A hoax? Complete ban of chemical treatment ?

pingpongrob wrote: pongmaster wrote: rob, the thing is, not everbody uses sriver the same way. Sometimes the tuners and speed glue is not beneficial to a players game, but let's say that is, and you're getting beat by someone only becuase he's glueing.  Then why don't you just glue yourself? Tuned Sriver > Sriver Tuned Sriver = Tuned Sriver But Thats the point exactly, I'm trying to make. If everyone had tuned sriver there would be no advantage, the better player would win. Yes Or NO. So if everyone had untuned sriver, or MarkV or Geospin, or Inspirit it would go down to skill. And if you thought that the rubber beat you, all you would have to do is buy that sheet and try it. See where i'm coming from.

Tensors are going to be faster, spinnier, better than a regular sheet of sriver or markv or whatever, so yes that's true all you would have to do is go out and buy a sheet, but it's also more expensive. Plus, why does there need to be a rule for it? The rule, if it actually does ban tuners/boosters isn't leveling the playing field, it just forces people to look for yet other alternatives, which at this point is tensor rubbers.

What's the difference between using a tuned/glued rubber and one with a tuned/glue effect already built in, from a fairness standpoint? I agree it would make things more simple if everyone played a rubber straight out of the package, but it's not more fair by any means.

pingpongrob wrote: pongmaster wrote: rob, the thing is, not everbody uses sriver the same way. Sometimes the tuners and speed glue is not beneficial to a players game, but let's say that is, and you're getting beat by someone only becuase he's glueing.  Then why don't you just glue yourself? Tuned Sriver > Sriver Tuned Sriver = Tuned Sriver But Thats the point exactly, I'm trying to make. If everyone had tuned sriver there would be no advantage, the better player would win. Yes Or NO. So if everyone had untuned sriver, or MarkV or Geospin, or Inspirit it would go down to skill. And if you thought that the rubber beat you, all you would have to do is buy that sheet and try it. See where i'm coming from.

rob,

pongmaster wrote: rob, so we should all just use one universal rubber? Even if we play with it straight out of the package, some rubbers will still be better than others. And this would only apply to the opponent of the exact same style and game.  I wouldn't mind the equipment if my opponent was identical to me. We could use hardbat or frictionless long pips and that would still bring it down to skill.  But if im a two winged looper and am playing a chopper, penholder, or a counterdriver, then what would be the "standard" equipment.  Do you get my point?

Your Missing the point Here,
I'm not saying that we should all use the same rubbers, But with such a variety out there why do we have to tune the sponges to get an extra advantage - Where will it stop.

If you think that I beat you because I played with Plasma, then go out and buy plasma, if it makes you better - thats good. See what I mean.

If I think you beat me because you tuned your sponge, (Super Charged or Turbo Charged), then I should go out and Tune my sponge as well.

In car racing - Generally Turbo charged Cars race against Turbo Charged Cars.  Get what I mean.

I think most people tune their rubbers because it gives them an advantage, not that its against the rules at the moment.

topspinschuss wrote: Join the protest! Ignore this stupid, corrupt rule!

How ridulous ,  Rules are there not to make more profits for the table tennis companies - but to make the sport fairer for all.
Butterfly is probably the largest table tennis manufacturer and they have no problems selling $80.00 rubbers - Not that I agree with that.


One other reason is to make the sport more viewable by the general public. Then we might get better participation.

JimT wrote: pingpongrob wrote: topspinschuss wrote: Join the protest! Ignore this stupid, corrupt rule! How ridulous ,  Rules are there not to make more profits for the table tennis companies - but to make the sport fairer for all. Butterfly is probably the largest table tennis manufacturer and they have no problems selling $80.00 rubbers - Not that I agree with that. One other reason is to make the sport more viewable by the general public. Then we might get better participation. Oh, so now it's about making the sport more viewable? That's a new one, Rob... Tell me how exactly this is going to make it more viewable -  7 years have passed after 2001-2002 changes which were supposed to make TT more viewable, more telegenic, slower etc. Where is ESPN showing table tennis at all hours of night (or day)? How many hours of TT do you get in Australia? C'mon, mate, you are grasping at straws for arguments here... As for your argument of overall fairness - I can just repeat what I said before... there are hundreds (almost thousands) of different rubbers. How exactly using a dirt-cheap tuner will cause some people to have unfair advantage over the others? why exactly buying an $80 super-charged Bryce doesn't translate into having that advantage but having used a few grams of PO or CO or EO on your rubber is unfair?

Firstly Jim, we have 0 hours of TT on our TV stations in Australia at the moment.

The ITTF tried to make the sports more viewable with the introduction of the 40mm ball - but that failed dismally, as most of us adjusted in a very short time.

The unfair advantage - is due to the fact that you are modifying something that is supposed to be ITTF approved. Thats one of the stupid rules that the ITTF allowed to happen, (Although there are rules that stop this type of behavior, but they are never enforced).  From what you keep saying, you just want a free rule to do whatever you want.  How can this be good for the sport.

Rob,

it seems as if you are agreeing with me that basically all changes that ITTF made to the rules were stupid, ill-conceived and ultimately didn't help the sport at all. Then you turn around and say, ok, this time this will help... very very doubtful, imho.

As for "free to do whatever I want" - yes, within standard, old, common sense rules, that have proven themselves over more than hundred years, we should be allowed to play with whatever we want.

The restrictions that are natural - like prohibition to use sandpaper because it damages the ball and can even damage the opponent's paddle - are quite acceptable. Even ban on the VOC glues can be treated as a proper decision when you look at it from the common sense point of view.

All restrictions which are imposed because it is alleged that they can "damage" the game - like 4 mm thickness restriction, or like 85% wood restriction are quite unnatural, in my opinion, and should not be there at all. If you want to play with 100-plastic racket, you should be allowed to do that. If you want to put 5 kilos of rubber on your paddle, please do as long as those kilos are not flying out off your racket and hurting people around you.

The only permissible restrictions are the ones which prevent damage to the equipment and to the health of the players. Perhaps I forgot something but I am sure you catch my drift...

I don't see how CTE will be banned. There is nothing on the ittf website from what I have seen.

JimT wrote: Rob, it seems as if you are agreeing with me that basically all changes that ITTF made to the rules were stupid, ill-conceived and ultimately didn't help the sport at all. Then you turn around and say, ok, this time this will help... very very doubtful, imho. As for "free to do whatever I want" - yes, within standard, old, common sense rules, that have proven themselves over more than hundred years, we should be allowed to play with whatever we want. The restrictions that are natural - like prohibition to use sandpaper because it damages the ball and can even damage the opponent's paddle - are quite acceptable. Even ban on the VOC glues can be treated as a proper decision when you look at it from the common sense point of view. All restrictions which are imposed because it is alleged that they can "damage" the game - like 4 mm thickness restriction, or like 85% wood restriction are quite unnatural, in my opinion, and should not be there at all. If you want to play with 100-plastic racket, you should be allowed to do that. If you want to put 5 kilos of rubber on your paddle, please do as long as those kilos are not flying out off your racket and hurting people around you. The only permissible restrictions are the ones which prevent damage to the equipment and to the health of the players. Perhaps I forgot something but I am sure you catch my drift...

Imagine if what your saying was applied to other sports - Motor Racing, Boxing, Pole Vaulting.

Imagine if I made a pole Vault that help me jump a little higher, That would be fare.

Imagine if I treated my boxing gloves so they also hurt more per punch.

Imagine if I increased the flow of my Turbo Charge to give me more horsepower, yet only stipulate a certain flow rate (Our 4mm rule, which was designed for manufacturers, Not players).

There are probably lots more example's to go by, but I'm sure you will have an answer for each, not that I object - its a free world we both live in, thats why you choose to treat & I choose to not. That doesn't make you an evil person, it just makes us different.

These discussions are very important, This is what the ITTF Committee's should be doing, getting people from all over the world @ all level to determine which direction our game should head in, and come up with 100% decisive and enforcible set of rules.

as for public viewing, the answer to that is to add more choppers to the game.  how? change the diameter height ratio on long pips.

You are still missing the point, even with all your explanations - The one with the racing cars does not make sense. You are saying that more power equals Win, You still need skill to achieve this.

Now if I beat you with Plasma, whilst your using sriver, it might mean I'm a better player, Then you go and put a sheet of plasma on your blade - do some serious training, we play again & the same result, then again I'm the better player. But if after training with the Plasma, you beat me - Then its obvious that the plasma has improved your game & now you are the better player.

Adding Glue to your sriver changes everything - As you and everyone elso knows - no Tensor matches the effects of speedglue 100%. So who then has the advantage. ---- As I said before its just a viscous circle that players like yourself keep getting into, and then we have to follow.

Thats why all the Top Players use it - Because they know without it they would not be able to compete at their level.

And its no good quoting my comments if they are irrelevant to your answer.

Hey JimT

JimT wrote: Here is the email I have just sent to the same ITTF official. I hope that you will agree with me that this was the proper respectful letter, and you are behind me in asking the questions posted there.

Did Mr. Lineros answered to your email?

Cheers. Martin

martinspin wrote: Hey JimT JimT wrote: Here is the email I have just sent to the same ITTF official. I hope that you will agree with me that this was the proper respectful letter, and you are behind me in asking the questions posted there. Did Mr. Lineros answered to your email? Cheers. Martin

Nope, not yet.

So basically now you can see that, as it was noted before, this is intended for pips-out only, and for regular smooth rubber they are only concerned about 4mm thickness rule. Sponge is not subject to ITTF regulation (so far)therefore they cannot prevent you from using tuners.

esnift wrote: Tuners don't give an unfair advantage to one player over another because tuners are available to all and each player must adapt their play style to utilize the speed spin boost.

But They do give an advantage.

esnift wrote: My main argument though is a failure to see the logic in banning tuners/booster for the sake of "slowing down the game" while allowing companies to sell pretensioned rubbers with near the same attributes but at a huge price markup.

Pretensioned rubbers are not sold at the Huge price markup that you state. In fact German Built rubbers are very reasonable in Price for the A1 Quality that you get.

I dont hear anyone mention how much the Research & development costs are for these rubbers.

Another point that you forget is: These rubbers are played without any tampering by the player.

And just a hint for those that still believe that the Ban on Sponge tuners and treatments will not go ahead. I spoke with one of the manufacturers, last night and I was told that they believe that the ITTF will introduce a ban, to co-incide with the Speed glue ban in Sept. Sorry for those that have spent the time tryng to find a replacement. I hope for you sake's it doesn't go through.

pingpongrob wrote: But They do give an advantage.

They give an advantage only if it benefits your play style. I won't waste time on examples, but is not really an advantage because people who want to use it can use it. It's no different than simply buying a faster rubber; it's of no benefit unless that player can utilize the speed increase. For me it's like saying a more skilled player than myself has an unfair advantage against me because they are better (it's not unfair, it's just the way things are and I have the ability to change the situation by improving my own skill).

pingpongrob wrote: esnift wrote: My main argument though is a failure to see the logic in banning tuners/booster for the sake of "slowing down the game" while allowing companies to sell pretensioned rubbers with near the same attributes but at a huge price markup. Pretensioned rubbers are not sold at the Huge price markup that you state. In fact German Built rubbers are very reasonable in Price for the A1 Quality that you get. I dont hear anyone mention how much the Research & development costs are for these rubbers.

I didn't explain my point here very well. Coming from a background using Chinese and Japanese rubbers, I would much rather but a national edition globe 999 and tune it with PO to get the feel/speed/spin I like for a total cost of $15 as opposed to $40-$60 a sheet for a pretensioned rubber being a poor college student. I didn't mean to say there was an unnecessary mark-up or that they weren't worth the cost, simply that they are more than I would like to pay for the effect I want.

pingpongrob wrote: Another point that you forget is: These rubbers are played without any tampering by the player.

I didn't forget the point about players tampering with rubber. That was the point I was trying to make. A rubber has certain qualities that are inherent with and without treating it, ie h3 provincial. People aren't getting a crazy different rubber each time a different person tunes it, it will always play a certain way when tuned (more or less). "Tampered" puts such a negative connotation on it, I would say "enhancing the natural characteristics."

I understand the principle behind not wanting people to change the characteristic of the rubber that was approved by ITTF, it just smacks over-regulation. It's as if the end goal is to have everyone use pre-assembled bats with rubber permanently attached and all the same characteristics. The variation and complex nature of the sport is what attracts me the most. It was incredibly frustrating playing against an opponent that used frictionless rubber but I don't think that should be banned either.

In the end it doesn't really matter though because I don't foresee myself playing in an international competition and if I do I'll be good enough that switching over to pretensioned rubber would not be a problem in any aspect. I'm just saying I'm against the principle of it.