I was wrong about Kong Linghui....

[@VladTableTennis]

Hey Guys! Thank you so much for watching this video! You can also buy me a coffee for more content and full matches ko-fi.com/vladtabletennis

[@xx765]

Kong and Liu Guoliang were like table tennis brothers. They stayed in the same room at Chinese national squad since teenage years, and their prime kind of overlapped. During their prime they were basically equally good at TT, versus each other whoever had a better day on match day would win. Together they took table tennis reign from Sweden, and China hasn't lost it since. So they were both household names in China. Outside of TT though, Kong is better looking and more of a media's favorite boy. He got better sponsorships and his face was on prime time TV the whole time. He got tangled up with female reality TV stars and also that casino mess you mentioned. While Liu Guoliang pretty much stayed in TT and contributed a lot to recent Chinese success. So right now it definitely feels that Liu Guoliang has a much stronger presence in TT, but whoever watched the game during their days would feel they are completely equal.

[@garkbull]

I think what made him famous/memorable is that he modernised the Chinese BH. They called it a hybrid stroke where he incorporated elements of tradition Chinese stroke with the bigger elbow movement of European backhand. So in a way, he paved a path for future Chinese players the same way LGL paved a RPB for Ma Lin and then perfected by Wang Hao

[@VladTableTennis]

That is very nerdy thing to notice… And I RESPECT IT A LOT! Great Comment!

[@tapegasi]

I have to be one more person to do a little critique here. There are only 5 grand slam winners and kong linghui is one of them. You might prefer players for the beautiful shots they make, their style,or some other personal reasons, but at the end of the day, what counts is the wins and he is one of the most awarded of all history of table tennis. So, what makes a difference here is what are your parameters to define goat, because he has the resume, and is one of the most complete players of all time, even if not as flashy as others might be. Personal opinion is great, but you cant define a player by seeing 3 videos of them, and not really doing any research. Personally I appreciate a little research, it shows care and interest, but thats my view. Really enjoying your amateur to pro videos.

[@dickn.ormous1064]

He was the first Chinese counterloop robot.Actually,Wang Tao from the previous generation had a better bh and Ma Wenge never made mistakes on the bh despite having an awkward looking stroke.Kong was one of the first Chinese who had good defence/attack balance but he couldn't touch Europeans in rallies.

[@ChrisStein-p3d]

A couple comments. One, the game had celluloid ball. It was much spinnier than today's game. It is not correct to say they "push" with no spin. Why flipping or banana or strawberry shots were not as popular back then was because there was a lot more spins on the ball. To say they did not impart spin on the ball is not correct. They imparted a lot of backspin on the ball and that's why heavy push was a popular way to return serve. And if you would know how much spin was on it by the way the opposing played opened the game up with slow top spin. If the ball had no spin, like you suggested, then the other player would rip the ball, AKA Kreanga style. Two, Waldner did not make mistakes. Kong Linghui was making Waldner committing forced errors. Again you cannot appreciate the amount of spin on the ball so you thought Waldner basically threw the game/match away without understanding the skills exhibited by Kong Linghui.

[@VladTableTennis]

Ball has nothing to do with it. I played with both balls. The game has changed when celluloid ball was still used. They also played in the speed glue era, which is a lot faster, don’t know about spinnier tho. No way you trying to tell me that it is less spin on the ball now. The rubbers advanced so much in grip and tackiness

[@ChrisStein-p3d]

No seriously, they imparted A LOT more spin than today's player. I don't know why you would argue against that. There is a reason why long pip choppers cannot survive in today's game because they used to spin the ball a lot more in the celluloid ball era. Also, just look at Waldner. He opened back spin ball toward him with soft, spinny top spin. It is Waldner we are talking about here. If the ball had no spin, Waldner would have killed the ball, again AKA Kreanga style. The rubbers were advanced to give more spin because 1) the plastic ball does not spin as much as celluloid ball and 2) speed glue gave the rubber a lot more spin and speed than even Tenergy today@@VladTableTennis

[@grindercap]

Kong was known for his consistency, looping on both sides to keep the pressure up, and spin quality. Looping consistently on both sides was a rare thing at the time. Your call is correct in general, Kong just excelled at the basics. Btw, Kong won tourneys as a junior just with the quality of his pushes. Also, Butterfly worked with him to develop a rubber sheet (Tackifire) but Kong abanded it because Butterfly couldn't get it right in his opinion.

[@grindercap]

In the vid you were asking what rubber they used, Kong used Globe 999 on fh and maybe Butterfly Sriver on bh, (so they said, he was sponsored by Butterfly.) The penhold Korean player Kim Taek-Soo used Sriver and the shakehand player Jean-Philippe Gatien ('93 World Champ) used Yasaka Mark V. And yes Schlager used Bryce both sides. That one butterfly wing you see by Schlagers thumb is the unmistakable Bryce logo. BTW Kim Taek Soo was disqualified for speed glue after the quarter-final match at the '95 World Champs where he defeated Wang Tao.

[@Megaboyd]

Yes. I agree. Was so fun to watch back in the days. (Especially in person). Many more styles from different players. It gave kids something to try and emulate and have fun with and not just train like a robot. And the camera angle was way better than the WTT side angle for sure.

[@ilikeapples811]

0:36 idk what that pronunciation is it might be AI but his name is approximately pronounced Koung Ling Hwey using English letters and without Chinese tones

[@tisthegreat7420]

Kong Linghui won a GRAND SLAM and you put him in world class..... Cmon man

[@VladTableTennis]

It’s not all about the rings lol 🤣

[@tisthegreat7420]

@@VladTableTennis It is though. Would you have put ma long in GOAT if he hadnt won 2 grand slams?

[@coolbutnotverycool1440]

​@@VladTableTennisif someone has a grand slam it makes automatic "almost goat"

[@dickn.ormous1064]

​​@@coolbutnotverycool1440Lost to veterans all the time and couldn't beat the next generation of Wang Liqin.Actually, the Chinese public wanted him to play in the 2004 Olympics but the coaches couldn't trust him 'cause anyone who could hit big could beat him and young Wang Hao took his place.

[@michaelshaw7652]

Kong was a very consistent and fundamentally sound player. His style was not fancy with big killer shots. But he was very balanced and steady in both offense and defense. It's not easy to get easy points from him. Technically, he wasn't much superior to most current players, even to his Chinese peers at the time, like Wang Liqin with his big forehand, Liu Guoling with his serve and attack, Ma Lin with excellent shot ball control and tricks and Chen Qi with his ferocious attack and speed. However, he was the first Chinese shakehand who achieved great success for team China and himself. He was known for pioneering a close to the table backhand top spin drive that emphasized speed than power. Even to this day, you can see its effect on many Chinese players, even more pronounced on women's side. China national team in recent years has been dominated by shakehand players, in large part it can be attributed to Kong's success. Overall, Kong's historical position in Chinese men's table tennis should be on the same tier as Liu Guoliang, above Wang Liqin, Ma Lin and Xu Xin.

[@alexbashforth4955]

Waldner was not in the final of 2004 Olympics, that was RSM vs Wang Hao

[@VladTableTennis]

Damn! You right! I always seem to make that mistake hahah Even though literally last video I said that RSM played Wang Hao in the final😂 I needed to proofread lmao

[@alexbashforth4955]

​@@VladTableTennis😂 he was in the semis of 2004 tho so you were close

[@VladTableTennis]

@@alexbashforth4955 yeah, I always mess it up for some reason hahah

[@ajtatosmano2]

Kong was a bit like Koki Niwa. He played with equal confidence no matter the score. Other players might have been more powerful, more entertaining, creative, but he just played his solid game and catched up. Nerves of steel made him so successful.

[@samongandroid]

Europeans only have a fascination with Waldner, not the Chinese players and just looking at wikipedia is not enough to see just how good many of the Chinese players really were despite China being such a poor country back then. After beating Sweden, the Chinese men's team had never looked back. Nearly all of them should be in the top or God tier level.

[@VladTableTennis]

World has a fascination with Waldner, cause he’s the OG GOAT. You can hate, that’s fine, but those are just facts

[@samongandroid]

​@@VladTableTennis Not compared to Kong Linghui, Liu Guoliang, Wang Hao and Wang Liqin who have won more. That is a fact! Waldner - Won 3 world singles (including one in the Olympic) PRE-1998. He was not competitive against the Chinese after this. Here are some other facts you will find interesting, head to head losses against these players: - Liu Guoliang. 4-5. - Kong Linghui. 7-7. - Wang Liqin. 2-6. - Ma Lin. 1-3. - Wang Hao. 1-2. - Chen Longcan 7-10. - Guo Yuehua 0-2. - Jiang Jialiang 4-8. - Ryu Seungmin 0-4. - Lee Jungwoo 0-2. He is ranked almost God-tier level because he's simply not close to Ma Long. Here are the rest, Almost God-Tier level: Ma Lin - 6 time world singles champion. He is at the top of Almost God-Tier level. Wang Liqin - Won three singles, three doubles, three mixed doubles on the world stage. His success rate is above Boll and Samsonov. Wang Hao - Won three world singles, two doubles and more Olympic medals than any other player. His success rate is also above Boll and Samsonov (completely dominated in their head to head 14-1) and has a 18-18 head to head record with Ma Long. Xu Xin - Won three world singles and 5 doubles. His success rate is better than Samsonov (5-4) and Boll (8-0), would be ranked higher if he didn't have to compete with other Chinese players. His is ahead in his head to head against Zhang Jike (14-10) and is also better than Ma Lin. So why is he not GOAT? Ma Long is just too good. Vladimir Samsonov - Won three world singles. He is Waldner V2.0 after 2000 in a much more competitive era, and also has a better head-to-head record against Waldner (20-10). World Class: Timo Boll - Won 2 world singles in a 20 year career. Head to head with Xu Xin he's way behind 0-8. OVTCHAROV Dimitrij - Below Timo Boll in terms of accomplishments and success rate. Certainly not better than Xu Xin. Elite: Mizutani - Perennial third place getter. Certainly not equal to Xu Win and was never ranked No.1. Putting Niwa in Elite is also a joke. You are welcome to challenge these facts.

[@samongandroid]

Some more facts: OVTCHAROV Dimitrij has a losing record against Xu Xin 1-9. Waldner - Wang Liqin (2-6) - beat WANG Liqin CHN 3:0 1997 Pro Tour Japan Open, Final - lost WANG Liqin CHN 2:3 1997 ITTF Pro Tour Grand Finals, QF - beat WANG Liqin CHN 2:1 21-14, 18-21, 21-17 1999 Mens World Cup in Xiaolan, China - lost WANG Liqin CHN 1:3 2001 China vs. Sweden - lost WANG Liqin CHN 1:3 2002 China vs. World Challenge - lost WANG Liqin CHN 0:3 Japanese Super Circuit 2005-2006 - lost br WANG Liqin CHN 1:4 12-10, 3-11, 8-11, 7-11, 9-11 2004 Olympics in Athens, Greece - lost WANG Liqin CHN 3:4 4-11, 9-11, 11-5, 11-3, 10-12, 12-10, 6-11 2004 Pro Tour Singapore Open Waldner - Kong Linghui (7-7) - beat KONG Linghui CHN 2:0 1994 Swedish Open, Team Final - beat KONG Linghui CHN 3:2 1994 Mens World Cup at Taipeh, QF - beat KONG Linghui CHN 2:1 1996 Mens World Cup at Nimes/FRA - beat KONG Linghui CHN 3:1 1997 Pro Tour Qatar Open, SF - lost KONG Linghui CHN 0:3 1997 Mens World Cup at Nimes/FRA, QF - beat KONG Linghui CHN 3:1 1998 Pro Tour Italian Open, QF - beat KONG Linghui CHN 3:2 22-20, 13-21, 21-18, 19-21, 21-15 1999 WTTC in Einhoven, NED, QF - lost KONG Linghui CHN 1:2 1999 Pondus Cup, SF - lost KONG Linghui CHN 1:2 1999 China vs. Sweden - lost KONG Linghui CHN 0:2 9-21, 17-21 2000 WTTC (Team) in Kuala Lumpur, MAS, Final - lost KONG Linghui CHN 0:2 2000 China vs. Sweden - lost KONG Linghui CHN 2:3 16-21, 19-21, 21-17, 21-14, 13-21 2000 Olympic Games in Sydney, AUS, Final - beat KONG Linghui CHN 3:2 2001 China vs. Sweden - lost KONG Linghui CHN 0:3 2004 China vs. World Challenge Waldner - Samsonov head to head needs to be updated, it's (10-20)

[@dickn.ormous1064]

​​​​​​@@samongandroidWaldner -Kong Linghui 8-3 in official matches.You have to add those meaningless exhibitions in China to elevate his stats and you don't include their 97 WTTC match to make it look even. Waldner had twice the titles of KLH and wasn't kicked by a semi-amateur Schlager like Kong in 2003.LOL.Kong is freaking forgotten 'cause his game was boring even his teammates called him "veteran" 'cause he always played half baked shots like injured veterans in their 30's. Watch Kong getting hammered by Kim Taek Soo a player that Waldner owned. And what Waldner has to do with Boll?It was the Chinese who were afraid of him-Waldner beat him like a drum. Samsonov was semi-retired after 2000 read his interviews his mother passed away,he started a family and he didn't train that much- competitive era my ass!The emergence of Kreanga/Schlager in the early 00's shows it wasn't that competitive. Those players were irrelevant in their 20's and became relevant only when the Waldner/Persson/Saive/Gatien/Primorac generation got old. Xu Xin in any era would have been a third wheel,the guy was a lefty penholder with average serves who couldn't play close to the table.Wang Tao was 10 times the player he was.

[@samongandroid]

​@@dickn.ormous1064 Who won in the Sydney Olympic finals? Kong Linghui. As I said, Waldner could not beat a more competitive generation of players when table tennis was becoming more popular. Everything you've said is a personal opinion, while I stated the facts. After 2000 Kong was better than Waldner, as were so many other players like Wang Liqing, Ma Lin, Wang Hao etc. You simply cannot accept the fact that since 2000 and despite Europe throwing everything it could into the game, China has dominated this game in both men's and women's. As I said, the numbers speak for themselves, and I'll list them out again, Ma Lin - 6 time world singles champion. He is at the top of Almost God-Tier level. Wang Liqin - Won three singles, three doubles, three mixed doubles on the world stage. His success rate is above Boll and Samsonov. Wang Hao - Won three world singles, two doubles and more Olympic medals than any other player. His success rate is also above Boll and Samsonov (completely dominated in their head to head 14-1) and has a 18-18 head to head record with Ma Long. Xu Xin - Won three world singles and 5 doubles. His success rate is better than Samsonov (5-4) and Boll (8-0). Timo Boll - Won 2 world singles in a 20 year career. Head to head with Xu Xin he's way behind 0-8.

[@sunkruptman6436]

Hes def better than some players in almost goat bruh. The Waldner bias is crazy too😂 "You can tell Waldner is a much better player" yeah nice job finding excuses for Waldner losing in the finals like it was some average game. A win is a win so give him the credit for it. What even is your standards for your tier list if u don't even account for accolades thats like taking out the only objective aspect of this especially in a solo sport.

[@VladTableTennis]

Nah, I gave him credit. I said beating Waldner in the final of Olympics is a crazy accomplishment. It’s just, with GOATs there are still levels to it, even if he wins everything. But you are right, I’m hating

[@michaelshaw7652]

Beating Waldner in Olympics was a greatest feat for Kong. Remember, prior to the final, Waldner just beat Liu Guoling, who beat Waldner numerous times until last two times they met. So Waldner was in great shape. Ironically, Kong, who Waldner beat quite a few time in the past, became the Waldner stopper in the final. That's why a usually pretty reserved Kong was so excited in celebration.

[@dickn.ormous1064]

​@@michaelshaw7652 Waldner was gassed out after playing a 5 setter against Samsonov who had the best defence of all time. Otherwise,Kong was always Waldner's pigeon 8-3 in official matches and the only good performance in a big tournament after the 2000 Olympics was the 2001 WTTC where he reached the final although he still lost all his matches to Korea in the team event and his younger teammates had to save his ass. After 2001 he was semi retired from the Pro Tour and lost his big matches to Europeans (2002 World Cup to Boll,2003 WTTC to Schlager). In every single metric Kong is way behind Waldner.Waldner had to carry Sweden quite a number of times in team matches after his teammates had injury problems(1994 European Championships,1995 WTTC team,2000 WTTC) whereas Kong was a liability and was promptly replaced by the likes of Ma Lin/Wang Hao.

[@tomassantiagomolina5438]

Well, no words needed. The video speaks for itself.

[@Megaboyd]

Kong Linghui was like the first Chinese to be modeled after the European game instead of just the Chinese style. Kong even went to Sweden to learn how to play like Waldner and Persson. With the Service, Forehand and Backhand. Was never my favorite, I’d take other Chinese above him. P.S. Primorac was World Class 😉

[@VladTableTennis]

Yeah, I agree on Primorac, completely overlooked his early career. Good point

[@dickn.ormous1064]

His serve and his forehand were average and his bh was decent but couldn't match the Eastern Europeans.He had good defence like the Swedes and good counter attacks but didn't have either their power or touch.

[@kyotoryo6569]

IMO only 5 male players ever won grand slams so that should be an esay list of goats

[@VladTableTennis]

Listen, you’re right… In fact, everyone right in the comments. Very subjective thing. But, I think I agree with you somewhat, but at the same time. There are levels. And like, Ma Long will be top of all grand slam winners, right?

[@kyotoryo6569]

​@@VladTableTennis Ma Long wins most titles so objectively yes. Of course beyond the grand slam winners there are great players with great influences like Timo Boll really revolutionized the backhand techniques so things can be quite subjective. Personally I would say Joo Se-Hyuk is at least world class if Filus is in the list.

[@BrunoNeureiter]

Xu Xin GOAT

[@VladTableTennis]

Not really lol

[@BrunoNeureiter]

@@VladTableTennis “Not really lol” ☝️🤓

[@VladTableTennis]

give me an argument instead of just saying @@BrunoNeureiter

[@BrunoNeureiter]

@@VladTableTennis He was number one for consecutive years. Plus, he doesn't care. He really doesn't care. If you see him playing, most of the time he's super relaxed and just throws the ball back until he can smash. You'll never see him do a normal topspin, he always goes to the bottom, so he knows he can have more time. And about results, he never tries hard until he's down in points or in sets. Then he completely changes his mind and starts pulling out incredible stunts. Why would he be the only Chinese to constantly fish, to snake and do behind the back shots even at match pints? Dude just doesn't care. But he has the best feeling for spin. Top spin, chops, he has them all. He just doesn't care. That's why he chops from weird positions. And he also learned a lethal backhand topspin after ignoring it for years, yet didn't care to use it and just fished. Dude is a magician. Plus, every match of his is interesting to watch. You can't say that about many other players.

[@dickn.ormous1064]

​​​@@BrunoNeureiterLost the mixed doubles to Mizutani.That makes him the worst Chinese lefty in doubles since TT was introduced in the Olympics.For feeling and spin go watch Applegren who could land the ball from every position.Essentially,XX was a doubles specialist but he didn't cut it 'cause his close to the table game wasn't good enough.Chinese lefties were never good in singles probably the best since the 90's was Wang Tao a guy who actually had a workable bh block which is the most essential shot for lefties.

[@leon-xl5jw]

Seems that you don't know much about Xu Xin🤣. Here is some single match record of Xu Xin against your GOAT player: Xu Xin(8) vs Timo Boll (1) Xu Xin(9) vs Ovtcharov Dimitrij (1) Xu Xin(5) vs Zhang Ji Ke(4) Xu Xin(5) vs Ma Lin(2) Xu Xin(4) vs Wang Hao(4) Xu Xin(11) vs Ma Long(22) (note: XX is the only player who defeated Ma long more than 10 times, but Wang Hao is the only player who kept 50/50 win ratio against Ma long)

[@VladTableTennis]

I know he never won World Champ or World Cup or Olympics. Head to head here don’t matter

[@leon-xl5jw]

​@@VladTableTennis You said “It’s not all about the rings lol ”, and you also said "Head to head here don’t matter". Ok, so what matters? Also, are you sure Xu Xin is the winner of 2013 world cup? From en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xu_Xin_(table_tennis) World Championships: SF (2013, 2017). World Cup appearances: 3. Record: winner (2013), runner up (2016), 4th (2012). World Tour winner (×18): Kuwait Open 2010; Slovenian Open 2011, Qatar Open 2011; Qatar Open 2012; China Open 2012, Russian Open 2012, Korea Open 2013; Qatar Open 2014, Korea Open 2014; Japan (Yokohama) Open 2015; Korea Open 2016; Swedish Open 2017, Australia Open 2018; Bulgaria Open 2018, Japan Open 2019, Korean Open 2019, Australian Open 2019; German Open 2020. Runner-up (×11): Belarus Open 2008; Korea Open 2012; China Open 2013; China Open 2014; Kuwait Open 2015, China Open 2015, Swedish Open 2015, Japan Open 2016, German Open 2018; Swedish Open 2018, Austrian Open 2018. World Tour Grand Finals appearances: 6. Record: winner (2012, 2013), runner up (2009, 2010), SF (2015, 16), QF (2017, 2018). Asian Games: winner (2014). Asian Championships: winner (2019); runner-up (2015); SF (2009, 12). Asian Cup: winner (2012, 13, 15, 16); 2nd (2011); 3rd (2010).

[@tehtsb]

​@@VladTableTennis Just to reiterate, Xu Xin has won the 2013 World Cup. (He beat Samsonov in the final and Ovtcharov in the semi.) There's no English wiki for this, but a German one: de.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Cup_2013_(Tischtennis) What I don't understand is how Boll and Ovtcharov, who have very similiar accomplishments (2 and 1 World Cup wins, respectively, with no WC or Olympic singles gold or silver, just like Xu Xin), are in a higher tier than Xu Xin. It can't be their accomplishments, and it can't be their head-to-head with other (almost) GOATs, so why are they in a higher tier than Xu Xin? It just seems inconsistent, really. Of course, Xu Xin also has 5 World Championship gold medals in doubles and mixed doubles (with 5 different partners, one of which wasn't Chinese), it doesm't seem like you are acknowledging these?

[@theclaushoran]

genius content farming

[@VladTableTennis]

I couldn’t go to Calgary to beat your ass again for the video So had to improvise💀

[@theclaushoran]

never forget that first time at st.albert@@VladTableTennis