescue points in this match but the end result was mind-numbingly disappointment.

42-10

Game 9: Terry/Derek v Shamir/David

Having snapped two service returns back belligerently in game 6, Derek resumed normal service in this game by failing to return single serve from Shamir! By this time, Terry and Derek were obviously tired and a slow start took them on far too steep a learning curve, despite winning worthy if not exactly exciting points. Too many points were given to the opposition and our team deficiencies again outweighed our potential and the final game was surrendered willingly and tamely to a very good League 1 side. Well done to our opponents and thank you.

42-14

What can we learn from this match? Well, firstly, that doubles is a very different game at which none of us has any meaningful experience so, at least we competed. Secondly, our failings in this match and in our previous doubles outing, which were specifically connected to the doubles game can act as prompts to improvements in our singles game. Our mobility around the court in relation to the threat from the opposition was not good. Our positioning and awareness in relationship to each other was also deficient. Speed and anticipation are a massive part of the doubles game and are very much part of the strategy of the doubles game, a strategy which we largely did not employ. All these requirements for competence in the doubles game, would, if improved, substantially inform our singles game. Mobility, anticipation and general awareness must be integral requirements of our game and an over-arching improvement in consistency in all areas can be gained from our focus at our coaching sessions on Tuesdays and Thursdays. The progress we have all made since our team was formed is considerable. It is, however, quite exhausting to achieve the blend of enjoyment, fitness and well-being that we all demand from playing table tennis in any shape or form AND improve our skills in competition, particularly when we are outplayed on a regular basis.

Recognising our own potential, despite regular setbacks and defeats and continuing to play with optimism should be our main goal.

DG/19.01.09

POPPS have now played all the teams in division 3 once so this is halfway through our first season. As the table below shows we are third from bottom at the moment, in 9th place. We had hoped to finish near the top of the bottom half at the end of the season. This is not impossible we will have to improve a bit to achieve this. In fact the division is down to 10 teams now as, sadly, ARK has had to withdraw from League, so our target will be 6th or 7th.

We don’t seem to be getting results for every week and when we do they are often incomplete. These are the results for Division 3 for the first matches of 2009

Division Three

• Old Town Hounds (D Williamson 3, P Ward 3, R Tipton 3)  9  v  Old Town Hoods (D Sweeney 0, D Coneron 0, J Sweeney 0)  0
• HxTTC Popp (D Greenwood 2, P McMullen 0, R Thomas 0)  2  v  Sowerby 3 (J Korner 2, P Parry 2, T Kershaw 3)  7
• HxTTC Evergreens (M Curry 3, D Lewis 2, M Higgins 3)  8  v  HxTTC Lions (B Speak 1, J Tallis 0, H Kendall 0)  1
• HxTTC Rams 2 (S Northey 3, D Stott 0, J Broadbent 2)  5   v  Old Town Hounds (P Ward 2, S Allen 1, R Tipton 1)  4

Full results for the week can be found on the Results page.

Would Popps be suffering from post Christmas hangovers, weighed down with mince pies and turkey, or would they spring into the New Year like youthful lambs? In the event, it was more like lambs to the slaughter at the hands of a more worldly-wise Sowerby team, who demonstrated the virtues of patience, even to the extent of waiting and waiting to create attacking opportunities, happily taking many unforced points from us.

Derek came across their most defensive player John Korner and tried to match him with patience whilst seeking appropriate point winning opportunities. After a five game war of attrition, Derek emerged as winner by 3 games to 2. Against Phillip Parry, Peter kept it tight in three quite even encounters, but going down 11-9, 11-9 and 11-7. Both players made errors, but Parry’s smashes became more telling as the match developed. Robin against Trevor Kershaw had the merit of limiting the pain by its brevity, with Kershaw winning fairly easily, 11-3, 11-6, and 11-3.

Peter had a more competitive set against the ever steady and defensive Korner, when he tried to match his opponent’s careful style, edging to 11-8 in game 1. Korner returned well in the second game to win 11-7. At 2-2, Korner retained his slow steady pace and high returns, to frustrate Peter to a 3-2 defeat.

It was Derek’s turn to meet Kershaw, perhaps Sowerby’s most consistent player. After a tentative start by both players, and some inconsistent attacks from Derek, Kershaw won game one 11-8. The second game was similar, 11-7, with Kershaw catching Derek out of position on a couple of key shots. Kershaw varied his serve in game 2 and whilst Derek tried to attack his way out of trouble, he fell away to 11-7, losing 3 nil. Robin played at a slightly higher level against Parry, with some good attacks from both sides, but in the end went down 11-6, 11-6 and 11-6, there being some consistency in the nature of the defeats.

Peter showed plenty of fighting spirit and doggedness in winning 2 out of 3 against Kershaw. After a slow start against a steady opponent, Peter lost the first game 11-2, but fought back to win the second, 11-9. His endeavour forced Kershaw to be more erratic, and Peter won an exciting third game, 13-11. However, Kershaw recovered his composure and raced to 11-5 and 11-8, to win a close match. By this time, Robin had lost the will to live and Kersaw cleaned up 11-6, 11-1 and 11-2.

The match had been well lost, but there was still some pride to be fought for by Derek against Parry’s pen-holder grip style, one not encountered by Popps so far. Does this indicate a propensity for take away meals or a disturbing interest in Japanese horror movies? We may never know. Derek won the first comfortably by 11-4, but Parry, perhaps sensing the impending collapse of Derek’s troublesome shoulder, closed in for an 11-8 win. Parry had some good winners and the odd fluke to edge ahead in game 3, by 16-14. Game 4 saw Derek valiantly fighting against waves of shoulder pain to achieve some good winners, while Parry responded with some fiendishly oriental returns. Again, it reached 16-14 to Derek. Two all!

In the deciding game, Parry started to lose his concentration, Derek continued to hold his shaky frame together, and won 11-4, to take the match 3-2.

Overall, Sowerby won 7-2, showing greater consistency and steadiness to generally outshine Popps, in spite of Derek’s courageous endeavours and Peter’s competitive but measured approach. Robin will have to find ways of dealing with the steady, percentage approach adopted in this region of the league, or he will have the indignity of have a nil percent record in the next edition of the blue book. What next? Footage of disastrous shots on Youtube!