Alex Table Tennis - MyTableTennis.NET Homepage
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Plastic balls debacle (to all TDs out there)
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login
tabletennis11.com

Plastic balls debacle (to all TDs out there)

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123 6>
Author
JimT View Drop Down
Premier Member
Premier Member
Avatar

Joined: 10/26/2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 14602
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote JimT Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Plastic balls debacle (to all TDs out there)
    Posted: 11/21/2014 at 10:51am
I was very disheartened when I saw that some of the best tournaments in the country decided to switch to plastic plastic balls for their tournaments. Among them - NA Teams, Westchester Open (and probably many others).
 
Those are great tournaments but I am sure everyone knows the reasons behind my feelings 

a) cost of the new balls – of course, in the case of tournaments, the balls are provided by the organizers;but there is hidden cost for the participants who naturally have to get at least some practice with the plastic balls if they want to perform well at the “plastic” tournaments. My calculations based on what I see from our club play in the last two months, show that the cost of the new balls is about6 times higher (!!) – taking into account their pricing and their horrible lifespan.
 
b) the fact that the plastic balls are so short-lived doesn’t mean just the budget problem. It means
that the balls are poorly made, that the material is not uniformly distributed along the spherical surface (and we all know how precise the TT balls have to be in order for them to be playable). This leads to bad, inconsistent bounce.
 
Notice that I am not talking about their slower speed or spin (or sound) – that is something we can get used to;  after all that would be similar to the changes that we all had to make in 2000 when the entire world switched to 40 mm balls. No, I am talking about quality and pricing – and both are horrible at the moment. Even the better plastic balls – such as Andro, XuShaoFa, Kinson – are noticeably inferior to the average, 1 dollar apiece celluloid balls. I am not even talking about NIttaku Premium or TSP 3-star ($1.5-1.8 each for celluloid; in plastic they will probably be priced at $3-3.50).
 
If it were up to me, I would wait as many years as necessary until manufacturers finally came up with plastic balls which are virtually indistinguishable from current celluloid balls in quality of the bounce, quality of production and lifespan. It should not be our problem that some bureaucrats decided that celluloid is in danger of being banned all over the world, then realized it was not true, but since they couldn’t admit they screwed up they went ahead anyway, especially after manufacturers realized all the possible financial ramifications.
 
But as it stands now, ITTF has no intention of doing that, which only encourages people to come up with conspiracy theories and wild guesses about corruption and greed. After all, if an average club player (2-3 times a week practice) will have to spend $250-400 a year instead of $30-50 just for the balls, what is going to happen?
 
Nothing good – mainly, a whole lot of players WILL NOT use plastic balls in their club matches. What that will mean, is that less  players (on average) will take part in “plastic” tournaments, including our best high-level competitions. And that is not good for our sport. Not good at all.
Even if in few years plastic balls will have become much better and cheaper, we will still lose many
players, and the tournaments on average will attract even less participants.
 
So my plea is – for all the TDs out there, please think hard and think smart. I beg you, do not switch to plastic balls until you are 100% satisfied with their quality and their pricing. Granted, this might take a few years, but that should not be our concern. Please reject the bad choice that ITTF (and alas, USATT as well) are posing before us.
 
We should tell them (with our words, and with our actions) that they are wrong, that they are hurting the sport, and their  reasons are not only invalid but they are (or at least, seem to be) highly suspect. 
 
Thanks everybody for your attention – I know this was a lot of words Smile. I just felt I really needed to pour it all out. Who knows, maybe someone will listen...
 
Single Ply Hinoki Club, Founding Member

Say "no!" to expensive table tennis equipment. Please...
Back to Top
Sponsored Links


Back to Top
tom View Drop Down
Premier Member
Premier Member


Joined: 11/18/2013
Location: canada
Status: Offline
Points: 3016
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote tom Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11/21/2014 at 11:10am
"It should not be our problem that some bureaucrats decided that celluloid is in danger of being banned all over the world, then realized it was not true, but since they couldn’t admit they screwed up they went ahead anyway, especially after manufacturers realized all the possible financial ramifications."

Jim,  a very nicely written piece but I am afraid the wave to change over for the competitive players cannot be stopped.  National associations want their top players to do well in ITTF tournaments so they adopt the plastic ball and this trickles down to the regional associations who run the regional tournaments with the same logic.  I see people kicking  and screaming against the plastic balls but buy them anyways in order to adopt to the tournaments.  Sad but true.

I think your quote above gave too much credit to the ITTF, ethics wise.  I don't think they ever thought celluloid was in danger - they just want to put forth something to justify their corruption.


Edited by tom - 11/21/2014 at 4:29pm
Back to Top
NextLevel View Drop Down
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 12/15/2011
Location: Somewhere Good
Status: Offline
Points: 14842
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote NextLevel Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11/21/2014 at 11:36am
Originally posted by JimT JimT wrote:

 
Notice that I am not talking about their slower speed or spin (or sound) – that is something we can get used to;  after all that would be similar to the changes that we all had to make in 2000 when the entire world switched to 40 mm balls. No, I am talking about quality and pricing – and both are horrible at the moment. Even the better plastic balls – such as Andro, XuShaoFa, Kinson – are noticeably inferior to the average, 1 dollar apiece celluloid balls. I am not even talking about NIttaku Premium or TSP 3-star ($1.5-1.8 each for celluloid; in plastic they will probably be priced at $3-3.50).
 
 
I actually disagree that XSF is noticeably inferior to celluloid.  I can imagine another universe where those balls were made before celluloid and people wondered why one should ever use celluloid.

Edited by NextLevel - 11/21/2014 at 11:37am
I like putting heavy topspin on the ball...
Cybershape Carbon
FH/BH: H3P 41D.
Lumberjack TT, not for lovers of beautiful strokes. No time to train...
Back to Top
1dennistt View Drop Down
Silver Member
Silver Member
Avatar

Joined: 03/03/2010
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 533
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote 1dennistt Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11/21/2014 at 11:37am
"I see people kicking  and screaming against the plastic balls"

I agree, I'm one of those "kicking and screaming" people, I played with a Joola ball last nightDead, not fun at all.  I block a lot close to the table, and I'm having a hard time predicting the bounce of the new seamed ballsCry.  Haven't tried a seamless ball yet.

Even I can see the writing on the wall.  Time to adapt. I'm sure I'll get better at this over time, I'd better or else.  Confused
Donic Waldner World Champion 1989 ZLC (Inner), Donic BlueStorm Pro (Red) Max, ????? (Black) 1.8 mm)
Back to Top
tom View Drop Down
Premier Member
Premier Member


Joined: 11/18/2013
Location: canada
Status: Offline
Points: 3016
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote tom Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11/21/2014 at 11:46am
"I actually disagree that XSF is noticeably inferior to celluloid.  I can imagine another universe where those balls were made before celluloid and people wondered why one should ever use celluloid. "

NL, are you saying the XSF is better, last longer, and cheaper than the quality cell balls?
Back to Top
iakovka View Drop Down
Super Member
Super Member
Avatar

Joined: 07/14/2006
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 446
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote iakovka Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11/21/2014 at 12:02pm
Originally posted by tom tom wrote:

"I actually disagree that XSF is noticeably inferior to celluloid.  I can imagine another universe where those balls were made before celluloid and people wondered why one should ever use celluloid. "

NL, are you saying the XSF is better, last longer, and cheaper than the quality cell balls?

Comparable to Nittaku celluloid in price (already, and with time I belive they will be cheaper), last longer, more round. About "better" it is rather a subjective parameter b/c am sure my racket is better than yours :))) lol


XIOM ZX1 Feel 85 Gr, FH: XIOM Omega VII Pro, BH: Rakza 7 Soft 2MM
XIOM ZXI 88 Gr, FH: XIOM Omega V Tour, BH: Rakza Soft 7 2MM
Back to Top
NextLevel View Drop Down
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 12/15/2011
Location: Somewhere Good
Status: Offline
Points: 14842
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote NextLevel Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11/21/2014 at 12:22pm
Originally posted by tom tom wrote:

"I actually disagree that XSF is noticeably inferior to celluloid.  I can imagine another universe where those balls were made before celluloid and people wondered why one should ever use celluloid. "

NL, are you saying the XSF is better, last longer, and cheaper than the quality cell balls?

Yes. I am preparing for the teams so I usually do not use the XSF balls.  Over the last two days, I have used them with people who were depressed by the Joola balls that will be used at the Teams.  Both of them really liked the balls and said they played closer to celluloid.  Both of them but particularly one of them likes to hit the ball hard.  The one of them who does played a fellow junior who does as well and they repeatedly made shots that would have cracked the Joola ball in short order, and even hit the edge and net post a few times (which can on occasion break the XSF ball), but the ball survived intact.  It also made be a bit scared for my all round play and for defenders in general who like these slow Joola balls what would happen if these XSF balls became dominant.  I would definitely have to get quicker again and have less time to juice the ball (which means a quick return to Tenergy).
I like putting heavy topspin on the ball...
Cybershape Carbon
FH/BH: H3P 41D.
Lumberjack TT, not for lovers of beautiful strokes. No time to train...
Back to Top
slevin View Drop Down
Premier Member
Premier Member


Joined: 03/15/2012
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Points: 3602
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote slevin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11/21/2014 at 12:22pm
JimT, in my area, the clubs have moved their leagues to plastic as well. The clubs' biggest revenue generators are the juniors paying a lot in coaching & participating in the big tournaments. They naturally demand for consistency in type of balls used during league play (the want the same balls that are used in the tournaments) & if the club wants to be competitive, it has to comply.

Given that so few factories are manufacturing the balls, there is massive scope for easy price manipulation.
Back to Top
JimT View Drop Down
Premier Member
Premier Member
Avatar

Joined: 10/26/2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 14602
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote JimT Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11/21/2014 at 12:23pm
Originally posted by NextLevel NextLevel wrote:

I actually disagree that XSF is noticeably inferior to celluloid.  I can imagine another universe where those balls were made before celluloid and people wondered why one should ever use celluloid.


I actually liked XSF and Kinson best out of all brands I tried. However, many other players commented that they felt some noticeable differences between them and premium celluloid balls.
Single Ply Hinoki Club, Founding Member

Say "no!" to expensive table tennis equipment. Please...
Back to Top
JimT View Drop Down
Premier Member
Premier Member
Avatar

Joined: 10/26/2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 14602
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote JimT Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11/21/2014 at 12:28pm
Originally posted by slevin slevin wrote:

They naturally demand for consistency in type of balls used during league play (the want the same balls that are used in the tournaments) & if the club wants to be competitive, it has to comply.


Using the word "consistency" here is kind of ... hmm...

I understand that you meant they want to use the same ball as they will have to use at the high-level tournaments. However, any consistency (so far) is out of the question, for almost all the brands of plastic.

And that was one of my main point. Until manufacturers start producing balls made with at least same level of quality, consistency, roundness etc as the celluloid we have now, it is next to criminal to force millions upon millions of players around the world to switch to that cr@p.

If more of us would take some kind of stand on the issue, and communicate it everywhere - at the tournaments, to TDs, to USATT, to ITTF, to clubs, to TT companies etc - then perhaps we can make the situation change for the better faster.
Single Ply Hinoki Club, Founding Member

Say "no!" to expensive table tennis equipment. Please...
Back to Top
tom View Drop Down
Premier Member
Premier Member


Joined: 11/18/2013
Location: canada
Status: Offline
Points: 3016
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote tom Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11/21/2014 at 12:30pm
Originally posted by iakovka iakovka wrote:

Originally posted by tom tom wrote:

"I actually disagree that XSF is noticeably inferior to celluloid.  I can imagine another universe where those balls were made before celluloid and people wondered why one should ever use celluloid. "

NL, are you saying the XSF is better, last longer, and cheaper than the quality cell balls?

Comparable to Nittaku celluloid in price (already, and with time I belive they will be cheaper), last longer, more round. About "better" it is rather a subjective parameter b/c am sure my racket is better than yours :))) lol

Iakovka,  are you trying to be funny or just like to argue ?   Paddle Palace: 12 Nittaku Premium, cell:25.95;plastic 33.95.  Where did you see people say plastic balls last longer?  To the contrary I have broken more than 1 plastic ball in a practice session.  I define "better" (balls) as enjoyment of the sport.
Back to Top
mts388 View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member


Joined: 03/21/2014
Location: Sonora CA
Status: Offline
Points: 2382
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote mts388 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11/21/2014 at 12:35pm
It's amazing how players can have so many different opinions on the new plastic balls.  I play in 3 different clubs.  All clubs have switched to plastic.  I haven't heard one complaint about the new balls.  My main club used to go through 3 or 4 celluloid balls each night.  Now we lose one plastic ball every other night.  We use Double Fish, Joola and the Nittaku premium.  Our ball cost is now less than before. 
Back to Top
NextLevel View Drop Down
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 12/15/2011
Location: Somewhere Good
Status: Offline
Points: 14842
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote NextLevel Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11/21/2014 at 12:35pm
There are differences, but those differences do not make the ball worse.  They make the ball different. 
 
Tom,
 
You can get XSF balls for between $1 to $2 per ball and they last longer and are more durable than celluloid.  Some say in bulk, you can get them from China for under $1 as well.  They play slightly differently, but I would be amazed if anyone watched an XSF match and could tell that the ball was not a celluloid ball.  In fact, some people liken it to a 38mm ball.


Edited by NextLevel - 11/21/2014 at 12:38pm
I like putting heavy topspin on the ball...
Cybershape Carbon
FH/BH: H3P 41D.
Lumberjack TT, not for lovers of beautiful strokes. No time to train...
Back to Top
Tinykin View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar

Joined: 10/30/2003
Location: England
Status: Offline
Points: 2336
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Tinykin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11/21/2014 at 12:44pm
Originally posted by NextLevel NextLevel wrote:

..............  In fact, some people liken it to a 38mm ball.


LOLLOLLOLLOL...You must be joking!!!right?
Blade:
Darker Speed90
Rubber Fh and Bh DHS Hurricane 3, 39/38deg

Delusion is an asset
Back to Top
tom View Drop Down
Premier Member
Premier Member


Joined: 11/18/2013
Location: canada
Status: Offline
Points: 3016
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote tom Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11/21/2014 at 12:44pm
Originally posted by mts388 mts388 wrote:

It's amazing how players can have so many different opinions on the new plastic balls.  I play in 3 different clubs.  All clubs have switched to plastic.  I haven't heard one complaint about the new balls.  My main club used to go through 3 or 4 celluloid balls each night.  Now we lose one plastic ball every other night.  We use Double Fish, Joola and the Nittaku premium.  Our ball cost is now less than before. 
I play in two clubs and haven't heard anything good about the plastic balls on top of complains about their durability.  IMO that the plastics will get better but to sing their praises now is odd (to me).  
Iakovka, you have 1(at least) supporter for you view.

Back to Top
JimT View Drop Down
Premier Member
Premier Member
Avatar

Joined: 10/26/2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 14602
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote JimT Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11/21/2014 at 12:45pm
Originally posted by mts388 mts388 wrote:

It's amazing how players can have so many different opinions on the new plastic balls.  I play in 3 different clubs.  All clubs have switched to plastic.  I haven't heard one complaint about the new balls.  My main club used to go through 3 or 4 celluloid balls each night.  Now we lose one plastic ball every other night.  We use Double Fish, Joola and the Nittaku premium.  Our ball cost is now less than before. 


That is extremely strange. At Boston TTC we have used JOOLA, Nittaku SHA, DoubleFish and Kinson. None of them are as sturdy as celluloid - when people play with plastic, they break (on average) at least one plastic ball per practice (that's for every player who uses plastic balls during league night or practice night).
Single Ply Hinoki Club, Founding Member

Say "no!" to expensive table tennis equipment. Please...
Back to Top
tom View Drop Down
Premier Member
Premier Member


Joined: 11/18/2013
Location: canada
Status: Offline
Points: 3016
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote tom Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11/21/2014 at 12:50pm
Originally posted by Tinykin Tinykin wrote:

Originally posted by NextLevel NextLevel wrote:

..............  In fact, some people liken it to a 38mm ball.


LOLLOLLOLLOL...You must be joking!!!right?

Pure physics based on their size while neglecting the material would dictate 40+ should not be anywhere near the 38.
Back to Top
Tinykin View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar

Joined: 10/30/2003
Location: England
Status: Offline
Points: 2336
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Tinykin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11/21/2014 at 12:55pm
Originally posted by JimT JimT wrote:

..............After all, if an average club player (2-3 times a week practice) will have to spend $250-400 a year instead of $30-50 just for the balls, what is going to happen?..................................................
 
So my plea is – for all the TDs out there, please think hard and think smart......................................
 

Come on, Jim, they are thinking smart. Tournaments usually have sponsorship from a Brand/supplier. You just explained that the supplier makes much more from plastic balls. Why would any supplier-sponsor ever again encourage celluloid balls?
This whole thing is about making TT players increase their spend thus more profit for suppliers and ITTF board members.
Sadly, celluloid balls are obsolete as far as organised competition is concerned.



Edited by Tinykin - 11/21/2014 at 1:03pm
Blade:
Darker Speed90
Rubber Fh and Bh DHS Hurricane 3, 39/38deg

Delusion is an asset
Back to Top
tom View Drop Down
Premier Member
Premier Member


Joined: 11/18/2013
Location: canada
Status: Offline
Points: 3016
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote tom Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11/21/2014 at 12:57pm
btw, some of the responses remind me of the arguments between Democrats and Republicans: no matter the topic opposite views (sometimes absurd) can be made and have supporters for both.
Back to Top
wturber View Drop Down
Premier Member
Premier Member
Avatar

Joined: 10/28/2008
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 3899
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote wturber Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11/21/2014 at 1:01pm
I disagree that the Nittaku Premium 40+ ( NP 40+) is inconsistent in its play.  While I don't like it, it is plays very consistently.  I also disagree with the notion that frequent breakage means poor quality control or that it implies inconsistent play.   But I do agree with your request for TDs to exhibit restraint in using the plastic balls for upcoming tournaments.  

I did rush in to using plastic for our upcoming Valley of the Sun tournament because it is held in early December many of our players use it as prep for the Nationals.  And since the USATT rushed headlong into plastic, I followed suit ... and got burned.  We now can't get the balls even though we were assured it would not be a problem.  Further, many players assumed that "plastic = plastic"  and bought the horrible Nittaku SHA 40+ balls at high prices and high failure rates.  What a waste of money.  We announced a change back to celluloid a few weeks ago.

So as a TD, I'll be thinking long and hard about which balls to use in upcoming tournaments. The history of this change is a good example of failure at the ITTF and member association level.  It has been pretty poorly handled from the start.
Jay Turberville
www.jayandwanda.com
Hardbat: Nittaku Resist w/ Dr. Evil or Friendship 802-40 OX
Back to Top
wturber View Drop Down
Premier Member
Premier Member
Avatar

Joined: 10/28/2008
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 3899
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote wturber Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11/21/2014 at 1:06pm
Originally posted by mts388 mts388 wrote:

It's amazing how players can have so many different opinions on the new plastic balls.  I play in 3 different clubs.  All clubs have switched to plastic.  I haven't heard one complaint about the new balls.  My main club used to go through 3 or 4 celluloid balls each night.  Now we lose one plastic ball every other night.  We use Double Fish, Joola and the Nittaku premium.  Our ball cost is now less than before. 

Right now I'm going through one ball a night on average with NP 40+.  The balls are costing me about three times what I paid for DHS 3* celluloid balls. 
Jay Turberville
www.jayandwanda.com
Hardbat: Nittaku Resist w/ Dr. Evil or Friendship 802-40 OX
Back to Top
LOG1C1AN View Drop Down
Super Member
Super Member
Avatar

Joined: 04/22/2013
Location: Los Angeles
Status: Offline
Points: 303
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote LOG1C1AN Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11/21/2014 at 1:06pm
I've been playing with the XSF seamless ball exclusively for the last month. I play 5 days a week for 3 hours average. I hit the ball hard on the FH side. In that time I have broken a grand total of one ball.

I realize it's pure personal preference, but I like this ball better than the celluloid balls.

I paid $2 a ball for the batch I have, but when I restock, I have found a place where I can buy 144 Yinhe balls (XSF rebranded) for $144, so at $1 a ball I will save a lot of $$$ from what I formerly paid for Nittaku celluloid balls.

I also have 12 of the Nittaku Premium 40+ from Paddle Palace. I also like this ball, but I'm saving them for the last week of practice before Nationals.

Btw, my club just held a 1 star tournament using the Nittaku Sha 40+ balls and the tournament director told me they had a a lot more broken balls than before.
Back to Top
wturber View Drop Down
Premier Member
Premier Member
Avatar

Joined: 10/28/2008
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 3899
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote wturber Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11/21/2014 at 1:08pm
Originally posted by Tinykin Tinykin wrote:

Originally posted by JimT JimT wrote:

..............After all, if an average club player (2-3 times a week practice) will have to spend $250-400 a year instead of $30-50 just for the balls, what is going to happen?..................................................
 
So my plea is – for all the TDs out there, please think hard and think smart......................................
 

Come on, Jim, they are thinking smart. Tournaments usually have sponsorship from a Brand/supplier. You just explained that the supplier makes much more from plastic balls. Why would any supplier-sponsor ever again encourage celluloid balls?

To clear old stock.
Jay Turberville
www.jayandwanda.com
Hardbat: Nittaku Resist w/ Dr. Evil or Friendship 802-40 OX
Back to Top
tom View Drop Down
Premier Member
Premier Member


Joined: 11/18/2013
Location: canada
Status: Offline
Points: 3016
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote tom Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11/21/2014 at 1:16pm
Originally posted by NextLevel NextLevel wrote:

There are differences, but those differences do not make the ball worse.  They make the ball different. 
 
Tom,
 
You can get XSF balls for between $1 to $2 per ball and they last longer and are more durable than celluloid.  Some say in bulk, you can get them from China for under $1 as well.  They play slightly differently, but I would be amazed if anyone watched an XSF match and could tell that the ball was not a celluloid ball.  In fact, some people liken it to a 38mm ball.

NL,

I cannot comment on the pricing of the XSF balls since I have not used or seen the pricing  of any of their equipments before the plastic ball.  A more legitimate comparison would be between the same ball level (eg. premium vs.premium) of the same made.
Back to Top
NextLevel View Drop Down
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 12/15/2011
Location: Somewhere Good
Status: Offline
Points: 14842
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote NextLevel Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11/21/2014 at 1:28pm
Originally posted by tom tom wrote:

Originally posted by Tinykin Tinykin wrote:

Originally posted by NextLevel NextLevel wrote:

..............  In fact, some people liken it to a 38mm ball.


LOLLOLLOLLOL...You must be joking!!!right?

Pure physics based on their size while neglecting the material would dictate 40+ should not be anywhere near the 38.
My coach watched us play with the ball and was amazed at the quality of ball we could get on short strokes with the XSF ball - he was the one who talked about how light it was and felt that in some ways, it was like a 38mm ball in consistency and response to quick strokes. 
 
I would have ignored what he said had roundrobin not talked about the top provincial players/coaches at his club describing the ball as playing on their rackets as if they used "speed glue" when they used the XSF ball.  So whether it is hyperbole or not, the opinions are similar enough IMO that they warrant mentioning.
 
Now if you haven't used the ball at length or played matches, it is one thing.  Note that the XSF is probably the lightest and softest of the balls currently being made.  IF you've been using the other balls, XSF is fairly different.  It grips pretty well, has good feel, and can be ripped with confidence (but still has less spin if you are too lazy to spin it). 
I like putting heavy topspin on the ball...
Cybershape Carbon
FH/BH: H3P 41D.
Lumberjack TT, not for lovers of beautiful strokes. No time to train...
Back to Top
NextLevel View Drop Down
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 12/15/2011
Location: Somewhere Good
Status: Offline
Points: 14842
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote NextLevel Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11/21/2014 at 1:41pm
Originally posted by tom tom wrote:

Originally posted by NextLevel NextLevel wrote:

There are differences, but those differences do not make the ball worse.  They make the ball different. 
 
Tom,
 
You can get XSF balls for between $1 to $2 per ball and they last longer and are more durable than celluloid.  Some say in bulk, you can get them from China for under $1 as well.  They play slightly differently, but I would be amazed if anyone watched an XSF match and could tell that the ball was not a celluloid ball.  In fact, some people liken it to a 38mm ball.

NL,

I cannot comment on the pricing of the XSF balls since I have not used or seen the pricing  of any of their equipments before the plastic ball.  A more legitimate comparison would be between the same ball level (eg. premium vs.premium) of the same made.
 
The XSF balls are ITTF approved 3* ball - I don't know what XSF used/sold before the new ball came out, but I know that ITTF approved 3* celluloid balls were mostly the same so I am not sure what you are trying to say.  There was Giant Dragon, but I don't believe I could get Giant Dragon at less than $1 per ball, so it was still within that $1-$2 range.  I'm trying to make it clear that there is a plastic 3* ball that is durable and plays pretty well (see Logic1an above for a sample experience).  It doesn't play exactly like celluloid, but people who use it sometimes prefer it to celluloid.  It is as cheap as a $1 in some contexts.  I used to get 3* ITTF balls for $2 per ball personally (sure, some clubs had cheaper rates), so I know that this ball is not expensive.  Since it lasts longer than celluloid and is harder to crack (though it can crack more violently), charging a premium would not be out of place were that to be the case.
I like putting heavy topspin on the ball...
Cybershape Carbon
FH/BH: H3P 41D.
Lumberjack TT, not for lovers of beautiful strokes. No time to train...
Back to Top
tom View Drop Down
Premier Member
Premier Member


Joined: 11/18/2013
Location: canada
Status: Offline
Points: 3016
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote tom Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11/21/2014 at 1:43pm
Originally posted by NextLevel NextLevel wrote:

Originally posted by tom tom wrote:

Originally posted by Tinykin Tinykin wrote:

Originally posted by NextLevel NextLevel wrote:

..............  In fact, some people liken it to a 38mm ball.


LOLLOLLOLLOL...You must be joking!!!right?

Pure physics based on their size while neglecting the material would dictate 40+ should not be anywhere near the 38.
My coach watched us play with the ball and was amazed at the quality of ball we could get on short strokes with the XSF ball - he was the one who talked about how light it was and felt that in some ways, it was like a 38mm ball in consistency and response to quick strokes. 
 
I would have ignored what he said had roundrobin not talked about the top provincial players/coaches at his club describing the ball as playing on their rackets as if they used "speed glue" when they used the XSF ball.  So whether it is hyperbole or not, the opinions are similar enough IMO that they warrant mentioning.

 
Now if you haven't used the ball at length or played matches, it is one thing.  Note that the XSF is probably the lightest and softest of the balls currently being made.  IF you've been using the other balls, XSF is fairly different.  It grips pretty well, has good feel, and can be ripped with confidence (but still has less spin if you are too lazy to spin it). 

easier to handle the short balls, I have heard comments to support that.  what I am saying is I have not used or noticed XSF equipment before their plastic ball so I have nothing (from the same brand) to compare the plastics to either in pricing or quality.  Most people say XSF balls are the closest to cell (as many did not get their hands on a NP) but the thing is they are not commonly used in tournaments so the competitors have to get use to the brands being used - see why people are complaining?


Edited by tom - 11/21/2014 at 1:44pm
Back to Top
tom View Drop Down
Premier Member
Premier Member


Joined: 11/18/2013
Location: canada
Status: Offline
Points: 3016
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote tom Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11/21/2014 at 1:51pm
"The XSF balls are ITTF approved 3* ball - I don't know what XSF used/sold before the new ball came out, but I know that ITTF approved 3* celluloid balls were mostly the same so I am not sure what you are trying to say"
what I am saying is to compare the pricing of the plastic to cell, one have to compare the comparable level of product of the same brand.  eg. you cannot compare the pricing of a  new top level sedan from Cadillac to that of Mercedes but only to the one it replaced (from Cadillac)


Edited by tom - 11/21/2014 at 1:54pm
Back to Top
Baal View Drop Down
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator


Joined: 01/21/2010
Location: unknown
Status: Offline
Points: 14336
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Baal Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11/21/2014 at 2:07pm
Originally posted by tom tom wrote:

"I actually disagree that XSF is noticeably inferior to celluloid.  I can imagine another universe where those balls were made before celluloid and people wondered why one should ever use celluloid. "

NL, are you saying the XSF is better, last longer, and cheaper than the quality cell balls?


Arguably this is true.  Certainly XSF are more durable.  No doubt at all.  Very good balls.  TDs should adopt these. I am another person who likes them better than celluloid.  Price is good too. I doubt that there are many people on this forum who have played with as many different types of 40+ balls as I have, or for as long.  All of the Chinese seamed balls have the problems JimT mentions. NP40+ is too expensive and not very durable but play pretty well.
Back to Top
lineup32 View Drop Down
Gold Member
Gold Member
Avatar

Joined: 12/06/2012
Location: Calif
Status: Offline
Points: 1195
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote lineup32 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11/21/2014 at 2:10pm
Originally posted by JimT JimT wrote:

I was very disheartened when I saw that some of the best tournaments in the country decided to switch to plastic plastic balls for their tournaments. Among them - NA Teams, Westchester Open (and probably many others).
 
Those are great tournaments but I am sure everyone knows the reasons behind my feelings 

a) cost of the new balls – of course, in the case of tournaments, the balls are provided by the organizers;but there is hidden cost for the participants who naturally have to get at least some practice with the plastic balls if they want to perform well at the “plastic” tournaments. My calculations based on what I see from our club play in the last two months, show that the cost of the new balls is about6 times higher (!!) – taking into account their pricing and their horrible lifespan.
 
b) the fact that the plastic balls are so short-lived doesn’t mean just the budget problem. It means
that the balls are poorly made, that the material is not uniformly distributed along the spherical surface (and we all know how precise the TT balls have to be in order for them to be playable). This leads to bad, inconsistent bounce.
 
Notice that I am not talking about their slower speed or spin (or sound) – that is something we can get used to;  after all that would be similar to the changes that we all had to make in 2000 when the entire world switched to 40 mm balls. No, I am talking about quality and pricing – and both are horrible at the moment. Even the better plastic balls – such as Andro, XuShaoFa, Kinson – are noticeably inferior to the average, 1 dollar apiece celluloid balls. I am not even talking about NIttaku Premium or TSP 3-star ($1.5-1.8 each for celluloid; in plastic they will probably be priced at $3-3.50).
 
If it were up to me, I would wait as many years as necessary until manufacturers finally came up with plastic balls which are virtually indistinguishable from current celluloid balls in quality of the bounce, quality of production and lifespan. It should not be our problem that some bureaucrats decided that celluloid is in danger of being banned all over the world, then realized it was not true, but since they couldn’t admit they screwed up they went ahead anyway, especially after manufacturers realized all the possible financial ramifications.
 
But as it stands now, ITTF has no intention of doing that, which only encourages people to come up with conspiracy theories and wild guesses about corruption and greed. After all, if an average club player (2-3 times a week practice) will have to spend $250-400 a year instead of $30-50 just for the balls, what is going to happen?
 
Nothing good – mainly, a whole lot of players WILL NOT use plastic balls in their club matches. What that will mean, is that less  players (on average) will take part in “plastic” tournaments, including our best high-level competitions. And that is not good for our sport. Not good at all.
Even if in few years plastic balls will have become much better and cheaper, we will still lose many
players, and the tournaments on average will attract even less participants.
 
So my plea is – for all the TDs out there, please think hard and think smart. I beg you, do not switch to plastic balls until you are 100% satisfied with their quality and their pricing. Granted, this might take a few years, but that should not be our concern. Please reject the bad choice that ITTF (and alas, USATT as well) are posing before us.
 
We should tell them (with our words, and with our actions) that they are wrong, that they are hurting the sport, and their  reasons are not only invalid but they are (or at least, seem to be) highly suspect. 
 
Thanks everybody for your attention – I know this was a lot of words Smile. I just felt I really needed to pour it all out. Who knows, maybe someone will listen...
 

A good review of the current situation will add that ITTF made it clear that only international level players and tournaments would need to change.  Considering that many of these new balls were and are still in the developmental stage it made no sense for National or local clubs to become early adopters so while ITTF is not without fault the early rush by national and local clubs that are 99.9%  recreation level play to use any of these new plastic balls make little or no sense.  Most if not all international level players have access to training sites that will give them the necessary exposure to these new balls no need to force or introduce recreation level play until all the developmental issues regarding manufacturing new plastic balls have been completed. 
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123 6>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.01
Copyright ©2001-2018 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.375 seconds.

Become a Fan on Facebook Follow us on Twitter Web Wiz News
Forum Home | Go to the Forums | Forum Help | Disclaimer

MyTableTennis.NET is the trading name of Alex Table Tennis Ltd.

Copyright ©2003-2024 Alex Table Tennis Ltd. All rights reserved.