How does stiffness/hardness effect spin

How does the stiffness and hardness of a blade effect its spin?

Rubber plays a more important role.

hidasjoki wrote: Rubber plays a more important role.

I highly disagree with this statement, I feel the blade is the more important role as  I feel your, "base stats"(I.E. speed, control, stiffness, hardness) are all derived from your paddle.. How stiff or flexible a paddle will help dictate what the rubber is going to add to your experience.




Edited by ri0t1 - 03/18/2016 at 9:47am

LUCKYLOOP wrote: ri0t1 wrote: hidasjoki wrote: Rubber plays a more important role. I highly disagree with this statement, I feel the blade is the more important role as  I feel your, "base stats"(I.E. speed, control, stiffness, hardness) are all derived from your paddle.. How stiff or flexible a paddle will help dictate what the rubber is going to add to your experience. 1st - can you explain how the manufacturers arrive at speed and control ratings for their blade and the related effects of soft or hard wood and weight. 2nd - can you give an example, Quantifying the numbers of a certain blade using different rubbers and the effects. ....

These are two requests that will take me some time to write up.  Time is not a luxury I have at the moment.  I am more than happy to share my thought processes on this, and my experience of using different blades/rubber combos over the short 10 years I've played this great game! It just will be a little delayed that is all! Cheers!


Edited by ri0t1 - 03/18/2016 at 4:22pm

fatt wrote: Flexier means the ball will stay longer with the blade, the time it flexes and springs back, allowing the ball to be slightly more brushed by the rubber.

We all know this is bunkum.  Time after time, the figures have been put forward to show that it is impossible for the ball to "stay longer with the blade".

fatt wrote: A few people smarter than I am and playing as good or better tell me that's a myth but I still believe the above is true.

My question is, 'Why do you choose to believe something that's rubbish rather than believe "people smarter than I am"'?

If you don't think rubber is the main contributor in generating spin, throw some hard bat rubber on your favorite flexible blade and enjoy the massive spin it will generate . Tassie is correct in that the ball time on a blade differs so slightly between different blades with the same rubber that it can't be considered the most important factor. You are arguing against physics not me.

Why do these topics have to come up every time when there is an Open ongoing?  I do have data to back up the claims but I don't want to be detracted from enjoying the amazing matches.

Sorry but the physics of table tennis are not "knee jerk" reactions. It is very misleading to just some it all up to: high flex = more spin &  more stiff = less spin. The interaction between different rubbers, sponge, and blade compositions are more complex than that. That is reality.  

In my opinion, no scientific facts back up, the blade has very little effect (maybe up to 10%), compared to sponge and rubber, exceptions OX .5 1.0 thicknesses, then some more effect but not sure how much.

In my opinion for me, the key to a blade is feel of grip/handle, weight and balance.

Manufacturers ratings

Blade - speed and control

Rubber - speed, spin and control

I don't think anyone is bullying you, at all. You just happen to be wrong and don't seem to like it very much.

fatt wrote: Insult? Where? That's Ridiculous...mentioning a knee jerk reaction is certainly not insulting. Treating people "effing nitwit" like you have done in the past is. Insulting on this forum is historically your strength not mine. I never said rubber is less important than the blade...of course it's the main factor...everybody agrees on that. I just want to underline the smallest flex effect of the blade has exponential consequences on the final spin; the same way than small legs work can increase final racket speed exponentially. Not so apples and oranges.

It would help if we could stick to the current topic, since to understand why I insulted someone would require revisiting the original.context. in this context, we are disagreeing over something which you and I have brought no serious evidence to. Since you agree with what I said about the relative impact of rubber, then what is so controversial?

You think the smallest flex effect has great consequences on the final spin while I find those consequences largely negligible and most inseparable from the speed effect of the blade. It is okay to say that you disagree and others are wrong. After all, you have played with far many more blades than I have. But why should my position be knee jerk? You mean you have a good reason to believe that I came to my conclusion without giving the issue serious thought?

Tassie52 wrote: If, as all the evidence suggests, the time the ball is on the racket can only be measured in milliseconds, then any flex in the blade takes place after the ball has already left the face. I'm not talking about vibrations in the blade - that's different from flex.  I'm not talking about whether energy is imparted or reduced - that is also different from flex.  If flexier blades are somehow better for looping, it's because of something other than "the ball will stay longer with the blade".

Regarding Spin

Why do the manufacturers only give a speed and control rating for their blades ?

There is no estimated spin rating given.

How do manufacturers come up with speed ratings ?

Drop a ball on a blade without rubber or have a robot ball impact a blade without rubber ?