Hard Rubber More Spin?

pnachtwey wrote: APW46 wrote: pnachtwey wrote: More non sense! I have a video some where that shows a looper and chopper playing in front of high speed cameras.  The video indicates the choppers ball is rotating at 137 RPS.   The looper must at least match that speed or the ball will go into the net.  in your own words 'non sense' Are you saying that the looper doesn't have to match or exceed the surface speed of the ball with the tangential speed of the paddle.

 YES, Prove me wrong. You can't because I know that it is actually impossible for the arm to make the speed required, what actually happens is that the bat angle compensates and lifts the ball.

)

APW46 wrote: .... I know that it is actually impossible for the arm to make the speed required, what actually happens is that the bat angle compensates and lifts the ball.

then that's an exceptional chopper... and i will push that ball. 

smackman wrote: roundrobin wrote: pnachtwey wrote: Early on I suggest that a two identical top sheets could be bought and one placed on a hard sponge and the other on a soft sponge.  I asked for a justification for why the hard hard sponge will provide more spin than the soft sponge.  No one has explained why a hard sponge will provide more spin than an soft sponge. Also, the assertion was that hard rubbers are spinier than soft rubbers.  There were no other qualifiers so my 40 year old dried out hard rubber is still an example of how the general statement that hard rubbers are spinier than soft rubbers is false. For some reason I can't type from my iPad or edit that blank comment from another computer.  The empty comment can be deleted. Because of my duty at our association, I had the chance to play with many top players and try out many of their equipments.  Time and time again the spinniest loops and serves came from Chinese players with Chinese sticky topsheet and med-hard sponge over the likes of T05, Donic, Yasaka and Stiga users.  I have also tried the same Chinese topsheet with softer sponge variants and the absolute amount of spin that they can produce is significantly less than harder sponge ones that such top players prefer.  This is strictly based on my own experience.  My observation is when executing hardest loops, the hard sponge used by Chinese players does not bottom out as easily as softer ones, so they have an extra gear at the top to add even more pressure/friction to the ball. What would happen if you gave one of those chinese players used a say LT sound and they did the same stroke? To me a fast shot is not always the spinniest and the timing of a loop type drive at almost before the top of the bounce will go like a rocket becuase of two things  1. the timming of the shot (as in hitting the ball early so it is already back to the other side before another ball that has been hit latter (so in some case if you hit the ball 3 inches back +the ball has to go 3inche forward to get back to the place where the other person hit it = therfore 6 inches faster per time factor 2. impact from the bat and speed at the right moment

Yes, I have done that many times by switching setups with them or ask them to use different setups.  To answer your question directly:  A looping stroke designed for firm-sponge Chinese smooth rubbers will not work with something like LT Sound.  These visiting Chinese players will adjust their strokes quite a bit after hitting a few balls lightly with the new setups and find the one that works. 
One of the players I played with frequently was Ma Lin's former training partner.  He tried many of our club members' paddles at their request.  When he used Euro or Japanese rubbers he could make a louder cracking sound when looping than anyone I know, indicating he was getting exceptional contact with every loop.  He was also able to use a penhold pips out setup and tried to serve and play like Liu Guoliang.  There's little doubt in my mind a top player of his caliber could use non-Chinese inverted rubbers effectively if he wishes.  BTW, his backhand rubber was Nittaku Hammond Pro Alpha 2.2mm.


Edited by roundrobin - 04/06/2011 at 6:36pm

Congoman wrote: silverhair wrote: Still no web references to why hard sponge generates more spin than soft sponge?   If you are really into it, knock yourself out... http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1953Natur.172..169L

If you ever played a soft sponge on the forehand and tried to loop with it you'll know what happens when a soft sponge compresses..... The ball leaves the bat before the sponge returns and flys straight over the table, spin-less

racquetsforsale wrote: roundrobin wrote:  ... When he used Euro or Japanese rubbers he could make a louder cracking sound when looping than anyone I know, indicating he was getting exceptional contact with every loop...   RR,   Was the loud crack just the click of those Euro/Jpn speedglue-effect rubbers or was there some wood in it, meaning the Chinese players were driving the ball more, giving a flatter arc?

It was a combination of both... And you are correct, they drive the ball extremely hard with an almost straight arm, while trying to give it as low arc as possible.

this debate will never end .. because truth is often so counter-intuitive. 

roundrobin wrote: silverhair wrote: roundrobin wrote: Everything being equal (topsheet, blade, thickness), a regular smooth rubber (not anti) with firm sponge will produce more spin when executed by world-class players than a softer one.  I don't understand why you can't accept this fact from other people's real life experiences...  Because it's counterintuitive.  As softer sponge compresses, it gets harder.  The throw would be longer spinning the ball more than just a quick release from harder sponge. Not if you can swing the blade faster to compress the hard sponge as much as the softer one.  At many pro's level they could "bottom" out a soft sponge rubber too easily, thus robbing them of maximum compression when executing their hardest shots.

silverhair wrote: Speedplay wrote:   Silverhair, I honestly don't feel I need to spend time to back up my claims against some one who refuses to stay on topic. If he was truly interested to learn (instead of trying to teach, which he clearly isn't knowledgeble enough to do) I might consider going in to the technical aspects of this, but when he brings up his "dead" rubber as an example, it shows to me that he don't want to learn anything. When you make claims such as you have, it is necessary to back up those claims with references.  Failing to provide those references, especially when they have been questioned (as they definitely HAVE been questioned) results in a loss of credibility and the claims being dismissed as unsupported opinion. So, once again, please provide references to back you claims.  I have stayed on topic, this is my third request.

I've only noticed it twice, but then again, I've not read the entire tread.

I back up my claims with real life experience.

Still not sure why I should have to find reference that I'm right, as I haven't seen any reference that holds true that shows me wrong. Perhaps yu should start by finding a reference that shows why I'm wrong?

When you loop, the ball digs in to the sponge, and with a harder sponge, you can loop harder/faster before it bottoms out, and the harder/faster you loop, the more spin there will be on the ball, thus giving the harder sponge a greater ability to generate spin.

And to make sure that there is no absurd answers to this, it only holds truth if all other things are being equal regarding the rubber/sponge.

3m/s for a snake's strike sounds really low. I googled but didn't find anything conclusive, but I vaguely remember a show on TV about snakes. It mentioned that a rattlesnake can strike @ 70 miles per hour, which is 27m/s, if not more. A good martial artist can certainly dodge or parry a punch from another, but there is absolutely no way a human can react fast enough avoid a striking rattlesnake, which strikes faster than the eye can see.

http://www.livedash.com/transcript/sport_science-(the_deadliest_strike)/3774/CSNBA/Sunday_August_1_2010/394472/

Scroll down to ~37, where the snake vs boxer begins.

This is a link to a transcript from another one of their shows, where they test a rattlesnake vs a boxer. The rattlesnake strikes at 15ft/s=4.572m/s. The boxer strikes 30ft/s=9.144m/s.

Can't find any clips, or links to the show I watched, sorry.

From the page:

00:35:52 >> In the sweet science of boxing, the most devastating punches aren't always the hardest.
00:36:06 Sometimes it's the blinding strikes mmt boxers spend a large percent able of their training focus specifically on hand speed.
00:36:19 But hour fast are the fists flying?
00:36:22 And how does the hand speed of a champion boxer compare to one of the animal kingdom's fastest strikes?
00:36:31 >> We rigged a real ringer.
00:36:34 It's not boxer versus boxer.
00:36:37 It's boxer versus snake.
00:36:39 And may the best species win.
00:36:44 >> Going against each other toe to tail, we are bringing in two performers in their prime.
00:36:52 This this corn e, representing the animal kinger, the western diamondback rattlesnake.
00:37:04 This viper killed more people in northern america than any other snake.
00:37:10 And in our corner, is a fight horse is known to have some of the fastest hands in boxing.
00:37:16 Chad dawson.
00:37:22 Chad entered the ring more than 25 times and left victorious every time with 60% of those wins by knockout.
00:37:34 We will test the rattle snake first.
00:37:42 We have never brought something so potentially lethal into the lab.
00:37:46 So the snake wranglers calls for a monday toir sayty meeting.
00:37:53 >> It destroys blood and tissue.
00:37:59 You get major tissue damage.
00:38:03 A snake like this, you are going to be in the hospital for quite some time.
00:38:09 >> The snake wranglers will position a balloon at two feet away and we will be looking at the snake's top speed as it lunges to the target.
00:38:26 We will capture the tight byte to determine how fast it moved.
00:38:31 >> They have an extremely fast strike.
00:38:35 It's like an explosion.
00:38:41 >> It's time to find out who's faster.
00:38:46 A rattlesnake or a boxer.
00:38:49 First up, the rattler.
00:39:21 So how fast is this deadly strike?
00:39:25 Analysis reveals a top speed of 15 feet per second.
00:39:31 That incredible acceleration is the equivalent of going 0 to 60 in under three seconds.
00:39:44 Animal kingdom's ringer is fast.
00:39:45 But now it's time to bring in our ringer.
00:39:49 Undefeated light heavyweight champion chad dawson.
00:40:01 >> Chad dawson, you have some of the fastest nands boxing.
00:40:05 How do you punch so quickly?
00:40:07 >> It's like a rattle snake.
00:40:10 A rattle snake, you want to be ready to strike.
00:40:16 And when you make a move, the snake reacts.
00:40:18 You want to be loose and aggressive.
00:40:24 >> For this experiment, our high speed camera will time chad's single punch to our crash test dummy.
00:40:36 We will read the exact moment chad's first makes contact.
00:40:42 >> See that real explosive energy.
00:40:45 Just like that.
00:40:46 Coiled up snake.
00:40:47 Whack.
00:40:51 >> So can chad outstrike one of nature's fastest strikes?
00:40:56 Find out when "sport science" returns.


I'm kind enough to cut out the advertisment, so here comes the rest of it:

00:44:20 >>> For a boxer, fast hands mains the difference mean taking home hardware and taking a hard fall.
00:44:27 So we want to know just how fast an elite boxer can really strike.
00:44:33 And how does the bocker's hands speed compare to one of nature east fasters strikers.
00:44:41 To test first versus fang, we started with a predator with a nasty rep constitution.
00:44:50 The western diamondback rattlesnake.
00:44:53 We measured a strike speed of 15 feet per sec.
00:44:58 So can this boxer, world heavyweight champion chad dawson, strike as quickly as this rattle snake?
00:45:08 Chad is willing to give it a shot.
00:45:23 >> Yeah.
00:45:27 >> So how fast was that punch?
00:45:32 Could chad's firsts will moving faster than the speed of fangs?
00:45:41 To the naked eye, this contest is way too close to call.
00:45:46 And since it's over in a heart beat, to determine the winner, our motion capture technology gives us on inside look.
00:46:01 Chad's hands speed is a product of olympics.
00:46:06 As he throws his fists, chad snaps his shoulder to create momentum that gains velocity as it gets down the arm.
00:46:21 Chad cracks his first at an incredible 30 feet per second.
00:46:26 Amazing lie, that is twice as fast as the snake.
00:46:31 If the snake is faster than a tricked out sports car, chad accelerates faster than a race car.
00:46:45 Faster that a top fuel dragster and even faster than an f-14 fighter jet.
00:46:53 All though chad gave the snake a beatdown, he still got a healthy respect for his rep tillan adversary.
00:47:05 >> He's faster than my opponents.
00:47:08 >> This is something else.
00:47:10 The snake is a one hit wonder.
00:47:13 It will only strike one.
00:47:15 Chad with obliterate with a flurry of punches.
00:47:21 Try to guess how many punches he throws in five seconds.
00:47:31 Our phantom high speed camera reveals that chad threw 26 punches in five seconds.
00:47:42 To put that in perspective, the same amount of time drew brees throws a dart down field, chad dawson unleeches five hammers punches and that kind of speed will leave anyone totally rattled.
00:48:04 >> Told you I was faster than a sna >>> I'M pete McLeod.
00:49:08 [ Murmuring ].

APW46 wrote: debraj wrote: ) APW46 wrote: .... I know that it is actually impossible for the arm to make the speed required, what actually happens is that the bat angle compensates and lifts the ball. sorry which arm speed are we talking about? 137 RPS is the rotational speed on the ball.  which means for a 40mm ball its 137 * 40 * (pi=3.14)= 17207mm/sec linear speed =17 meters per sec definitely most of us loopers match it.... and that's why we can actually loop against a backspin with the racket completely over the ball or at least the racket facing little downwards  .. and the ball hanging below. Which means the angle of the bat doesn't provide any  vertical lift vector (cos theta )  to the ball to lift it or keep it lifted.  ... yeeeeeehhhhhhhh !!!    now where's my prize for brushing up school maths?    I'm talking about the higher end of heavy chop, and I don't need maths, just a lifetimes experience to know that any attempt to lift it with a closed bat ends in the ball being dumped in the net. Infact its one of the most common mistakes of intermediate/lower rated players that they believe heavy chop has to be competed with. Can I ask how you loop float? decrease you bat speed accordingly, or close your bat angle?

Edited by debraj - 04/07/2011 at 4:23am

Jonan wrote: racquetsforsale wrote: but there is absolutely no way a human can react fast enough avoid a striking rattlesnake, which strikes faster than the eye can see. As a person who has hunted and killed some 40+ poisonous snakes, including rattlesnakes, using only a machete and a brush axe, it can be done, they aren't that fast. The only snakes that bit me were ones I kept as pets.

Jonan,

You the man. I absolutely abhor snakes. But back to the off topic discussion. If you stick your hand in front of a rattlesnake and it strikes, there's no way you can react and pull back fast enough to avoid the bite. Emphasis on react. The snake, however, might miss. There's no doubt that if you strike first, you might beat the snake to the punch, but purely reacting to it, meaning it has to strike first before you take action---no way.

Just in case you can, though, I bet a lot of people will pay money to see it.