Ah, Wang Chuqin’s serve has been attracting a lot of buzz for a while, especially since he started sweeping titles in late 2022. Usually, I relish a bit of sports drama, whether applauding brilliance or roasting athletes or teams like a backyard BBQ. But when people cry foul, claiming he’s hiding the ball on his toss or making other illegal serves, by whipping out livestream screenshots, my filmmaker brain kicks into overdrive. 🤯 It’s time to break down why clicking pause and yelling “Gotcha!” isn’t the slam-dunk argument they think it is.
Table of contents
The Optical Illusions That Trick Us All
Let’s start by busting the myth that what you see on screen is the gospel truth. Cameras are sneaky little magicians, bending reality in ways that can fool even the sharpest eyes.
- Lens Distortion: Camera lenses are sometimes like funhouse mirrors. They bend light, curving straight lines and stretching or shrinking objects. Even the best tech can only partially fix this, and it gets even worse when combined with other visual quirks.
- Perspective Distortion1: Cameras flatten a 3D world into a 2D image, and in the process, everything gets skewed—object size and position, camera-subject distance, and spatial relationships between objects. Focal length plays a major role here. There’s a widely accepted theory among photographers that a 50mm focal length is the closest to the human eye, producing images with a natural look. The farther you move from 50mm, whether to shorter or longer focal lengths, the more distortion or compression affects the footage and images.
- Eg 1: Ever seen a Hitchcock “dolly zoom”? That dramatic stretching or shrinking effect happens when a camera changes its focal length while moving closer or further from the subject. It’s cool to create the story in movies, but in sports broadcasts, it may unintentionally confuse.
- Eg 2: Two identical jars were sitting 16” apart. Change the focal length (not angle) of the camera, and suddenly the distance between them changes, and one jar looks twice the size of the other. Same jars, wildly different vibes.
- Parallax Effect: Objects at different distances appear to shift positions when the camera (or your perspective) moves. Think of trees rushing by on a train ride while the mountains in the distance barely move. This same effect occurs with the tiny and flying ping-pong ball, making what you see on screen more of an optical illusion than reality.
- Angles and Stabilization: Not to mention the limitations of camera angles and stabilization. The broadcast camera is set up to show the match, not the CSI-level investigation. We’ll never get the same perspective as the players and umpires on the court.
Cameras have revolutionized modern life, no doubt. We live in an age of instant replay and armchair refereeing, no doubt. But in table tennis, basically the Formula One of racket sports, accurately capturing a ball traveling at 70 mph with 150 spins per second is a tall order—let alone judging the key serving moments. It’s like guessing someone’s height from their Tinder profile picture: fancy and appealing, but it just doesn’t hold up.
Let’s be honest, under such relentless scrutiny, every player would look guilty at some point. The footage can make it seem like the ball is obstructed, tossed less than 16cm, or not vertically, even if it’s not bothering in real-time. A ball that appears to fly directly in front of the left eye in the footage, maybe 15” to the left of the body and higher overhead. As a filmmaker, I’ve seen first-hand how lenses, angles, and stabilization all play tricks on the eye. Maybe it’s my professional bias, but relying on camera footage without considering how it was shot? That’s a gamble I wouldn’t take.
Hawk-Eye to the Rescue: Table Tennis Needs a Tech Upgrade
Tired of replay-induced and pixel-by-pixel arguments? High-tech solutions like the Hawk-Eye system might just be the savior. While table tennis is still exploring these possibilities, tennis—a sport that has matured significantly in various aspects—has already demonstrated how technology can revolutionize officiating.
In the 2020 US Open, AI technology, including Hawk-Eye, replaced line judges in some matches2 after more than a decade of experimentation at international events. It was widely praised and welcomed by players and fans. The system, however, wasn’t entirely glitch-free. During the World TeamTennis 2020 season, a match between Jessica Pegula of the Orlando Storm and Bernarda Pera of the Washington Kastles saw the AI initially rule a ball in, only for Hawk-Eye’s replay to confirm it had landed out later.3 Despite occasional hiccups, most players support the shift toward AI officiating in tennis, agreeing that the benefits outweigh the flaws. For many, it represents a significant step forward.
When it comes to table tennis, the Hawk-Eye system, known as Table Tennis Review (TTR), feels like the ideal referee we all wish we had at family game night: no tantrums, no bias, and no “Did you see that?” debates. Utilizing multiple high-speed cameras, the TTR system tracks the ball from various angles, triangulating all data to create a precise 3D model of the ball’s trajectory, speed, spin, table touch points, etc. Technically, we can move beyond the confusion and debates caused by the camera circus.
- It was first implemented at the ITTF World Tour Grand Finals in 2019.4
- During a 2020 CNT internal match, 15 Hawk-Eye cameras helped Wang Chuqin successfully challenge a call on his serve in the mixed doubles final.
- At the very recent Mixed Team World Cup in Chengdu, six TTR challenges were initiated on the final day,5 one of which saved Team Korea from losing a point over an edge ball against Team Hong Kong.
So, Why isn’t this tech standard in table tennis yet? Officially, COVID-19 stalled its rollout. Unofficially? Maybe financial concerns? Who knows. However, it seems to be on its way, as the ITTF has endorsed the introduction of TTR at the World Championships Finals in Doha next year.6 Maybe we’ll finally see some consistency that players and fans deserve. Fingers crossed.🤞🏻
The Fine Line Between Strategy and Chaos
Speaking of borderline serves, the blend of artistry, strategy, and a touch of psychological warfare. If regular serves are a handshake, these are a sly wink with a hidden agenda. It’s the one moment where you have complete control of the ball, and a calculated weapon in the mental game, where every spin, toss, angle, and placement matters.
Take Ma Lin’s legendary “Ghost Serve”—short, loaded with heavy underspin, and paired with deceptive follow-up motions that confuse opponents. It’s genius, borderline evil, and, of course, controversial. But like all elite sports, pushing the boundaries is less about cheating and more about strategy.
Across sports, this balance between creativity and enforcement is everywhere. Catchers in baseball are basically con artists with gloves, subtly shifting their mitts to make borderline pitches look like strikes to the umpire—a tactic that can sway crucial calls in a game. Fielders use the hidden ball trick to tag unaware baserunners by feigning to return the ball to the pitcher while secretly holding onto it. Pitchers also use their creativity, deceiving opponents with subtle movements or by feinting pickoff attempts to catch runners off guard.
In hockey, players often deliberate offside traps that halt play to reset their defense, which is usually considered controversial but effective. Face-offs turn into little fights where stick placement and timing tip the scales. In football, players also use deceptive formations to confuse defenses about who is eligible to catch a pass. Offenses delay snaps to disrupt defensive timing, and players push ball carriers forward in scrums, skirting the rules against assisting forward progress. Each of them is a carefully crafted moment of competitive creativity.
What separates these maneuvers from outright cheating is intent and competence. Rather than breaking the rules, the top athletes and sports teams aim to grasp their absolute limitations. Wang Chuqin’s serves are, in fact, an excellent illustration of this sophisticated athletic communication.
Competition at the highest level goes beyond physical ability. It becomes a dynamic dialogue of adaptation in which athletes constantly read, interpret, and counter each other’s strategies. The most thrilling moments in sports happen in those razor-thin spaces between what’s expected and what’s possible. In table tennis, borderline serves are the spark, a calculated risk that elevates the game into a high-stakes battle of wits and reflexes. Or, to put it simply, it’s just a part of the game.
If It’s Not Called, It’s Not Illegal
At the heart of table tennis officiating is a system built on clear, commonly agreed-upon rules. These rules are the foundation for fairness, and the role of the umpires is to enforce them as consistently as possible. Umpires are right there on the court, not squinting through some grainy live stream or getting dizzy from slow-motion replays.
Critics often claim the system is biased or corrupt but rarely provide evidence to back up their accusations. The numbers tell a different story. I went through some stats from major competitions over the past few years, including the World Championships in Durban & Busan, WTT Singapore Smash 2024, and the Paris Olympics, and the data consistently shows no systemic bias. Warnings and penalties for illegal serves are issued regularly, proving that umpires are diligent about enforcing the rules. There is no evidence of favoritism based on language, race, association, gender, or even the type of match—whether singles, doubles, or mixed doubles. Nor is there any sign of double standards within matches. The same rules apply to everyone, making the system the Switzerland of sports officiating.
Of course, no system is perfect. Professional-level play and officiating involve split-second decisions, and occasional mistakes are bound to happen. Players and umpires are humans, not robots with 20/20 hindsight. One wrong or missed call doesn’t mean the entire system is a dumpster fire or anyone’s trying to cheat. It’s more like, “Oops, my bad,” and then everyone moves on.
Yet, despite these flawless, human officiating remains the best option we have and has proven itself effective time and again. Even with advanced tools like Hawk-Eye in place, human oversight is essential. While precision is critical, interpreting the game’s dynamics and applying context requires the nuanced judgment that only an experienced umpire can offer. The future of officiating isn’t about replacing umpires but enhancing their work with complementary tools.
This reliance on human judgment isn’t unique to table tennis; it’s a cornerstone of many sports. Take tennis, for example, where human officials bring an irreplaceable layer of unpredictability, emotion, and texture to the game. Tennis player Noah Rubin once said, “I’m usually not a tennis traditionalist, but there’s something about having those line judges dressed up in the back of the court making the calls. There’s definitely something missing” when human line judges are replaced.7 Consider the 2009 US Open semifinal between Serena Williams and Kim Clijsters.8 It’s remembered not just for the tennis but Serena’s fiery outburst over a foot-fault call. Moments like this, fueled by human decisions, become part of tennis lore. Legendary chair umpires like Mohamed Lahyani and Carlos Ramos also enrich the game (perhaps not always in a praised way) with their distinct personalities and memorable interactions. While AI promises flawless calls, it can never replicate the messy, deeply human essence that keeps us glued to the action.
Back to table tennis. Some critics argue that its officiating system is outdated. My inner progressive is shouting, “Yeah! Democratize the system!” Let’s have instant experts, fans, and players themselves vote on rulings and decisions. Imagine setting up Hawk-Eye over every inch of the court while thousands of livestream viewers pause matches mid-serve to cast votes and debate edge balls in real time via TikTok challenges or Twitter polls. Who wouldn’t want a game decided by the collective wisdom of the internet? Who wouldn’t love a little ITTF/WTT freedom fest? Yeah!
At the End of the Rally…
Judging Wang’s service based on livestream screenshots is like reviewing a chef’s cooking from a heavily filtered Instagram post. Context is missing, nuance is erased, and the full complexity of the moment gets lost. While cameras promise objectivity, they often deliver a fragmented, decontextualized narrative that fails to capture the complex dynamics of high-speed competitive sports. If anything, this debate shows the need for better tech like the TTR system to become standard in table tennis. But technology is just one piece of a more complex puzzle. Sports aren’t just rules and pixels. They’re unpredictable, brilliant, human moments that make us scream at TVs, question life choices, and somehow still love every second of it.
As for me, I’m not here to play the role of a neutral observer or an all-seeing guru. As a table tennis newbie, I’m diving into the sport like a kid at an all-you-can-eat dessert bar—curious and hungry to form my own opinions through personal experience and way of thinking, rather than simply echoing established opinions or letting others control the narrative. After all, every established “truth” in sports started as someone’s wild idea, and every now-legendary technique probably had critics throwing a fit at first. So, yeah, being a rookie? It’s a gift. While everyone else is arguing over screenshots, I’m just here enjoying the ride and figuring things out for myself, without anyone else’s “education” or conversation dominance.
See Also
AI Is Helping Referee Games in Major Sports Leagues, but Limitations Remain | Scientific American
Notes
- Perspective distortion – Wikipedia ↩︎
- Automated Line Calls Will Replace Human Judges at U.S. Open – The New York Times ↩︎
- WTT – Jessica Pegula Carries Orlando to Victory Against Washington; Storm Rolls 23-17 ↩︎
- Table Tennis Review to be implemented at 2019 ITTF World Tour Grand Finals – International Table Tennis Federation ↩︎
- Table Tennis Review System Returns with a Successful Trial at ITTF Mixed Team World Cup 2024 – International Table Tennis Federation ↩︎
- ITTF Executive Board Announces Key Decisions During Busan 2024 Summit – International Table Tennis Federation ↩︎
- The U.S Open replaces human line judges with optical technology: NPR ↩︎
- U.S. Open: Serena Williams penalized on match point to fall in semis – ESPN ↩︎