DHS Plastic Ball

No, baal was trying to cover for you with the loller 1-10hr estimate because even he knows 1hr seems unrealistic.

Also, it's pretty clear lowballing to make your case is the opposite of integrity by definition of the word. From the minutes to hour to >2 the word on the street for longevity seems quite bullish.

AgentHEX wrote: No, baal was trying to cover for you with the loller 1-10hr estimate because even he knows 1hr seems unrealistic. Also, it's pretty clear lowballing to make your case is the opposite of integrity by definition of the word. From the minutes to hour to >2 the word on the street for longevity seems quite bullish.

Well, I will buy the balls today and start tracking.  Again, the 12 year old I asked the question and the 1800 player who gave me his answer are real players known to lots of mytt members in the NJ/PA area.  And I have my experience with my balls as well.  We can then decide if I am lowballing or not. 

Edited by NextLevel - 03/26/2015 at 4:11pm

NextLevel wrote: The weird thing is that AgentHex repeatedly forgets that the couple of guys spitballing have bought and used more balls and play at a higher level than the average tournament does. My point is that if the tournament keeps a careful record, then it does. But the people spitballing actually invested in these balls. The tournaments often got them for free from ball manufacturers.

42andbackpains wrote: Seamless balls are not perfect either....Probably about 1 hour in with my new Xushaofa seamless balls, cracked a ball by hitting the side of my paddle. $2.50 gone in a hour. None of the new balls seamed or seamless can compare to the old celluloid balls. Reliability is definitely a issue and we have to live with this for now until something better comes out.

Edited by wturber - 03/26/2015 at 4:41pm

NextLevel wrote: I polled a few more people, none of whom AFAIK visits here (mytt).  I know that none of this is a substitute for precise measurements but just to show people how out of the loop AgentHex is with his trolling.

wturber wrote: NextLevel wrote: I polled a few more people, none of whom AFAIK visits here (mytt).  I know that none of this is a substitute for precise measurements but just to show people how out of the loop AgentHex is with his trolling.   Paddle Palace customer reviews ... http://www.paddlepalace.com/New-Nittaku-3-Star-SHA-40-Balls/productinfo/BNACH/#

Best one:

I have just returned from a five week stay in China. The new ball has been available there for about a month so I had a chance to ask most of the Chinese players how they liked the ball. All of them said the ball was slower and did not bounce as high as the three star celluloid balls. They also said that they know why this change was made, for the same reason there was a change from the 38 to the 40mm ball. They all said it would make no difference, the new ball will not change China's dominance in the sport. After visiting their national training center, I couldn't agree more. American players also noticed a slowing of the ball's speed and rotation. No one has said they like it. It is a disgrace that the ITTF uses these kinds of tactics to slow down the game and to stop China's domination. If you want to change China's domination, you need to practice as hard as the Chinese. Period. Less game playing and more drills.
--

Seems pretty straightforward slower/lower.

Maybe this type of whining is a 'Merican thing.

AgentHEX wrote: wturber wrote: AgentHEX wrote: > You have provided nothing other than trolling masquerading as objectivity. You are willing to let those you accuse of lacking integrity perform tests that were you really invested, you could perform yourself. I've only asked those making claims to justify them. Bizarre, I know. It's not my problem they all of sudden seem a lot more wishy washy than they were presented to be. No.  You've made claims yourself and then failed to support them. Can you be more specific? Recall I've said they seem to last a few matches, or definitely >1hr.

AgentHEX wrote: The claims seem quite a bit more than "my personal experience on the matter" given how they're phrased and repeated ad infinitum, esp when your estimate is somewhere between 1-10hr until further notice.

I'm not making an estimate - I'm stating what my experience is. I've had a ball last 15 minutes, and I've seen balls last 10 hours (approx), and I've heard many opinions from national players and a coach. These balls are inconsistent and the QC is poor, hence some last a few minutes and some last considerably longer. I don't expect ANY 3* approved ball to last less than a few hours at the very least.

You're building a ridiculous strawman here. Just about any post on a public forum about the balls are going to be from personal experience. I'm not seeing anything more than that here. Sure, things are being repeated a lot on various threads, but this is an important moment in TT. If the groundswell of public opinion is negative, perhaps the point will be made about the unsatisfactory nature of the (seamed) balls at the moment. IMO the more noise about this the better, and I can understand the frustration people must feel about things as they stand. It's no wonder they want to take every opportunity to voice their opinion.

I genuinely can't even understand what point you're trying to make. You can't invalidate people's personal experiences - they happened, like it or not. The overall trend of experiences I read about online and hear IRL is that these balls are poor and early breakages are common. There is nothing to misunderstand - the general opinion based on real-life experiences is easy to see. If you don't care about people's opinions on the ball then you're posting in the wrong place - stay out of ball threads. If you do care - what do you think is the reason for all these negative reports about durability? Why are so many reviews and tests filled with the sense of disbelief about the short lifespan of many of these 3* balls?

AgentHEX wrote: You'll also find that I never get on anyone's case for personal experience, unlike many here do, only for objectively stated facts with apparent poor grounding. BTW, Andy, many examples reside above of the BS resulting from not doing anything to mitigate it.

OK then, here is your opportunity. Grab it with both hands and enthusiasm. Quote the objectively stated facts you feel have poor grounding. Quote the examples above of BS. Make your case.

AgentHEX wrote: You realize the trouble isn't for my benefit but your credibility. Enough performers here for a musical, let's call it Unsubstantiated Accusations.

Baal wrote: "So the DHS balls last ~1hr vs ~10? Anyone have tournament ball counts to verify this 10x discrepancy?" Here is the very basic illustration of how one might see that one  DHS ball could last for, say 1 hr before breaking and the next one could last for 10 hr, and one still might conclude that in general they are worse than, say, celluloid or seamless.  In this cartoon the ball lifetime is plotted on the X-axis and the Y-axis is the percentage of balls in a large sample that lasted that have a particular lifetime. Consider that the sample 1 is a DHS 40+ and  sample 2 is some other ball, like XSF.  Not all DHS balls break in 30 min (although I have had one or two that broke that quickly).  Some will last longer.  Same with all balls, it's always been true, for any brand there is a distribution of lifetimes.  Now, when the collective experience gets sufficiently massive, as we now have for Chinese seamed balls, we are pretty sure that reality is something like the diagram below.  But no, I haven't kept careful records.

NextLevel wrote: Baal, are you really trying to say that there are Chinese seamed balls that last 10 hours?  Or is this another AgentHex invention in a moment of gleeful trolling?  I remember you saying that balls are unplayable even if not broken after 3 hours.

I've never seen a DHS-made plastic ball that lasted 10 hours of regular club or tournament play!  But I suppose it's possible if two grandpas (or AH) are using antis and bump it short over the net back and forth for 10 straight hours.

This whole discussion with AH is ridiculous.  Everyone who contradict his opinion has credibility problems... ROFLMAO!

AndySmith wrote: AgentHEX wrote: You'll also find that I never get on anyone's case for personal experience, unlike many here do, only for objectively stated facts with apparent poor grounding. BTW, Andy, many examples reside above of the BS resulting from not doing anything to mitigate it. OK then, here is your opportunity. Grab it with both hands and enthusiasm. Quote the objectively stated facts you feel have poor grounding. Quote the examples above of BS. Make your case.

To make this less a waste of my time given how obvious it is let's make it one person apiece for each:

Baal's claims:

I searched for his posts containing seamed which no doubt refers to the ball, and get 100 in last few month. This is an underestimate since the term isn't always used (chinese ball, dhs/joola, etc). I can't search at OOAK where he post about them perhaps more. Would ~20% of these contain complaint to their durability+bounce+Kutchensink as anyone who's read some can attest to they generally complain about a lowball approx? You can do the math.

A random sample include:

" DHS made garbage balls are history to me",

"But he and the ITTF are so firmly attached to DHS that now when that company is out of the seamless business, and making a grotesquely inferior seamed product, ITTF is still using the seamed ball in all of the big events. "

"The Chinese seamed balls are another matter altogether. Total garbage. "

Apparently his own experience on the matter is some balls he got last June as detailed above.

Do these two ends seem like they square to you?

Nextlevel's BS:

Where to even begin. First NL knows what I've stated about the balls, and I'm only doing this from the last page, no search necessary.

> You mean the same way you have a vague notion of your personal objectivity but still claim it is valid?

> Sure, you don't.  Explains why you feel a need to respond to them with arguments that use the reptilian part of your brain. 

> And how is the aggregate expected difference from any one director different from the word on the street given the standards by which it was collected?  Did you query Wturber on his methodology? You might think you are deceiving people, but the nature of your process is pretty transparent.

> Who do you think your barely informed posts are fooling? 

> People have provided informed answers which even of wrong, are heuristically in the right direction. You have provided nothing other than trolling masquerading as objectivity. You are willing to let those you accuse of lacking integrity perform tests that were you really invested, you could perform yourself.

--------------

Andy, even I only have limited willingness to put up with this level of behavior. Next time I'd advise seeking a case on something more difficult to show because what you've asked for here is incredibly tedious and a foregone conclusion.

Baal wrote: NextLevel wrote: Baal, are you really trying to say that there are Chinese seamed balls that last 10 hours?  Or is this another AgentHex invention in a moment of gleeful trolling?  I remember you saying that balls are unplayable even if not broken after 3 hours. No.  I was not trying to say that. But it's not really AHex trolling, because one of the comments I made could have been interpreted that way, but I was just trying to illustrate the idea of a distribution, which I did because I misinterpreted something AHex wrote earlier.

This is your post:
http://mytabletennis.net/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=70818&PID=864297&title=dhs-plastic-ball#864297

and the relevant quote: (And surely even AgentHEX understands the concept of a distribution when it comes to observations, so yes, some current DHS balls could last 1 hr or less, and some 10).

I believe my statement referring to vague guessing despite rather forceful claims instead of stating your actual experience (>2hr after which you stop using them IIRC) is entirely accurate.