Alex Table Tennis - MyTableTennis.NET Homepage
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Plastic Balls -- Happy Innovation.
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Plastic Balls -- Happy Innovation.

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <123>
Author
zeio View Drop Down
Premier Member
Premier Member


Joined: 03/25/2010
Status: Offline
Points: 6955
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote zeio Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08/09/2014 at 1:34pm
Originally posted by pingpongpaddy pingpongpaddy wrote:

When they break you saw them in half and check out the inside. If that is not smooth it would explain weird flight

JTTA has commissioned a study on the effects of internal flow on the trajectory of 40mm table tennis ball.  The findings show the inside flow accounts for at most 2% on the angular momentum of the ball, which is significantly lower than the effects of external force induced by the external flow.  I doubt it would be much different for the 40+.


Edited by zeio - 08/09/2014 at 1:36pm
Viscaria FL - 91g
+ Neo H3 2.15 Blk - 44.5g(55.3g uncut bare)
+ Hexer HD 2.1 Red - 49.3g(68.5g 〃 〃)
= 184.8g
Back to Top
Baal View Drop Down
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator


Joined: 01/21/2010
Location: unknown
Status: Offline
Points: 13248
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Baal Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08/09/2014 at 4:40pm
Three words to describe this ball:  slow, low, straight.   I really don't have much fun playing with them. 

(Slower ball flight, lower bounce, less arc, or so it seems).
Back to Top
the_theologian View Drop Down
Premier Member
Premier Member
Avatar

Joined: 01/11/2009
Location: U.S.
Status: Offline
Points: 3927
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote the_theologian Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08/09/2014 at 5:03pm
Originally posted by Baal Baal wrote:

Three words to describe this ball:  slow, low, straight.   I really don't have much fun playing with them. 

(Slower ball flight, lower bounce, less arc, or so it seems).



These words will likely trigger an auto response from Igor-googlebot
Hayabusa Zi ST/FH:H3-50med/BH:GoldArc5-42.5-2.0
Back to Top
NextLevel View Drop Down
Premier Member
Premier Member
Avatar

Joined: 12/15/2011
Location: Somewhere Good
Status: Offline
Points: 12954
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote NextLevel Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08/10/2014 at 8:59am
I got a lot of XuShaofa 1 star balls and a couple of approved 3 star balls from TTNPP.com.  I also purchased some DFish 3 star balls.  Until the German site releases its ball, I am pretty much done with plastic call purchases (I might buy the new Nittaku Ball from Paddle Palace but I already have an iruiru order).
I like putting heavy topspin on the ball...
Carbonado 145
FH: Fastarc C-1 2.0 B
BH: Fastarc C-1 2.0 R
Lumberjack TT, not for lovers of beautiful strokes.
Back to Top
Imago View Drop Down
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 07/19/2009
Location: Sofia
Status: Offline
Points: 6031
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Imago Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08/10/2014 at 9:51am
Originally posted by JacekGM JacekGM wrote:

Originally posted by assiduous assiduous wrote:

I don't agree with most of his stuff but still like him. I have some respect for all unorthodox thinkers.


Yeah, me too.... But how do we determine who is the orthodox thinker?


A general prerequisite would be the ability to think.
Back to Top
Baal View Drop Down
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator


Joined: 01/21/2010
Location: unknown
Status: Offline
Points: 13248
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Baal Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08/10/2014 at 12:29pm
Originally posted by Imago Imago wrote:


A general prerequisite would be the ability to think.


Sure if you can define that. 
Back to Top
clannewton View Drop Down
Super Member
Super Member
Avatar

Joined: 03/03/2008
Location: Melbourne,FL US
Status: Offline
Points: 298
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote clannewton Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08/10/2014 at 3:18pm
A friend of mine who stays in contact with Stellan Bengstan, related that they had experimented with this poly ball back in the 70's and not only did it not work out, due to the weight and the surface of the ball, it was wearing out the rubber sheets at a substansially faster rate as well as the table tops. I can imagine the equipment companies have got to be drooling at that prospect.

Edited by clannewton - 08/10/2014 at 3:19pm
Nittaku Violin FL-L
FH Donic Bluefire m-1 max
BH Donic Bluefire m-2 max
Cocoa Beach TTC, Florida
Back to Top
Tassie52 View Drop Down
Gold Member
Gold Member
Avatar

Joined: 10/09/2010
Location: Australia
Status: Offline
Points: 1326
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Tassie52 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08/11/2014 at 1:53am
Originally posted by clannewton clannewton wrote:

A friend of mine who stays in contact with Stellan Bengstan, related that they had experimented with this poly ball back in the 70's
Obviously not true as the ball in the 70s was not 40+, nor was it likely to be made out of the same materials.
Back to Top
Baal View Drop Down
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator


Joined: 01/21/2010
Location: unknown
Status: Offline
Points: 13248
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Baal Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08/11/2014 at 6:12am
Actually the fact that the ITTF rule has specifically allowed for plastic balls for decades is not an accident..  Some of the older players may remember that Halex produced ITTF approved plastic balls in the 1970s.  They were, of course 38 mm, but they had a somewhat broken sound and had a lot of the same problems that people are reporting with the current seamed polyballs (fragility, hardness, weird play, somewhat different sound).  I don't know if they were made of cellulose acetate, but that would be the obvious choice if you were trying to use something other than cellulose nitrate.  There may have been other attempts at this I don't know about.  I very much doubt that the increase in size is the source of all of the discontent with the seamed Chinese poly balls (which also means some of the problems could get better).  I think some of it is the hardness of the ball surface.  Too hard or too soft can both be bad.  The word "this" in clannewton perhaps should have been "a".   
Back to Top
Tassie52 View Drop Down
Gold Member
Gold Member
Avatar

Joined: 10/09/2010
Location: Australia
Status: Offline
Points: 1326
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Tassie52 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08/11/2014 at 6:32am
Oh for the days of Barna 3 Crown balls!  Made of plastic and indestructible.  I was a poor high school student and indestructible was pretty damned important!   Big smile
Back to Top
LUCKYLOOP View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar

Joined: 03/27/2013
Location: Pongville USA
Status: Offline
Points: 2822
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote LUCKYLOOP Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08/11/2014 at 6:45am

The Halex 3 stars 38 mm I remember in 70's were of high quality very hard, did not break easy. very fast and spinny. except the stiga rubber used then was not very tacky, not quite as tacky as Tenergy 05.

edit

The ones I used were celluloid and good balls.     

Edited by LUCKYLOOP - 08/11/2014 at 3:09pm
Hntr Fl / 4H & BH Xiom Sigma Pro 2 2.0
Yinhe T-2 / 4H Xiom Sig Pro 2 2.0 BH Xiom Omega IV Elite Max
Gam DC / 4H DHS Hurricane 8 39deg 2.1 BH GD CC LP OX
HARDBAT / Hock 3 ply / Frenshp Dr Evil OX
Back to Top
Baal View Drop Down
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator


Joined: 01/21/2010
Location: unknown
Status: Offline
Points: 13248
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Baal Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08/11/2014 at 7:48am
They barely bounced, were brittle, and sounded broken, and nobody wanted to use them.
Back to Top
clannewton View Drop Down
Super Member
Super Member
Avatar

Joined: 03/03/2008
Location: Melbourne,FL US
Status: Offline
Points: 298
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote clannewton Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08/11/2014 at 10:11am
Originally posted by Tassie52 Tassie52 wrote:

Originally posted by clannewton clannewton wrote:

A friend of mine who stays in contact with Stellan Bengstan, related that they had experimented with this poly ball back in the 70's
Obviously not true as the ball in the 70s was not 40+, nor was it likely to be made out of the same materials.
Baal made a good correction, as I should have written "a" instead of this, but the fact that these ball are even larger than the 38mm, even more mass and heavier, it seems to me the effects on the equipment(rubbers and tables) is going to have even more impact than than the "similiar material" balls from the 70's.  But I will be glad to let you use it on your equipment over a long term and please let us know what and if there is any impact on your equipment.  I don't know if there has been any long term testing to see if this is a real concern as it feels like this ball has been rushed into production and into the market.
Nittaku Violin FL-L
FH Donic Bluefire m-1 max
BH Donic Bluefire m-2 max
Cocoa Beach TTC, Florida
Back to Top
lineup32 View Drop Down
Gold Member
Gold Member
Avatar

Joined: 12/06/2012
Location: Calif
Status: Offline
Points: 1159
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote lineup32 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08/11/2014 at 1:05pm
Originally posted by Baal Baal wrote:

Three words to describe this ball:  slow, low, straight.   I really don't have much fun playing with them. 

(Slower ball flight, lower bounce, less arc, or so it seems).

  The issues about lower bounce and spin may have something to do with what happens when modern plastic balls hit a TT table vs Celluloid. The confusion many of us have is calling celluloid a true plastic and expecting the new plastic balls to have similar properties but it may be that one reason celluloid has been used for all these years in spite of new plastic materials and process is that has some unique properties relative to retaining/transferring energy when it strikes a surface.
Back to Top
NextLevel View Drop Down
Premier Member
Premier Member
Avatar

Joined: 12/15/2011
Location: Somewhere Good
Status: Offline
Points: 12954
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote NextLevel Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08/11/2014 at 1:28pm
The real problem is that there is no real money in our sport. I find it hard (but not impossible) to believe that no reasonable substitutes for celluloid can be developed with all the genius out there - the question is likely resource-starved. Thankfully, the Japanese took the problem seriously. Let's hope the Germans are doing the same.
I like putting heavy topspin on the ball...
Carbonado 145
FH: Fastarc C-1 2.0 B
BH: Fastarc C-1 2.0 R
Lumberjack TT, not for lovers of beautiful strokes.
Back to Top
zeio View Drop Down
Premier Member
Premier Member


Joined: 03/25/2010
Status: Offline
Points: 6955
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote zeio Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08/11/2014 at 1:31pm
Originally posted by Baal Baal wrote:

Actually the fact that the ITTF rule has specifically allowed for plastic balls for decades is not an accident..  Some of the older players may remember that Halex produced ITTF approved plastic balls in the 1970s.  They were, of course 38 mm, but they had a somewhat broken sound and had a lot of the same problems that people are reporting with the current seamed polyballs (fragility, hardness, weird play, somewhat different sound).  I don't know if they were made of cellulose acetate, but that would be the obvious choice if you were trying to use something other than cellulose nitrate.  There may have been other attempts at this I don't know about.  I very much doubt that the increase in size is the source of all of the discontent with the seamed Chinese poly balls (which also means some of the problems could get better).  I think some of it is the hardness of the ball surface.  Too hard or too soft can both be bad.  The word "this" in clannewton perhaps should have been "a".   

According to one patent application, Dunlop used styrene acrylonitrile copolymer for their non-celluloid balls in the 80s.  I doubt it would be anything cellulose-based for Halex.


Edited by zeio - 08/11/2014 at 1:33pm
Viscaria FL - 91g
+ Neo H3 2.15 Blk - 44.5g(55.3g uncut bare)
+ Hexer HD 2.1 Red - 49.3g(68.5g 〃 〃)
= 184.8g
Back to Top
zeio View Drop Down
Premier Member
Premier Member


Joined: 03/25/2010
Status: Offline
Points: 6955
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote zeio Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08/11/2014 at 1:48pm
Originally posted by lineup32 lineup32 wrote:

Originally posted by Baal Baal wrote:

Three words to describe this ball:  slow, low, straight.   I really don't have much fun playing with them. 

(Slower ball flight, lower bounce, less arc, or so it seems).

  The issues about lower bounce and spin may have something to do with what happens when modern plastic balls hit a TT table vs Celluloid. The confusion many of us have is calling celluloid a true plastic and expecting the new plastic balls to have similar properties but it may be that one reason celluloid has been used for all these years in spite of new plastic materials and process is that has some unique properties relative to retaining/transferring energy when it strikes a surface.

1. Under room temperature, celluloid possesses an exceedingly high hardness and young's modulus.  Table tennis balls made of celluloid can remain intact after an impact with the table at a speed over 150 km/h(~93mph) without any permanent deformation.

2. At 100°C(212°F), celluloid can stretch over 60% its original length, which makes it possible to use water as a heat medium for compression molding.

3. The ability to use solvent to join two domes a little over 10 seconds, and the strength of the joint is on par with that of the main unit.

There are hardly any other material available today that can satisfy these three prerequisites.  This is the sole reason celluloid has remained a staple for so long.
Viscaria FL - 91g
+ Neo H3 2.15 Blk - 44.5g(55.3g uncut bare)
+ Hexer HD 2.1 Red - 49.3g(68.5g 〃 〃)
= 184.8g
Back to Top
Baal View Drop Down
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator


Joined: 01/21/2010
Location: unknown
Status: Offline
Points: 13248
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Baal Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08/11/2014 at 2:32pm
Also, the possibility of using cellulose acetate plastics has existed for 100 years.  For example, it was used to replace celluloid in movie films to reduce fire hazards of movie theaters, I believe by the 1930s.  I read somewhere that plastics made of cellulose acetate tend to degrade more over time than cellulose nitrate, and the film stock starts to smell like vinegar as it degrades, a serious problem for preservation of classic films.  So I am thinking that cellulose acetate would have been used a lot earlier if it made a decent ball.  After all, you might think that the companies making balls would want to reduce their risks.  Perhaps zeio knows more about this. 

I am hopeful that modern chemical engineers are able to solve the problem and tweak cellulose acetate in such a way as to produce something better and more like celluloid.  Like I have said, the Nittaku Japan polyball we checked (only one, though) bounced exactly the same as a Nittaku celluloid Japan 40 (at least in our crude test).  It was very round.  We will learn more in October.  Interestingly, a seamless XSF ball (again only one) actually bounced quite a bit higher than celluloid!  I wish I had played with that one more, and I just ordered some from TTNPP.  It is the only time I have ordered something from them.
Back to Top
lineup32 View Drop Down
Gold Member
Gold Member
Avatar

Joined: 12/06/2012
Location: Calif
Status: Offline
Points: 1159
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote lineup32 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08/11/2014 at 2:35pm
Originally posted by zeio zeio wrote:

Originally posted by lineup32 lineup32 wrote:

Originally posted by Baal Baal wrote:

Three words to describe this ball:  slow, low, straight.   I really don't have much fun playing with them. 

(Slower ball flight, lower bounce, less arc, or so it seems).

  The issues about lower bounce and spin may have something to do with what happens when modern plastic balls hit a TT table vs Celluloid. The confusion many of us have is calling celluloid a true plastic and expecting the new plastic balls to have similar properties but it may be that one reason celluloid has been used for all these years in spite of new plastic materials and process is that has some unique properties relative to retaining/transferring energy when it strikes a surface.

1. Under room temperature, celluloid possesses an exceedingly high hardness and young's modulus.  Table tennis balls made of celluloid can remain intact after an impact with the table at a speed over 150 km/h(~93mph) without any permanent deformation.

2. At 100°C(212°F), celluloid can stretch over 60% its original length, which makes it possible to use water as a heat medium for compression molding.

3. The ability to use solvent to join two domes a little over 10 seconds, and the strength of the joint is on par with that of the main unit.

There are hardly any other material available today that can satisfy these three prerequisites.  This is the sole reason celluloid has remained a staple for so long.
Not unusual for materials that have unique properties  included for classification purposes within the same general material.  Clay is similar to plastic in that it can be molded or made into a wide variety of shapes and uses but don't take a low fire clay and put it in a high fire kiln as it will explode.  One can mix various clay bodies to generate unique temp ranges and hardness and therefore create a clay body that is perfect for specific applications.  
No mystery about new TT balls muted  magnus effect relative to 40C they are a different material and do not behave the same like comparing a nerf ball to a baseball or other sphere shapes. Would not spend much money on new equipment trying to make the new ball play like Celluloid.

Golf went through a similar situation in that a smooth ball was introduced that had little or no mangus effect so it didn't slice or curve making it easier for players to keep the ball in the fairway.  The PGA and other  professional golf associations banned the ball from tournament play because it made the game too easy to play.  
                

Back to Top
Baal View Drop Down
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator


Joined: 01/21/2010
Location: unknown
Status: Offline
Points: 13248
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Baal Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08/11/2014 at 2:52pm
Also, no matter what, the larger size cannot lack effect.  But i am more annoyed by low bounce of DHS etc.
Back to Top
lineup32 View Drop Down
Gold Member
Gold Member
Avatar

Joined: 12/06/2012
Location: Calif
Status: Offline
Points: 1159
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote lineup32 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08/11/2014 at 3:07pm
Originally posted by Baal Baal wrote:

Also, no matter what, the larger size cannot lack effect.  But i am more annoyed by low bounce of DHS etc.

If the new ball was 40+ celluloid then it would still be  slower but the magnus effect would be stronger or the same as the current 40C per the MIT study I posted.  
The issue with the  new ball goes beyond just  larger ball its made of a different material and reacts differently then celluloid when striking  surface area's.  Throw in heavier, thicker walls , less round, durability etc only adds to deviation from the celluloid ball.  

  
Back to Top
LUCKYLOOP View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar

Joined: 03/27/2013
Location: Pongville USA
Status: Offline
Points: 2822
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote LUCKYLOOP Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08/11/2014 at 3:17pm
Originally posted by lineup32 lineup32 wrote:

Originally posted by Baal Baal wrote:

Also, no matter what, the larger size cannot lack effect.  But i am more annoyed by low bounce of DHS etc.

If the new ball was 40+ celluloid then it would still be  slower but the magnus effect would be stronger or the same as the current 40C per the MIT study I posted.  
The issue with the  new ball goes beyond just  larger ball its made of a different material and reacts differently then celluloid when striking  surface area's.  Throw in heavier, thicker walls , less round, durability etc only adds to deviation from the celluloid ball.  

  


Hopefully, there is going to be a period of manufacturer quality control improvement.

This wouldn't be a problem except there was no tournament testing period to let the manufacturers perfect the new balls.

I think it would be better if they would put a little resin in the plastic so they would be more spinny and normal like the celluloid.
Hntr Fl / 4H & BH Xiom Sigma Pro 2 2.0
Yinhe T-2 / 4H Xiom Sig Pro 2 2.0 BH Xiom Omega IV Elite Max
Gam DC / 4H DHS Hurricane 8 39deg 2.1 BH GD CC LP OX
HARDBAT / Hock 3 ply / Frenshp Dr Evil OX
Back to Top
lineup32 View Drop Down
Gold Member
Gold Member
Avatar

Joined: 12/06/2012
Location: Calif
Status: Offline
Points: 1159
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote lineup32 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08/12/2014 at 12:50pm
Would like to see how each of the new plastic balls compare to celluloid in this test.  Celluloid seems to be an ideal material for TT balls if you want a lively ball after impact on a surface.  

 
Method 1
Table Tennis 
Ball
Marble


Cricket 
Ball
Tennis 
Ball
Golf
Ball
 
Velocity prior to impact (u) (m/s)
1.92
1.55
1.39
2.09
1.66
Velocity after impact (v) (m/s)
1.8
0.82
0.6
1.76
1.23
e
0.94
0.53
0.43
0.84
0.74

 
Method 1
Table Tennis 
Ball
Marble


Cricket 
Ball
Tennis 
Ball
Golf
Ball
 
H dropped (m)
0.22
0.16
0.13
0.27
0.16
H bounced (m)
0.18
0.05
0.03
0.18
0.1
Hb/Hd
0.82
0.31
0.23
0.67
0.63
e
0.90
0.56
0.48
0.82
0.79
Back to Top
igorponger View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar

Joined: 07/29/2006
Location: Third planet to the Sun
Status: Offline
Points: 2689
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote igorponger Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08/13/2014 at 9:09pm
GOOD TO HEAR......

http://tabletennis.org.au/Portals/16/Plastic_Balls_Q_A.pdf

Friends.
Look into this document's pages 15 -- 16.
"Research for a better plastic material will go on and on,
so as to meet the original technical specifications...."

Good to hear. So nIce and promisssory statement by the ball makers, Yes.
Back to Top
Tassie52 View Drop Down
Gold Member
Gold Member
Avatar

Joined: 10/09/2010
Location: Australia
Status: Offline
Points: 1326
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Tassie52 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08/13/2014 at 9:54pm
According to the Q&A, the acceptable range for bounce is for a ball dropped from 305mm onto a standard block of steel to rebound between 260mm and 240mm. If we're used to celluloid bouncing at the top of that range (255-260mm) but the DHS poly is at the bottom (240-245mm) then the difference is going to be very noticeable. Perhaps we need another rule change! Reduce the acceptable range to 250-260mm and the differences would be far less problematic.
Back to Top
Baal View Drop Down
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator


Joined: 01/21/2010
Location: unknown
Status: Offline
Points: 13248
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Baal Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08/13/2014 at 10:09pm
Originally posted by igorponger igorponger wrote:

GOOD TO HEAR......

http://tabletennis.org.au/Portals/16/Plastic_Balls_Q_A.pdf

Friends.
Look into this document's pages 15 -- 16.
"Research for a better plastic material will go on and on,
so as to meet the original technical specifications...."

Good to hear. So nIce and promisssory statement by the ball makers, Yes.


That is good to hear because things as they stand are not acceptable.

There is a clear misstatement of fact in that ITTF document by Dr. Kuneth.  He claims that there is now no difference in sound in celluloid and polyballs approved by ITTF.  That is clearly not true for the seamless balls, even the ITTF approved ones. 

Also, he states that seamed balls are in the same range as bounce and roundness as current celluloid balls and overlap in size.  Maybe the companies spent weeks selecting their best 1% of plastic balls for testing by ITTF.  I have yet to see a single seamed Chinese ball from DHS, Joola or Nittaku that bounces as high as any of the celluloid balls I have compared them to, and I have by this time checked around 16 of them.  Not even 1 out of the 16.  The average bounce height is roughly around 75% of celluloid.  Roundness was also a much greater problem with plastic.  Maybe Double Fish is better.  I have not checked one of those.

And then there is the giant elephant in the room that ITTF does not address at all --- the Chinese seamed balls they have already approved have huge durability problems even at $2.00 each.

So one hopes they can fix this fiasco.

The good news is that there will be a new German ball maker named Weener.  Not the balls themselves necessarily, we have no clue yet what they will be.  The name.  Weener Balls. 

Yes.
Back to Top
DreiZ View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar

Joined: 06/01/2009
Location: New York, US
Status: Offline
Points: 2484
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote DreiZ Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08/13/2014 at 10:59pm
Originally posted by Baal Baal wrote:

Originally posted by igorponger igorponger wrote:

GOOD TO HEAR......

http://tabletennis.org.au/Portals/16/Plastic_Balls_Q_A.pdf

Friends.
Look into this document's pages 15 -- 16.
"Research for a better plastic material will go on and on,
so as to meet the original technical specifications...."

Good to hear. So nIce and promisssory statement by the ball makers, Yes.


That is good to hear because things as they stand are not acceptable.

There is a clear misstatement of fact in that ITTF document by Dr. Kuneth.  He claims that there is now no difference in sound in celluloid and polyballs approved by ITTF.  That is clearly not true for the seamless balls, even the ITTF approved ones. 

Also, he states that seamed balls are in the same range as bounce and roundness as current celluloid balls and overlap in size.  Maybe the companies spent weeks selecting their best 1% of plastic balls for testing by ITTF.  I have yet to see a single seamed Chinese ball from DHS, Joola or Nittaku that bounces as high as any of the celluloid balls I have compared them to, and I have by this time checked around 16 of them.  Not even 1 out of the 16.  The average bounce height is roughly around 75% of celluloid.  Roundness was also a much greater problem with plastic.  Maybe Double Fish is better.  I have not checked one of those.

And then there is the giant elephant in the room that ITTF does not address at all --- the Chinese seamed balls they have already approved have huge durability problems even at $2.00 each.

So one hopes they can fix this fiasco.

The good news is that there will be a new German ball maker named Weener.  Not the balls themselves necessarily, we have no clue yet what they will be.  The name.  Weener Balls. 

Yes.




I, for one, vote for Weener Balls.
Maybe instead of a fish it will have a cute little wiener dog on them... and 3 stars on the collar.
Yes!
Force Pro BE FL 82g | H3 Neo 2.15 + FTL | Aurus Select 2.1
Force Pro BE AN 82g | 2x Aurus Prime 2.1
FS Feedback
Back to Top
igorponger View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar

Joined: 07/29/2006
Location: Third planet to the Sun
Status: Offline
Points: 2689
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote igorponger Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08/13/2014 at 11:17pm
Originally posted by Baal Baal wrote:


...... ....... Yes.


Dear Colleague,

Vexation eats the dog. you know, and easy mindset is the best healer.
Take things easy, pingpang is just a happy passtime, no case for going mad. Yes.
Back to Top
lineup32 View Drop Down
Gold Member
Gold Member
Avatar

Joined: 12/06/2012
Location: Calif
Status: Offline
Points: 1159
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote lineup32 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08/13/2014 at 11:29pm
Originally posted by igorponger igorponger wrote:

GOOD TO HEAR......

http://tabletennis.org.au/Portals/16/Plastic_Balls_Q_A.pdf

Friends.
Look into this document's pages 15 -- 16.
"Research for a better plastic material will go on and on,
so as to meet the original technical specifications...."

Good to hear. So nIce and promisssory statement by the ball makers, Yes.

that should have been done prior to release no major sport would release equipment critical to the sport without complete research and testing, instead the ITTF has release several versions claiming there all play alike, unbelievable!    Bounce test is out dated and not critical enough for this purpose, video technology and software is available to accurately measure COR it should be used and results posted.
Back to Top
stiltt View Drop Down
Premier Member
Premier Member
Avatar

Joined: 07/15/2007
Location: Northwest USA
Status: Offline
Points: 16148
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote stiltt Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08/13/2014 at 11:44pm
the carnal sex-starved vampiress are taking the vexery mad dog for a walk; everybody hidess before the bitee.




Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <123>
  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 0.156 seconds.

Become a Fan on Facebook Follow us on Twitter Web Wiz News
About MyTableTennis.NET | Forum Help | Disclaimer

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

Copyright ©2003-2019 Alex Table Tennis Ltd. All rights reserved.