Alex Table Tennis - MyTableTennis.NET Homepage
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Transition from H3Neo to Euro/Jap
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Forum Home Forum Home > Equipment > Equipment

Transition from H3Neo to Euro/Jap

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <123
Author
Lightzy View Drop Down
Super Member
Super Member
Avatar

Joined: 09/18/2017
Location: T-A
Status: Offline
Points: 172
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Lightzy Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01/13/2018 at 3:26am
Tacky hard rubber is more forgiving because it lets you adjust the spin/speed ratio in favor of spin in many situations. That was what I was explaining. topspin = safety.
Of course to someone who doesn't move and has poor mechanics this does not apply. It applies to high level competitors, which is exactly what I wrote :)


Back to the topic:

So, like I said, I suggest trying a modern tacky rubber if you're used to tacky rubbers. One that's significantly faster and more tacky, that being the Battle II :)
Good luck!


Edited by Lightzy - 01/13/2018 at 6:13am
DHS H301 (84g)
FH Rubber: 729 Battle II
BH Rubber: Palio AK47 Blue
Back to Top
Hozuki View Drop Down
Super Member
Super Member


Joined: 01/22/2017
Location: Germany
Status: Offline
Points: 194
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Hozuki Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01/13/2018 at 5:56am
No. High level competitors do not use low throw rubbers anymore. Some did do so, but that was two ball changes ago, with H2 designed for WL around year 2000. With all the recent changes, players became too inconsistent and powerless with the tacky low throw rubbers that they developed H3, which specifically states on the back of its cover, that it is for players who feel they lack power with 40mm balls (with H2).

Chinese players nowadays exclusively play H3 and not your B2, because at least its topsheet is medium to high throw. High throw rubbers give you a much larger window of hitting the table when looping, because the ball comes in at a steeper angle, thus more consistency and more 'forgiveness' as you like to call it. Low throw rubbers require extreme precision and perfect positioning, which not even top level chinese players apparently find feasible.

Also, tacky rubbers suck at smashing, lobbing, recieving due to spin sensitivity, and all kinds of more passive shots like weak drives or blocks. The low throw may dumb down counterlooping, but makes it much harder to loop backspin close to the table, due to a lack of arc on the ball trajectory. What you say about spin/speed ratio is much easier to do with a slow rubber with high arc, yet you immediately go ahead and recommend a fast tacky low throw rubber.

None of your claims make sense or is backed up by some kind of evidence.
Come back when you are ready to build some credibility.
Until then, don't be surprised if we ignore you and warn others about your inaccurate brabbling.

Back to Top
Lightzy View Drop Down
Super Member
Super Member
Avatar

Joined: 09/18/2017
Location: T-A
Status: Offline
Points: 172
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Lightzy Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01/13/2018 at 6:24am
Originally posted by Hozuki Hozuki wrote:

No. High level competitors do not use low throw rubbers anymore. Some did do so, but that was two ball changes ago, with H2 designed for WL around year 2000. With all the recent changes, players became too inconsistent and powerless with the tacky low throw rubbers that they developed H3, which specifically states on the back of its cover, that it is for players who feel they lack power with 40mm balls (with H2).

Chinese players nowadays exclusively play H3 and not your B2, because at least its topsheet is medium to high throw. High throw rubbers give you a much larger window of hitting the table when looping, because the ball comes in at a steeper angle, thus more consistency and more 'forgiveness' as you like to call it. Low throw rubbers require extreme precision and perfect positioning, which not even top level chinese players apparently find feasible.

Also, tacky rubbers suck at smashing, lobbing, recieving due to spin sensitivity, and all kinds of more passive shots like weak drives or blocks. The low throw may dumb down counterlooping, but makes it much harder to loop backspin close to the table, due to a lack of arc on the ball trajectory. What you say about spin/speed ratio is much easier to do with a slow rubber with high arc, yet you immediately go ahead and recommend a fast tacky low throw rubber.

None of your claims make sense or is backed up by some kind of evidence.
Come back when you are ready to build some credibility.
Until then, don't be surprised if we ignore you and warn others about your inaccurate brabbling.



Hozuki, some of your conclusions are based on inaccurate information.
Read especially point 4 because it is a common laymen misunderstanding.

1) B2 is a medium-high throw rubber, not low throw. It is softer sponged than H3 which is often a tell.
BTW EmRatThich in his video about chinese rubbers shows a clip of ma-long loop-killing a ball. You can notice the throw of the rubber. Check it out.

2) Chinese players, well, many pro players, play highly personalized customized rubbers, so anyone who says anything about them who isn't from among them is probably incorrect. This is also in reference to your first opening statement. That the rubbers are highly customized is well known. What their specific throw is, well, how do you know, if they're custom made?
Even the last coach in my club who was 'only' ranked 12th nationally had a custom made promotion offer blade. It is really not that rare.

3) Yes, I recommend to him an easier to play chinese style rubber, because he is asking about moving from a H3Neo. So I suggest to first make one step instead of two and seeing if he likes it. Do you find this objectionable?

4) This is such a common misunderstanding I will correct: tacky rubbers certainly don't suck at smashing/lobbing and most especially receiving due to spin sensitivity, because tacky rubbers LOWER the spin as they absorb it as they grab at the ball. It lowers the balls speed and spin, which is why a short accurate return is easier, though if you want to add a lot of quality to the ball, you need more motion. They are less good because they lower the SPEED of the ball as, again, they are made to favor spin, allowing you to impart more force which will be converted to spin.

The tackiness itself is mostly for safety, so the ball is better grabbed by the rubber at very sharp angles for topspin. The defining property of the rubber is not that it's tacky, but that it is hard (which leads to low throw on low power hits), which is what most people don't understand who are laymen. It is because the rubber is hard so there is a risk the ball will slip off unless the rubber is engaged, and engaging it takes more power, which is not always desirable in serve return etc.


I am sorry, this could have been a civil exchange but you preferred to go another way with your last paragraph.
Is there by any chance a moderator on this forum who would care to moderate the tone of these discussions?



Edited by Lightzy - 01/14/2018 at 2:16pm
DHS H301 (84g)
FH Rubber: 729 Battle II
BH Rubber: Palio AK47 Blue
Back to Top
Hozuki View Drop Down
Super Member
Super Member


Joined: 01/22/2017
Location: Germany
Status: Offline
Points: 194
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Hozuki Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01/13/2018 at 11:23am
Ok, I have to say, I did assume that B2 was low throw. In fact, I have heard it is similar to H8 regarding throw, which could be wrong, so maybe you do have a point there.

For the rest of your post, however, I have to thank you. Because everyone that has every tried a chinese rubber can tell that it is total bogus. Especially the part about the tackiness being for safety, hilarious.
Also, what you say about ML, ERT and H3 is just not differentiated enough. I previously told you that H3 has high throw topsheet. If you brush, you get high throw, while when you drive through the sponge it is low throw. And I've done enough analysis of my own footage of ML taken from WTTC 2017 to make this claim.

I agree with your last sentence though. We can't have a storm that spreads misinformation running wild.

Back to Top
Lightzy View Drop Down
Super Member
Super Member
Avatar

Joined: 09/18/2017
Location: T-A
Status: Offline
Points: 172
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Lightzy Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01/13/2018 at 11:56pm
Originally posted by Hozuki Hozuki wrote:


For the rest of your post, however, I have to thank you. Because everyone that has every tried a chinese rubber can tell that it is total bogus. Especially the part about the tackiness being for safety, hilarious.
Also, what you say about ML, ERT and H3 is just not differentiated enough. I previously told you that H3 has high throw topsheet. If you brush, you get high throw, while when you drive through the sponge it is low throw. And I've done enough analysis of my own footage of ML taken from WTTC 2017 to make this claim.


Here's an article on the subject I found. It seems to confirm everything I said, but then, since I also am a ping pong player with a background in physics, it is no great surprise I guess.

https://thoughtsontabletennis.wordpress.com/2015/08/20/on-tacky-rubbers/

I understand why you might think that many players would say it's 'hilarious' that tackiness is for safety etc etc. It is because it is likely they do not play at a high enough level, where you actually have to close the face of the racket very sharply in order to get the right contact to return a topspin. Or perhaps they do, but with a softer rubber that grips around the ball. There is no such luxury with hard rubber, hence the tackiness.

And of course, you're right, we can't have a storm of misinformation, otherwise you and some other people will keep finding the truth bogus and hilarious. Perhaps a moderator should shut them down, like you suggest? I suppose there is no greater irony. However you will note that I was requesting a moderation of the tone of the discussion only. I have no KGB aspirations like some.




Edited by Lightzy - 01/14/2018 at 12:09am
DHS H301 (84g)
FH Rubber: 729 Battle II
BH Rubber: Palio AK47 Blue
Back to Top
bard romance View Drop Down
Silver Member
Silver Member


Joined: 02/18/2016
Location: us
Status: Offline
Points: 542
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote bard romance Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01/14/2018 at 1:50am
dele

Edited by bard romance - 01/14/2018 at 9:27pm
Back to Top
Chairman Meow View Drop Down
Super Member
Super Member
Avatar

Joined: 10/04/2016
Location: Hell, Michigan
Status: Offline
Points: 185
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Chairman Meow Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01/14/2018 at 10:39am
I doubt your average coach or high level player could accurately explain the science behind table tennis. You don't have to be good at the sport to understand how it works, or vice versa.
(Blade-FH-BH)
-BBC 1 ply Cypress 10mm "The Castigator"
-H3 Prov. Blue Sponge 2.1mm 41 deg.
-H3 Prov. Orange Sponge 2.10mm 37 deg
Back to Top
bard romance View Drop Down
Silver Member
Silver Member


Joined: 02/18/2016
Location: us
Status: Offline
Points: 542
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote bard romance Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01/14/2018 at 11:54am
Originally posted by Chairman Meow Chairman Meow wrote:

I doubt your average coach or high level player could accurately explain the science behind table tennis. You don't have to be good at the sport to understand how it works, or vice versa.

More often than not the "scientists" trying to explain the game aren't knowledgeable enough to explain the thousands of variables that go into what playing table tennis is. Sure, there's mechanical physics with the ball interacting with the racket, but then there's all the other variables such as the hand and the brain of the player behind the ball, how they interpret certain things, unlimited environmental variables, I could go on and on. That's why, sure you can explain simple concepts like trajectory, spin, stuff like that, but when it comes to actually explaining how a human being plays the game, it's damn near impossible to explain it all with science unless you are a savant.

That's why physicists and scientists aren't the teachers of the game. You do need to be at least some baseline of "good at the sport" to understand how it works, unless you are a scientific genius, which none of these people are.


Edited by bard romance - 01/14/2018 at 11:57am
Back to Top
mon22 View Drop Down
Silver Member
Silver Member
Avatar

Joined: 03/05/2010
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 997
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote mon22 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01/14/2018 at 11:56am
Any reviews or in depth reviews for

The STIGA GENESIS M?

Not too many on the search function just wanted to see if anyone here ever experienced it
I am a total Newb. Come at me!
Back to Top
Chairman Meow View Drop Down
Super Member
Super Member
Avatar

Joined: 10/04/2016
Location: Hell, Michigan
Status: Offline
Points: 185
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Chairman Meow Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01/14/2018 at 12:10pm
Originally posted by bard romance bard romance wrote:

Originally posted by Chairman Meow Chairman Meow wrote:

I doubt your average coach or high level player could accurately explain the science behind table tennis. You don't have to be good at the sport to understand how it works, or vice versa.

More often than not the "scientists" trying to explain the game aren't knowledgeable enough to explain the thousands of variables that go into what playing table tennis is. Sure, there's mechanical physics with the ball interacting with the racket, but then there's all the other variables such as the hand and the brain of the player behind the ball, how they interpret certain things, unlimited environmental variables, I could go on and on. That's why, sure you can explain simple concepts like trajectory, spin, stuff like that, but when it comes to actually explaining how a human being plays the game, it's damn near impossible to explain it all with science unless you are a savant.

That's why physicists and scientists aren't the teachers of the game. You do need to be at least some baseline of "good at the sport" to understand how it works, unless you are a scientific genius, which none of these people are.

Sorry, my statement was too general. I am not saying you should be taking table tennis lessons at the Princeton Plasma Physics lab. The game is very complicated, beyond the scope of any one person. That is why both are needed - people who understand the human aspect, and people who understand the science. In terms of the physical capabilities of a rubber, the scientists are the ones most appropriate to explain. The ability of the material has no correlation to the human factor. The article Lightzy posted merely served to explain the way different rubbers function, which stays constant regardless of who uses them. However, if you want to put this information into practice, you will need to have a coach (or use your own experience) to apply the science to a real world, infinitely varying scenario. But it is not necessary to know.
(Blade-FH-BH)
-BBC 1 ply Cypress 10mm "The Castigator"
-H3 Prov. Blue Sponge 2.1mm 41 deg.
-H3 Prov. Orange Sponge 2.10mm 37 deg
Back to Top
bard romance View Drop Down
Silver Member
Silver Member


Joined: 02/18/2016
Location: us
Status: Offline
Points: 542
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote bard romance Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01/14/2018 at 12:19pm
double post

Edited by bard romance - 01/14/2018 at 12:22pm
Back to Top
bard romance View Drop Down
Silver Member
Silver Member


Joined: 02/18/2016
Location: us
Status: Offline
Points: 542
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote bard romance Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01/14/2018 at 12:21pm
dele

Edited by bard romance - 01/14/2018 at 9:28pm
Back to Top
NextLevel View Drop Down
Premier Member
Premier Member
Avatar

Joined: 12/15/2011
Location: Somewhere Good
Status: Offline
Points: 11912
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote NextLevel Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01/14/2018 at 12:25pm
Originally posted by Chairman Meow Chairman Meow wrote:

Originally posted by bard romance bard romance wrote:

Originally posted by Chairman Meow Chairman Meow wrote:

I doubt your average coach or high level player could accurately explain the science behind table tennis. You don't have to be good at the sport to understand how it works, or vice versa.


More often than not the "scientists" trying to explain the game aren't knowledgeable enough to explain the thousands of variables that go into what playing table tennis is. Sure, there's mechanical physics with the ball interacting with the racket, but then there's all the other variables such as the hand and the brain of the player behind the ball, how they interpret certain things, unlimited environmental variables, I could go on and on. That's why, sure you can explain simple concepts like trajectory, spin, stuff like that, but when it comes to actually explaining how a human being plays the game, it's damn near impossible to explain it all with science unless you are a savant.

That's why physicists and scientists aren't the teachers of the game. You do need to be at least some baseline of "good at the sport" to understand how it works, unless you are a scientific genius, which none of these people are.




Sorry, my statement was too general. I am not saying you should be taking table tennis lessons at the Princeton Plasma Physics lab. The game is very complicated, beyond the scope of any one person. That is why both are needed - people who understand the human aspect, and people who understand the science. In terms of the physical capabilities of a rubber, the scientists are the ones most appropriate to explain. The ability of the material has no correlation to the human factor. The article Lightzy posted merely served to explain the way different rubbers function, which stays constant regardless of who uses them. However, if you want to put this information into practice, you will need to have a coach (or use your own experience) to apply the science to a real world, infinitely varying scenario. But it is not necessary to know.


This is true but sometimes you find that you have to be a good enough player to experience some of the physical properties described in a way that is relevant to your playing style. So the physical properties may impact you in a certain range of technique so to speak.
I like putting heavy topspin on the ball...
Tibhar Inca
FH: MX-S 1.9 B
BH: MX-S 1.9 R
Lumberjack TT
No train, no gain.
Back to Top
NextLevel View Drop Down
Premier Member
Premier Member
Avatar

Joined: 12/15/2011
Location: Somewhere Good
Status: Offline
Points: 11912
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote NextLevel Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01/14/2018 at 12:43pm
Originally posted by bard romance bard romance wrote:

Originally posted by bard romance bard romance wrote:

Originally posted by Chairman Meow Chairman Meow wrote:

Originally posted by bard romance bard romance wrote:

Originally posted by Chairman Meow Chairman Meow wrote:

I doubt your average coach or high level player could accurately explain the science behind table tennis. You don't have to be good at the sport to understand how it works, or vice versa.


More often than not the "scientists" trying to explain the game aren't knowledgeable enough to explain the thousands of variables that go into what playing table tennis is. Sure, there's mechanical physics with the ball interacting with the racket, but then there's all the other variables such as the hand and the brain of the player behind the ball, how they interpret certain things, unlimited environmental variables, I could go on and on. That's why, sure you can explain simple concepts like trajectory, spin, stuff like that, but when it comes to actually explaining how a human being plays the game, it's damn near impossible to explain it all with science unless you are a savant.

That's why physicists and scientists aren't the teachers of the game. You do need to be at least some baseline of "good at the sport" to understand how it works, unless you are a scientific genius, which none of these people are.




Sorry, my statement was too general. I am not saying you should be taking table tennis lessons at the Princeton Plasma Physics lab. The game is very complicated, beyond the scope of any one person. That is why both are needed - people who understand the human aspect, and people who understand the science. In terms of the physical capabilities of a rubber, the scientists are the ones most appropriate to explain. The ability of the material has no correlation to the human factor. The article Lightzy posted merely served to explain the way different rubbers function, which stays constant regardless of who uses them. However, if you want to put this information into practice, you will need to have a coach (or use your own experience) to apply the science to a real world, infinitely varying scenario. But it is not necessary to know.






Well said. Maybe from a theoretical standpoint scientists are best qualified to explain but when it comes to the real world, experienced players indirectly cut out the science by just "getting it", because, as we agree, playing the actual game goes way beyond theoretical explanations.

I was under the impression we weren't discussing theoretical ability of the material but how it actually manifests when people use it. 

Honestly couldn't be bothered to read the blog (guy doesn't have a background in coaching, high level play, or science) but it seems we're in agreement that even if someone presented some scientifically-backed facts, inexperienced players can't turn that into actual useful information for players, which is what I thought we're trying to do here.


I have found that blog quite credible and reasonable for my level of play and experience. No one on this thread has said anything about tacky rubbers that is implausible if you know the context or the experiences that support it. The issue is that some of us would like to pretend that there isn't a level of skill tied to the things one feels or experiences with these rubbers.

There was a time when the popular phrase on mytt was "bottoming out". All kinds of players complained about bottoming out various high level rubbers because they were supposedly too soft or too slow or too this or too that.or you would hear various players under the 2000 rating level claiming they could only use Hurricane for 2 months before changing because they had powerful loops at a 2400 level (They never disclosed their actual ratings for reasons easy to know if you knew the players). And even some of the more honest and open ones were only 1700-1800 players at best.

The good thing about table tennis is that lots of us who got better got good free advice from some better players. There is a good culture of players trying to help other players and this is good for the sport. But there should always be an attempt to place it in context. You may or may not want advice from a player who isn't at the level you aspire to playing at.
I like putting heavy topspin on the ball...
Tibhar Inca
FH: MX-S 1.9 B
BH: MX-S 1.9 R
Lumberjack TT
No train, no gain.
Back to Top
Hozuki View Drop Down
Super Member
Super Member


Joined: 01/22/2017
Location: Germany
Status: Offline
Points: 194
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Hozuki Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01/14/2018 at 1:00pm
"Here's an article on the subject I found. It seems to confirm everything I said, but then, since I also am a ping pong player with a background in physics, it is no great surprise I guess."

Interesting, let's give that cherry-picked article you found a fair chance. Since you are so confident that it will confirm everything you said so far, surely there will be nothing in there that will prove you wrong.
Let's focus on a single issue: Your claim that tacky rubbers increase safety, or in your words 'forgiveness'
The following citations are directly from your quoted article and have not been altered.

The receive is easier with nontacky rubbers regarding sidespin and backspin, the most common amateur bottlenecks.

And already, your credibility is void. Recieving is more difficult with tacky rubbers, hence no forgiveness.

Given that amateurs are often late to the ball and do minimal wristy upward strokes from a hollow back it might be easier for them to use nontacky rubbers to loop backspin.  A tacky rubber which is used that way won’t pass the net because the forward speed is missing. To sum it up, a nontacky rubber is easier for looping backspin if you’re caught off balance.

Again you stand corrected. If you are out of position, no forgiveness.

Tacky rubbers are especially good at receiving short, the first attack and counterattacking with the forehand side, while being demanding at the same time in terms of a proper technique and the basic understanding of the game.

I think I get it. In your world, forgiveness means, that if you play like a pro with perfect technique and positioning, you have more options and therefore can land a variety of shots more likely. However, nobody plays like a pro, so calling this forgiveness is just plainly ignorant.

Hence the recommendation to use nontacky rubbers for amateurs, nontacky rubbers for intermediate players with the option to upgrade to a tacky forehand as a long term investment and finally the tacky forehand plus nontacky backhand combination of (semi-) professional players.

And again, the article says that tacky rubbers are a long term investment, because you will lose short term consistency and forgiveness for long term improvement and better shot quality.

And all of this was just the debunking of one single aspect of all the bullshit you are spewing. How come I didn't read anything in that article about MX-S producing only half as much spin as B2? That's right, it is because you are a self-righteous, overconfident person, that has a different understanding of basic terms such as forgiveness than the rest of us, lacks proportion as to accurately estimating differences and can't even prove a point by cherry-picking his sources. I'm out.

Back to Top
bard romance View Drop Down
Silver Member
Silver Member


Joined: 02/18/2016
Location: us
Status: Offline
Points: 542
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote bard romance Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01/14/2018 at 1:09pm
dele

Edited by bard romance - 01/14/2018 at 9:27pm
Back to Top
Lightzy View Drop Down
Super Member
Super Member
Avatar

Joined: 09/18/2017
Location: T-A
Status: Offline
Points: 172
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Lightzy Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01/14/2018 at 1:54pm
Originally posted by NextLevel NextLevel wrote:

 
The blog may be good, but what I don't like is Lightzy acting like it validates his know-it-all attitude, for the reasons above. I am sure a wide range of players may find tacky rubber more forgiving across a specific range of shots, and an even wider range would find it easier to generate spin on serves at low speed. Could that give readers the impression that tacky rubbers are overall more forgiving? Yes. Do I agree?  Not at all


That's weasely. Whoever said that 'tacky rubbers are more forgiving' just like that, with no qualifiers?? nobody. You also dare to say that I act like it justifies my attitude? It justifies my CLAIMS, insofar as you trust the article.
I've had enough of your entitlement and base need to prove something on my expense, so read the following only if you really want to.
The following is an analysis of your behavior, and why indeed you use the word 'attitude' here, making a difference between the facts of the article as facts and my sharing the same facts as 'attitude'.
There is also an offer at the end:


There is a big risk in making things personal and engaging emotionally. I did warn.
This is actually a well documented phenomenon: When someone gets gets emotionally engaged,  instead of pitting information against information in a process of scrutiny, he's pitting himself against another person, he invests HIS 'SELF' into the debate. Meaning that now any refutation of something he thought was true is no longer a refutation of information, which is something that normally is easily discarded and replaced by new information, but rather now a personal attack (it is very like the left in the USA, they call it 'identity politics' etc, 'identity' as in this 'self' and take dissenting opinions as personal attacks, which are termed 'micro-aggressions' etc.).

The problem then happens when truths become unassailable. For example, like when it turns out that I say the exact same thing as a source you respect and trust. This is called 'existential crisis'; because the person considers the information unassailable, he must somehow differentiate between the two sources lest he lose his argument which he has invested his SELF into, which is tantamount to the loss of self.
Thus, perhaps saying that *even though both say the same thing*, one is right and the other is *inherently* wrong "and I must justify why". This is normally when things break down badly. It is down to personal antagonism against one of the sources.
In this situation, it is extremely rare that the person will manage the crisis by self-scrutiny and a breakout from emotional engagement. His 'self' is already invested. A much greater likelihood is that he will say 'screw objectivity' or reinterpret things in different ways according to the source they comes from, because his 'self' is ultimately much more important than any mere piece of knowledge which is much more tangential to his person.
But strong minded people have the ability to self scrutinize and admit fault, coming back to the consideration and objective assessment of knowledge against knowledge, keeping that and their identity and self value disconnected and actually learning something.

It is obvious to see that I only presented knowledge. I did not enter into any discussion of another posters validity or character. This is what you did, and I asked you to stop. It seems so bizzarely out of place to me to even consider doing that. Someone posts something, and I'd jump and say "who are you!! how dare you! Where is your diploma?", that's so alien to me. It is essentially the feeling that one is entitled to 'authorize' the thoughts of others. In honesty I think it vile.
I'd just post what I think, another person posts what he thinks, and everyone else will do the same, as forums generally work *which are civil*.

I do hope you let go, admit that you actually learned some new things you didn't know before, that I might actually do know what I'm talking about, and be more respectful in the future. It's nobody's fault that you had some bad experience and was misled in the past. It doesn't mean anyone owes you any validation of anything. You're entitled to nothing of the sort, and part, admittedly a small one, but still a part of why I don't post such videos on your demand specifically is that it will reinforce this negative psychology.

These hysterics also proved detrimental to the dissemination of very basic knowledge which should be common knowledge, namely the physical and functional properties of tacky rubbers, as some mob minded people copied your attitude. It is almost lucky that I found the article only after people who don't really know the subject were saying I'm being 'hilarious'. Since this attitude is exactly the attitude the one which is detrimental to the propagation of knowledge (a quite far removed example; when someone claimed the earth is not flat) -  you may want to take this into account as well and from now on only share what you think without any entitled demands or criticisms of others based on the fact that you 'don't know them enough'.





Edited by Lightzy - 01/14/2018 at 3:00pm
DHS H301 (84g)
FH Rubber: 729 Battle II
BH Rubber: Palio AK47 Blue
Back to Top
icontek View Drop Down
Premier Member
Premier Member
Avatar
This is FPS Doug

Joined: 10/31/2006
Location: Maine, US
Status: Offline
Points: 4902
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote icontek Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01/14/2018 at 2:07pm
Originally posted by Lightzy Lightzy wrote:

Tacky hard rubber is more forgiving because it lets you adjust the spin/speed ratio in favor of spin in many situations. That was what I was explaining. topspin = safety.
Of course to someone who doesn't move and has poor mechanics this does not apply. It applies to high level competitors, which is exactly what I wrote :)

Your definition of "forgiving" is incorrect. 

Forgiving means that it is tolerant of user error.

The word I think you mean is "versatile". Tacky Hard Rubber allows a player of high skill to make choices with high granularity.






Edited by icontek - 01/14/2018 at 2:34pm
US1260.RC952 . Yasaka Gatien Extra : Target National + Rasant
Back to Top
Lightzy View Drop Down
Super Member
Super Member
Avatar

Joined: 09/18/2017
Location: T-A
Status: Offline
Points: 172
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Lightzy Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01/14/2018 at 2:12pm
Originally posted by icontek icontek wrote:

Originally posted by Lightzy Lightzy wrote:

Tacky hard rubber is more forgiving because it lets you adjust the spin/speed ratio in favor of spin in many situations. That was what I was explaining. topspin = safety.
Of course to someone who doesn't move and has poor mechanics this does not apply. It applies to high level competitors, which is exactly what I wrote :)

Your definition of "forgiving" is incorrect. The word you mean is "versatile". Tacky Hard Rubber allows a player of high skill to make choices with high granularity.


You're right. I replace that 'forgiving' with 'versatile' which is indeed appropriate, and I also retract my previous definition of forgiving and replace it with "more chances the ball will go on the table if you do X" which I guess is ultimately what I meant. More forgiving in short serve return because there's a higher likelihood the return will stay short, for example.
DHS H301 (84g)
FH Rubber: 729 Battle II
BH Rubber: Palio AK47 Blue
Back to Top
Chairman Meow View Drop Down
Super Member
Super Member
Avatar

Joined: 10/04/2016
Location: Hell, Michigan
Status: Offline
Points: 185
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Chairman Meow Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01/14/2018 at 2:51pm
Originally posted by Lightzy Lightzy wrote:

Originally posted by NextLevel NextLevel wrote:

 
The blog may be good, but what I don't like is Lightzy acting like it validates his know-it-all attitude, for the reasons above. I am sure a wide range of players may find tacky rubber more forgiving across a specific range of shots, and an even wider range would find it easier to generate spin on serves at low speed. Could that give readers the impression that tacky rubbers are overall more forgiving? Yes. Do I agree?  Not at all


...

You quoted the wrong person...
(Blade-FH-BH)
-BBC 1 ply Cypress 10mm "The Castigator"
-H3 Prov. Blue Sponge 2.1mm 41 deg.
-H3 Prov. Orange Sponge 2.10mm 37 deg
Back to Top
NextLevel View Drop Down
Premier Member
Premier Member
Avatar

Joined: 12/15/2011
Location: Somewhere Good
Status: Offline
Points: 11912
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote NextLevel Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01/14/2018 at 3:37pm
Originally posted by Chairman Meow Chairman Meow wrote:

Originally posted by Lightzy Lightzy wrote:

Originally posted by NextLevel NextLevel wrote:

 
The blog may be good, but what I don't like is Lightzy acting like it validates his know-it-all attitude, for the reasons above. I am sure a wide range of players may find tacky rubber more forgiving across a specific range of shots, and an even wider range would find it easier to generate spin on serves at low speed. Could that give readers the impression that tacky rubbers are overall more forgiving? Yes. Do I agree?  Not at all



...





You quoted the wrong person...


Thanks for pointing it out. Gives the rest of his post an interesting context.

Edited by NextLevel - 01/14/2018 at 3:38pm
I like putting heavy topspin on the ball...
Tibhar Inca
FH: MX-S 1.9 B
BH: MX-S 1.9 R
Lumberjack TT
No train, no gain.
Back to Top
NextLevel View Drop Down
Premier Member
Premier Member
Avatar

Joined: 12/15/2011
Location: Somewhere Good
Status: Offline
Points: 11912
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote NextLevel Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01/14/2018 at 3:41pm
Originally posted by Lightzy Lightzy wrote:

Originally posted by NextLevel NextLevel wrote:

 
The blog may be good, but what I don't like is Lightzy acting like it validates his know-it-all attitude, for the reasons above. I am sure a wide range of players may find tacky rubber more forgiving across a specific range of shots, and an even wider range would find it easier to generate spin on serves at low speed. Could that give readers the impression that tacky rubbers are overall more forgiving? Yes. Do I agree?  Not at all



That's weasely. Whoever said that 'tacky rubbers are more forgiving' just like that, with no qualifiers?? nobody. You also dare to say that I act like it justifies my attitude? It justifies my CLAIMS, insofar as you trust the article.
I've had enough of your entitlement and base need to prove something on my expense, so read the following only if you really want to.
The following is an analysis of your behavior, and why indeed you use the word 'attitude' here, making a difference between the facts of the article as facts and my sharing the same facts as 'attitude'.
There is also an offer at the end:


There is a big risk in making things personal and engaging emotionally. I did warn.
This is actually a well documented phenomenon: When someone gets gets emotionally engaged,  instead of pitting information against information in a process of scrutiny, he's pitting himself against another person, he invests HIS 'SELF' into the debate. Meaning that now any refutation of something he thought was true is no longer a refutation of information, which is something that normally is easily discarded and replaced by new information, but rather now a personal attack (it is very like the left in the USA, they call it 'identity politics' etc, 'identity' as in this 'self' and take dissenting opinions as personal attacks, which are termed 'micro-aggressions' etc.).

The problem then happens when truths become unassailable. For example, like when it turns out that I say the exact same thing as a source you respect and trust. This is called 'existential crisis'; because the person considers the information unassailable, he must somehow differentiate between the two sources lest he lose his argument which he has invested his SELF into, which is tantamount to the loss of self.
Thus, perhaps saying that *even though both say the same thing*, one is right and the other is *inherently* wrong "and I must justify why". This is normally when things break down badly. It is down to personal antagonism against one of the sources.
In this situation, it is extremely rare that the person will manage the crisis by self-scrutiny and a breakout from emotional engagement. His 'self' is already invested. A much greater likelihood is that he will say 'screw objectivity' or reinterpret things in different ways according to the source they comes from, because his 'self' is ultimately much more important than any mere piece of knowledge which is much more tangential to his person.
But strong minded people have the ability to self scrutinize and admit fault, coming back to the consideration and objective assessment of knowledge against knowledge, keeping that and their identity and self value disconnected and actually learning something.

It is obvious to see that I only presented knowledge. I did not enter into any discussion of another posters validity or character. This is what you did, and I asked you to stop. It seems so bizzarely out of place to me to even consider doing that. Someone posts something, and I'd jump and say "who are you!! how dare you! Where is your diploma?", that's so alien to me. It is essentially the feeling that one is entitled to 'authorize' the thoughts of others. In honesty I think it vile.
I'd just post what I think, another person posts what he thinks, and everyone else will do the same, as forums generally work *which are civil*.

I do hope you let go, admit that you actually learned some new things you didn't know before, that I might actually do know what I'm talking about, and be more respectful in the future. It's nobody's fault that you had some bad experience and was misled in the past. It doesn't mean anyone owes you any validation of anything. You're entitled to nothing of the sort, and part, admittedly a small one, but still a part of why I don't post such videos on your demand specifically is that it will reinforce this negative psychology.

These hysterics also proved detrimental to the dissemination of very basic knowledge which should be common knowledge, namely the physical and functional properties of tacky rubbers, as some mob minded people copied your attitude. It is almost lucky that I found the article only after people who don't really know the subject were saying I'm being 'hilarious'. Since this attitude is exactly the attitude the one which is detrimental to the propagation of knowledge (a quite far removed example; when someone claimed the earth is not flat) -  you may want to take this into account as well and from now on only share what you think without any entitled demands or criticisms of others based on the fact that you 'don't know them enough'.






I think at this point we have established that the claim that Battle 2 Gives 100% spin on serves than MX-S is not what most people consider knowledge.

In any case I am trying to help people improve their TT not engage in philosophical debates.   Please quote something I actually wrote.
I like putting heavy topspin on the ball...
Tibhar Inca
FH: MX-S 1.9 B
BH: MX-S 1.9 R
Lumberjack TT
No train, no gain.
Back to Top
NextLevel View Drop Down
Premier Member
Premier Member
Avatar

Joined: 12/15/2011
Location: Somewhere Good
Status: Offline
Points: 11912
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote NextLevel Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01/14/2018 at 3:52pm
I feel bad that this thread has gone off course but I honestly believe that between Golden Tango and a lot of other Hybrid tacky rubbers, OP will find something.
I like putting heavy topspin on the ball...
Tibhar Inca
FH: MX-S 1.9 B
BH: MX-S 1.9 R
Lumberjack TT
No train, no gain.
Back to Top
Chairman Meow View Drop Down
Super Member
Super Member
Avatar

Joined: 10/04/2016
Location: Hell, Michigan
Status: Offline
Points: 185
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Chairman Meow Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01/14/2018 at 7:20pm
I don't think he meant to put words in your mouth. He probably wanted to quote bard romance's post (16th from the top) and deleted the stuff you wrote, but accidentally left the first 'quote' code (yours).
(Blade-FH-BH)
-BBC 1 ply Cypress 10mm "The Castigator"
-H3 Prov. Blue Sponge 2.1mm 41 deg.
-H3 Prov. Orange Sponge 2.10mm 37 deg
Back to Top
bard romance View Drop Down
Silver Member
Silver Member


Joined: 02/18/2016
Location: us
Status: Offline
Points: 542
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote bard romance Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01/14/2018 at 9:27pm
Just wow. This thread has gone so far off track, deleting my posts that aren't relevant to the original post. 
Back to Top
mon22 View Drop Down
Silver Member
Silver Member
Avatar

Joined: 03/05/2010
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 997
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote mon22 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01/14/2018 at 10:12pm
Stiga genesis m anyone?
I am a total Newb. Come at me!
Back to Top
henningf View Drop Down
Super Member
Super Member
Avatar

Joined: 03/01/2017
Location: Norway
Status: Offline
Points: 170
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote henningf Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01/15/2018 at 4:10am
Why not mantra H? It feels like a good, spinny, hard rubber.
OSP Virtuoso +, DHS H3, Butterfly Rozena
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <123
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.171 seconds.
Mark all posts as read :: Delete cookies set by this forum

Cookies and JavaScript must be enabled on your web browser in order to use this forum


Copyright © 2003-2013 MyTableTennis.NET - All Rights Reserved. Disclaimer