Abros Blades + ABS Ball - New Korean Company!
Printed From: Alex Table Tennis - MyTableTennis.NET
Category: Equipment
Forum Name: Equipment
Forum Description: Share your experience and discussions about table tennis equipments.
Moderator: haggisv
Assistant Moderators: position available
URL: http://mytabletennis.net/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=88578
Printed Date: 04/24/2024 at 9:47pm
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Abros Blades + ABS Ball - New Korean Company!
Posted By: yogi_bear
Subject: Abros Blades + ABS Ball - New Korean Company!
Date Posted: 07/12/2020 at 2:08pm
|
Abros Blades + 40+ ABS Ball Abros is a Korean table tennis company which produces their own blades, balls and an incoming rubber according to my contact. Basing on their website, the company is called Kihyun. This is a fairly new company and now they are releasing their own brand of blades and balls. The rubber is still undergoing ITTF certification which they will probably release within a few months. By my estimate, probably when the new ITTF LARC will be released on October or November. Abros C50 Spruce Frame Blade Weight: 88 grams Plies: 3 Ply + 2 Carbon Thickness: 5.76mm Blade head: 150x157mm Speed: Off+
I really got curious about their blades because of the unique design. The concept of adding a frame to the blade head is unheard of by today’s usual blade designs. Abros said that they want to innovate by designing unique blades in order to stand out from other companies and will be given attention. Let me describe the quality of the C50 Frame blade as a comparable to that of the blades from Butterfly. The top plies are lacquered in order to protect from splintering due to changing of rubbers often times. Despite having a frame, the blade has a very intricate construction wherein the frame and the inner part of the blade fits perfectly that it almost feels like it is continuous with no junction whenever you run your fingers on the blade surface. Abros says that the frame gives additional stiffness or rigidity to the whole blade and at the same time adds protection to the sides of the blade from accidentally hitting the table. The frame is constructed wherein it covers the perimeter of the whole blade. Frame is about 5mm wide. I got the flared version and it feels a little bigger compared to other blades. The flared dimension is 100mm x 33mm x 24mm. The logo is also unique that it looks like a carbon fiber logo printed with the company’s name. To compare the C50’s Frame blade speed, I would compare the speed as faster than Timo Boll ALC, Yinhe T-11+ or Carbonado 190. It is slightly slower than the Primorac Carbon or Schlager Carbon. I felt the speed the moment I did forehand to forehand drills and topspin drills. The blade is very lively and bouncy. I used a Sanwei Gear Hyper 39 degrees and RITC Battle 2 rubber as test rubbers. When hitting both with regular forehand and backhand drives, you can see the long with medium low trajectory of the ball. Me and a friend tested the C50 near the table, middle distance and far distance from the table. We both concluded that this is a powerful and fast blade even when you are far from the table. The long trajectory helps you land the ball properly on the table. The sweet spot is about 1 to 1.5 inch from the edge of the frame. Despite being a very fast blade, the C50 Frame blade actually loops very well. Some fast blades with very stiff feel would give some people difficulty in brushing the ball due to the rebound effect of the blade. This is fairly common among pure carbon blades and companies would add soft layers on the blade to reduce stiffness. Usually, blades with 5.7mm thickness like that of the C50’s have flex especially when they do not have carbon layers or any other composite materials used as 2nd or 3rd layer in a blade. The spruce frame adds rigidity to the blade itself wherein despite the thin dimension, it gives the blade enough stiffness for additional speed and keeping the blade thin while also not forgetting the blade’s flex that will also help in looping against underspin or doing counter topspins. As what was stated, when looping it has a medium low arc that is about 2 to 3 inches above the net. The C50 is a very stable blade both in blocking strong topspins or doing punch blocks. It is a pretty linear blade with some gears. The rigidity and balance of flex gives you a great feel on your touch. Short strokes or shots need a bit adjustment due to the blade’s speed but it is not a major problem. Overall, this is a top quality blade that offers grip comfort, excellent feel and speed that an advanced -level player needs. This is a fresh concept for blades and I would think a lot of people will like this as I Have. This is a bit pricey with a price tag of 170 USD. This will start selling by August. Abros A50 Walnut Frame Blade Weight: 92 grams Thickness: 4.5mm Plies: 3 Wood + 2 Arylate Carbon Speed: Off to Off+
The A50 Walnut Frame blade is the thinnest blade I have ever tried in the market. The last very thin blade that I have tried was a Nexy blade. I have the straight handle version of the A50 and for a 4.5mm blade, it is on the heavy side because at 4.5mm it is at 92 grams!! This blade is pretty solid because of the walnut frame. It felt stiff and has more stiffness compared to the C50 Spruce Frame. I would understand why they made the blade very thin because the walnut frame will make the blade very heavy if they would go with a 5mm blade or greater since the walnut frame should also be as thick as the blade itself. Granting the blade is 5mm it would probably weigh more than 100 grams. Like the C50 Frame blade, it has excellent quality, smooth surface and comfortable handle. The straight handle was a bit slender for me but it is still comfortable. The ST handle of the Abros blades are smaller than the ST blades of Stiga or Sanwei. Like the C50, the A50 has koto outer plies. They only differ in the wood frame and the composite material which is carbon arylate for the A50. The picture in the internet shows it looks like it has limba outer plies but it has koto plies. I thought this was a slow blade. I was bouncing the ball on the bare blade and it was lower by about 2 inches compared to that of the C50’s ball bounce but when I played with the A50, it was fast and went over the table when I looped the ball. I tested the A50 using the Xiom Tau II and Stiga DNA H Pro rubbers. The bare blade bounce was a bit deceiving because I thought it was slow but when I started doing forehand loops and forehand drives, the speed was surprisingly fast. I can say that the A50 has lots of gears. It was slow when you are gentle with your soft touch shots or drop shots but also fast when you need power for your shots. It is slightly slower than the C50 blade. I would compare the speed to probably just a little above the speed of Timo Boll ALC. It felt more stiff and rigid than TB ALC. It felt as stiff as an Amultart blade. I guess the walnut frame really made the blade stiff with a touch of flex. The blade is bouncy when you apply a small effort when hitting the ball but it can be slow when you want it to. This is a better looping blade compared to the C50 Frame blade because it has the arc, control and feel that makes you loop the ball easily. The weight of the blade goes towards the head part and it might make some people uncomfortable but that is the catch. The arc was about 2 inches higher than that of the C50. This is a great looping blade that is more on a technical side. This is much more versatile than a lot of blades I know because it acts like an all around blade for short pushes or drop shots, blocking or smashing but has a speed of an offensive blade. The A50 might not be as thick as the C50, but it has power and speed that you would need. I would say looping is the best feature for the A50 Frame blade. Other shots like blocking is also stable with the A50 when I tried it. The rigidity that the walnut frame greatly helped with the stability during blocks. This is both for passive and active blocks. Also, the blade is wonderful with drop shots near the net. I would assume that this is also a good blade for attacking and blocking with long pimples. This is a dynamic and versatile blade. Even an intermediate level player can greatly appreciate this blade as long as he or she can afford the price of this blade, This is worth investing and maybe we can see this as a future of blade innovations. Abros 40+ ABS Ball
I think this is the first ever Korean-made ABS ball that is ITTF approved. I got 1 dozen of these balls and so far the consistencies of roundness of the balls seem excellent. I would say the quality is slightly better than the Yinhe 40+ Premium balls. The ball felt some sort of a mix between an ABS ball and a PVC ball. It has this hardness and feel partly of a PVC ball. Abros told me that the process of ball-making they are using right now is the same to that of the Nittaku Premium. So far the ball seems durable enough and have not experience breakage yet after 3 days of playing. ------------- Independent online TT Product reviewer of XIOM, STIGA, JOOLA, SANWEI, GEWO, AIR, ITC, APEX, YASAKA and ABROS ITTF Level 1 Coaching Course Conductor, ITTF Level 1 Coach |
Replies:
Posted By: ghostzen
Date Posted: 07/12/2020 at 2:51pm
|
Used an Abros ball last year when I was over training and playing in Korea. Have to agree on the strength of the ball. Very durable ball from my experience as well. |
Posted By: yogi_bear
Date Posted: 07/12/2020 at 3:35pm
I have to get used to the feel because sometimes it feels like it has a pvc mix. ------------- Independent online TT Product reviewer of XIOM, STIGA, JOOLA, SANWEI, GEWO, AIR, ITC, APEX, YASAKA and ABROS ITTF Level 1 Coaching Course Conductor, ITTF Level 1 Coach |
ghostzen wrote:Posted By: Shifu
Date Posted: 07/12/2020 at 5:01pm
| I’m not sure but isn’t this blade design against ITTF rules? |
Posted By: Skynet
Date Posted: 07/12/2020 at 5:17pm
I am also kinda confused because of the all-around-frame; you cannot see the composite layers...
|
Posted By: yogi_bear
Date Posted: 07/12/2020 at 5:21pm
There are several Joola and Andro blades i think where you cannot see the layers in thd side so this is ok.. ------------- Independent online TT Product reviewer of XIOM, STIGA, JOOLA, SANWEI, GEWO, AIR, ITC, APEX, YASAKA and ABROS ITTF Level 1 Coaching Course Conductor, ITTF Level 1 Coach |
Posted By: Skynet
Date Posted: 07/12/2020 at 5:39pm
|
Well, OK. I don't know that many Joola and/or Andro blades. I understand that this concept of an all-around frame is new...but if I were a racket judge I would probably be confused as well. With rubbers on both sides these blades would look like simple 1-ply-allwood blades, and a judge (provided he would actually know that this is a composite blade) would not be able to determine if the blade is at least to 85% made of pure wood and that the thickness of the composite layers are not more that 7.5% of the overall thickness of the blade. I have to admit that I do not know too much about these regulations, though.
|
Posted By: kindof99
Date Posted: 07/12/2020 at 5:55pm
|
Quite unique design indeed ------------- /forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=65174&title=feedback-for-kindof99" rel="nofollow - My Feedback | /forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=77924" rel="nofollow - Sale |
Posted By: yogi_bear
Date Posted: 07/12/2020 at 6:10pm
The 15% limit on composite thickness is correct but then again previous blades from other brands already have covers like a fineline wood cover so i think ittf allows it. ------------- Independent online TT Product reviewer of XIOM, STIGA, JOOLA, SANWEI, GEWO, AIR, ITC, APEX, YASAKA and ABROS ITTF Level 1 Coaching Course Conductor, ITTF Level 1 Coach |
Posted By: Shifu
Date Posted: 07/13/2020 at 5:04am
|
Posted By: TT newbie
Date Posted: 07/13/2020 at 7:18am
| Don´t blades need ITTF approval to be released on the market? If so, of course they will allow a player to use it. |
Posted By: NextLevel
Date Posted: 07/13/2020 at 7:46am
|
Clearly an illegal blade to me. ------------- https://youtu.be/jhO4K_yFhh8?t=115" rel="nofollow - I like putting heavy topspin on the ball... Cybershape Carbon FH/BH: H3P 41D. Lumberjack TT, not for lovers of beautiful strokes. No time to train... |
Posted By: stiltt
Date Posted: 07/13/2020 at 9:56am
|
Ross Leidy had experimented with that band of wood around the blade. It won’t affect play but the rules are broken. It does not really serve a purpose I can identify anyway, unless It makes the sweet spot give a different feedback that would be appreciated... They might just want to attract people’s attention on something unusual. ------------- /forum/topic91512_page1.html#1124698" rel="nofollow - sales - forum_posts.asp?TID=19315" rel="nofollow - feedback |
Posted By: yogi_bear
Date Posted: 07/13/2020 at 10:32am
The junction between the frame and inner blade head is almost non-existent when you run your fingers on it. Besides, the optimal hitting area of a blades is about 2 inches from the side of the blade. Logic would dictate you to check your designs with the ittf before selling them. Unless, ITTF sends a memo that these frame blades are illegal, all our opinions here are just opinions. ------------- Independent online TT Product reviewer of XIOM, STIGA, JOOLA, SANWEI, GEWO, AIR, ITC, APEX, YASAKA and ABROS ITTF Level 1 Coaching Course Conductor, ITTF Level 1 Coach |
Posted By: Skynet
Date Posted: 07/13/2020 at 12:20pm
That seems to be the crucial paragraph. It would give every opponent and racket judge pretty much the reason to object to a blade design/construction. I certainly do hope that yogi is correct in that the brand/company have checked with the ITTF beforehand and got the OK from them, although it might seem as a contradiction considering the above mentioned paragraph.
|
Posted By: gradge
Date Posted: 07/13/2020 at 1:46pm
| Obviously blades need to meet the ITTF standards but interestingly blades do not all carry an ITTF stamp and there is no list of approved blades as there is for rubbers. |
Posted By: Shifu
Date Posted: 07/13/2020 at 2:31pm
I remind you that even Butterfly once had the Kreanga Carbon blade which was illegal so they stopped manufacturing it.
|
Posted By: yogi_bear
Date Posted: 07/13/2020 at 3:52pm
Not every blade is a kreanga carbon. As what i have said. There blades in the past that were not marked as illegal by ittf now. Even the the new Aruna blade from Gewo has this smller covered sides using fineline wood. If we take the continuity context, this blade and other blades from other blades of similsr design would also be illegal. Also, as what I have said, unless ITTF says this is illegal, what we have are just opinions and wild interpretations of the rule. ------------- Independent online TT Product reviewer of XIOM, STIGA, JOOLA, SANWEI, GEWO, AIR, ITC, APEX, YASAKA and ABROS ITTF Level 1 Coaching Course Conductor, ITTF Level 1 Coach |
Posted By: penholderxxx
Date Posted: 07/15/2020 at 3:13am
|
"Not every blade is a kreanga carbon. As what i have said. There blades in the past that were not marked as illegal by ittf now. Even the the new Aruna blade from Gewo has this smller covered sides using fineline wood. If we take the continuity context, this blade and other blades from other blades of similsr design would also be illegal. Also, as what I have said, unless ITTF says this is illegal, what we have are just opinions and wild interpretations of the rule. " - yogi_bear This statement may not be necessarily accurate. the ittf does not say which blade, brand or model is illegal or otherwise and I think there is no such an approved list of blades either. but it does specify the requirements for a blade to be legal. But as already pointed out, in 2.4.5 on the Laws of Table Tennis published by the ittf , it says clear enough; that ' ....., any layer within the blade .... shall be continuous and of even thickness. ' At the least, these blades do not have even thickness with their layers; in fact, they are composed of different layers. How is interpreting 2.4.5 to say these blades are by definition illegal ' just opinions and wild interpretation ' ?  ------------- Iloveplayingtabletennis |
Posted By: yogi_bear
Date Posted: 07/15/2020 at 3:59am
|
[QUOTE=penholderxxx] "Not every blade is a kreanga carbon. As what i have said. There blades in the past that were not marked as illegal by ittf now. Even the the new Aruna blade from Gewo has this smller covered sides using fineline wood. If we take the continuity context, this blade and other blades from other blades of similsr design would also be illegal. Also, as what I have said, unless ITTF says this is illegal, what we have are just opinions and wild interpretations of the rule. " - yogi_bear " This statement may not be necessarily accurate. the ittf does not say which blade, brand or model is illegal or otherwise and I think there is no such an approved list of blades either." This is very uninformed. ITTF has declared in the past like that Kreanga Carbon is illegal. As what I have said, you can interpret all you want. Your interpretation will not matter unless it is an official interpretation of the ITTF. " but it does specify the requirements for a blade to be legal. But as already pointed out, in 2.4.5 on the Laws of Table Tennis published by the ittf , it says clear enough; that ' ....., any layer within the blade .... shall be continuous and of even thickness. ' At the least, these blades do not have even thickness with their layers; in fact, they are composed of different layers." I will go back to the arguement of some blades still being sold in the market with fineline wood coverings in the side of the blade, although thinner but still an obvious extension and not a natual part of the wood layer. They are not declared as illegal. "How is interpreting 2.4.5 to say these blades are by definition illegal ' just opinions and wild interpretation ' ? "As what I have stated you can interpret it all you like but unless ITTF declares it as illegal such as the Kreaga carbon, your interpretations are just interpretations. Also, your interpretation of kinda oyt of context. The even and continuous simply tells about the uniformity of the surface, meaning there is no depression or elevated or bulging on any part of the blade. In this case the junction between the frame And the innerwood is continuous due to a very tightly packed assembly. If you run your fingers on the junction it is almost non existent. If again you will try to be too strict with rule then stiga blades with notches on their limba outer plies will be illegal since there are some blades that the outer have junctions even near the middle of the blade head because the upper wood ply is composed of 2 different lba layers attached into one. Although the same wood, it is still a junction. ------------- Independent online TT Product reviewer of XIOM, STIGA, JOOLA, SANWEI, GEWO, AIR, ITC, APEX, YASAKA and ABROS ITTF Level 1 Coaching Course Conductor, ITTF Level 1 Coach |
Posted By: yogi_bear
Date Posted: 07/15/2020 at 5:17am
|
added info. Some Korean NATIONAL paralympic team members are using this blades now. ------------- Independent online TT Product reviewer of XIOM, STIGA, JOOLA, SANWEI, GEWO, AIR, ITC, APEX, YASAKA and ABROS ITTF Level 1 Coaching Course Conductor, ITTF Level 1 Coach |
Posted By: penholderxxx
Date Posted: 07/15/2020 at 5:44am
|
I could have been more careful with my sentence and should have stated that the ittf does not say whether any blade that is produced for sales is illegal or otherwise. I believe there is no certification process where manufacturers have their blades certified as legal and there is no such list as approved blades. correct this if I am wrong. What we have are the rules that are formulated by the ittf regarding the requirements for blades to be legal and the rules are the pronouncements of the ittf. If the rules state that any particular blade does not confirm to the specified requirements, they are said to be illegal. It is in this context when said that the ittf does not declare any blades to be legal or otherwise. Please correct again if wrong. If the Kreagna Carbon blade was declared to be illegal by the ittf, that does not mean that the ittf is to make a declaration on all blades produced. I suspect there must have been quite a discussion then on the blade and if it did not adhere to the requirements, it was only correct for the ittf to make a statement to the effect. no issue there. Fair enough, our interpretations are 'just interpretations', but like your interpretations, they are reasoned, not wild by any stretch. What you are suggesting is that a blade is legal with a part or portion of the playing surface multi layered and part single layered ( or of different number of layers ) ? I guess we are learning all the time. Thanks for your explanations. ------------- Iloveplayingtabletennis |
Posted By: yogi_bear
Date Posted: 07/15/2020 at 6:31am
------------- Independent online TT Product reviewer of XIOM, STIGA, JOOLA, SANWEI, GEWO, AIR, ITC, APEX, YASAKA and ABROS ITTF Level 1 Coaching Course Conductor, ITTF Level 1 Coach |
Posted By: penholderxxx
Date Posted: 07/15/2020 at 8:26am
|
If the manufacturer has indeed consulted the ittf on having a nearly 5mm frame on the perimeter of the blade and the ittf has given its approval, then there is no more issue. We have to accept this design is acceptable and the blade is legal. Truly unfortunate for the KC manufacturer not to have consulted the ittf before its mass production then. A lesson learnt. It will be interesting though how this 5mm wide frame is not viewed as forming part of a playing surface of a blade. Does it not affect the playing characteristics; say, hitting on the centre and hitting on the frame ? Admittedly, it was mentioned that the manufacturer said the inclusion of this frame ' gives additional stiffness or rigidity to the whole blade " and protects it as well and that having this frame is unheard of in today's blades design. Thanks again. ------------- Iloveplayingtabletennis |
Posted By: stiltt
Date Posted: 07/15/2020 at 10:33am
|
The design does not serve any purpose other than attracting attention, they are just stirring the pot with a "LOOK AT ME!" attitude. I understand the strategy because it is so hard for a new company to differentiate themselves in the blade making business. ITTF not giving leeway to new manufacturers would mean favoring the established companies so I am not sure what to think but "double standard" seems written all over this blade. ------------- /forum/topic91512_page1.html#1124698" rel="nofollow - sales - forum_posts.asp?TID=19315" rel="nofollow - feedback |
Posted By: gradge
Date Posted: 07/15/2020 at 1:45pm
| Also interesting that once the rubbers are on the appearance and cool design is largely covered. |
Posted By: Skynet
Date Posted: 07/15/2020 at 1:46pm
Hi yogi, do you happen to know if these players are only testing the blades or do they really intend to use them in official matches? Also: Do you know if Abros already started mass-producing these blades or are there just samples out there so far? Thanks
|
Posted By: Dr.Cho
Date Posted: 07/15/2020 at 3:42pm
|
I would think any "new idea" would be welcomed in the way of enhancing the look or playability of Table tennis, We are so far behind where we could be if we allowed more inventive folks to use their imagination. As far as being continuous, if the woods are together they are continuous.. right? I like the idea. Dr.Cho
|
Posted By: Skynet
Date Posted: 07/15/2020 at 3:54pm
But they are not continuous, that's the point. The top ply consists of two parts, part of the frame and the in diameter reduced actual top ply. The cut between frame and top ply for instance is very visible, and because of this cut, it is not continuous by definition. I am also not against "new ideas", I'd like to stress that, but it is probably for their own good if the company gets the OK from the ITTF before starting mass production, although until a few hours ago the ITTF equipment department in Cologne/ Germany was not aware of these blades. Initial response was that these blades do not pass requirements (see 4. 2.4.5) and that they will contact the company about it...
|
Posted By: stiltt
Date Posted: 07/15/2020 at 4:58pm
------------- /forum/topic91512_page1.html#1124698" rel="nofollow - sales - forum_posts.asp?TID=19315" rel="nofollow - feedback |
Posted By: yogi_bear
Date Posted: 07/15/2020 at 5:01pm
As what I have said, until ITTF declares it officially as illegal opinions are just opinions. I also eager to know. ------------- Independent online TT Product reviewer of XIOM, STIGA, JOOLA, SANWEI, GEWO, AIR, ITC, APEX, YASAKA and ABROS ITTF Level 1 Coaching Course Conductor, ITTF Level 1 Coach |
Posted By: jfolsen
Date Posted: 07/15/2020 at 5:47pm
|
Is the ITTF going to get involved? Probably not, they approve rubber, not blades. Some opponent is going to complain one day, the local umpire/referee will declare it illegal, and hopefully you have a more conventional backup racket. |
Posted By: BH-Man
Date Posted: 07/15/2020 at 5:59pm
|
If ANYONE remembers the BTY VSG series of blades, they will know what I am about to say about CONTINUOUS layers. The distinguishing characteristic about the VSG series was a modification of the handle to "Dampen" the vibrations of the wood, so the player would a more muted softer feel on well struck balls. BTY achieved this by making the entire handle area HOLLOW... and they inserted a long CARBON tube down the middle... and they seprated the blade handle by inserting a couple mm thick rubber ring horizontially accross the handle... thereby making ANOTHER break in the continuous layer(s). By DEFINITION of the ITTF laws of table tennis, such a blade would NOT BE LEGAL for ITTF play... and since natl associations copy/paste ITTF equipment rules as their own, then such a blade would not be tourney legal in many countries. ------------- Korea Foreign Table Tennis Club Search for us on Facebook: koreaforeignttc |
Posted By: BH-Man
Date Posted: 07/15/2020 at 6:03pm
|
Then we could get into some stuff ANDRO pioneered. SUPER CORE CELL (review of a blade and a pic of the tech visually in the link) https://www.megaspin.net/store/default.asp?pid=a-sc-cell-off" rel="nofollow - https://www.megaspin.net/store/default.asp?pid=a-sc-cell-off Since Andro is pretty much hollowing out the handle and injecting layes of FOAM into the thing... then technically that hollowed out area and the foam are NOT CONTINUOUS LAYERS and are technically NON-CONFORMING to the ITTF laws of table tennis for equiipment, and thus many nations TT associations' rules and laws. ------------- Korea Foreign Table Tennis Club Search for us on Facebook: koreaforeignttc |
Posted By: BH-Man
Date Posted: 07/15/2020 at 6:10pm
|
Then if we are in a picky mood... 80% plus of ALL BLADES CURRENTLY MANUFACTURED ARE NON_CONFORMING TO ITTF LAWS OF TABLE TENNIS. Why? 80% of blades have hollowed out handle pieces to reduce weight of the blade and push the balance point of center of weight FORWARD to make it more head heavy and FEEL more powerful at impact, like wielding a HAMMER. Technically, creating a huge open space in the handle violates the integrity of the CONTINUOUS LAYER requirement in the ITTF Laws of Table Tennis and thus the laws of many national TT associations. (A large EMPTY SPACE in what is supposed to be a continuous layer is obviously NOT continuous, thus non-compliant) Yet, I do not see a Black Lives Matter Seattle CHAD ZONE kind of protest of violent police enforcement of these technically non-conforming to the specs of the ITTF Laws of TENNIS blades. I provided the facts and evidence that show what is conforming and not, take it for what it is. If you all wish to have makers get away with what you allow them to and for ITTF to dictate your table tennis life, go right the heck ahead, just do not visit my neighborhood and burn it down is all I ask. ------------- Korea Foreign Table Tennis Club Search for us on Facebook: koreaforeignttc |
Posted By: BH-Man
Date Posted: 07/15/2020 at 6:13pm
|
Also, the BEAST MOD that I advocate, would also technically be non-conforming as well. There is already an open space that makes it non-conforming... so would my addition of straight glue and any reinforcing material, such as paperclips or toothpicks. Anyone not knowing my BEAST MOD... you are basically removing the handle pieces, and filling in the empty space of the handle pieces and throat of the blade if it is also hollow.. you fill it with glue and reinforce it with toothpicks... or paprerclips if you want more weight added low. You do that mod to mitigate the hollowed handle preferences of many blade makers to reduce weight. You do that mod to make the blde feel and act more solid... also easer to whip. ------------- Korea Foreign Table Tennis Club Search for us on Facebook: koreaforeignttc |
Posted By: BH-Man
Date Posted: 07/15/2020 at 6:17pm
Ultimately, jf has got it right hollistically and asks/presents the correct issues. Who is gunna enforce it? How will someone making a decision know? many matches have no umpire... so if an opponent hates on someone's blade/rubbers, they gotta go to the control desk and as the tourney director, who is often the referee, sometimes not, to have the referee examine and make a decision... very often that dude is very busy and the referee is not gunna make the opponent take of the handle pieces to verify it the balde is continuous or not. ------------- Korea Foreign Table Tennis Club Search for us on Facebook: koreaforeignttc |
Posted By: Dr.Cho
Date Posted: 07/16/2020 at 9:32am
|
I thought the continuous layer only applied to the head of the blade. Like the few references mentioned many blades have hollowed or modified handles. Thats where most of my work is done to enhance what a blade can do. |
Posted By: penholderxxx
Date Posted: 07/16/2020 at 8:57pm
|
I thought the continuous layer only applied to the head of the blade. Like the few references mentioned many blades have hollowed or modified handles. Thats where most of my work is done to enhance what a blade can do. - Dr. Cho rule 2.4.5 says,' The blade, any layer within the blade and any layer of covering material or adhesive on a side used for striking the ball shall be continuous and of even thickness. ' If we are to interpret the rule as written and consider the actual words used, it should not be wrong to suggest that the 'side' here refers to the 'head' of the blade which is used to strike the ball. This 'side', 'head', 'area' or 'top' refers to that part of the blade which is also covered with the rubber used for striking the ball. The rule does not mention the handle part of a blade which has additional layers or thicker layers of wood or similar or different materials making the handle bigger and bulkier; compared to the 'head'. Could this be the reason why manufacturers are allowed to hollow out handles of blades as the hollowed out handles still conforms to 2.4.5 ? This is a different issue from that of having a perimeter 'frame' and it is to be seen whether the abros blades will be accepted by referees in ittf sanctioned tournaments or if the ittf will make another statement for this blade. ------------- Iloveplayingtabletennis |
Posted By: AndySmith
Date Posted: 07/17/2020 at 5:15am
I know this is a very US-centric forum, but when you play local leagues then things don't go down like this. What happens is - someone (who has probably just lost to you) finds out that you have been using dodgy equipment. They put in a formal complaint to the league committee, who discuss it at their next meeting. If they decide that you broke the rules (and they'll refer to national and international guidelines), you'll be told that you can't use the equipment in the future, but worse case scenario you'll have your wins scratched. I've never had this happen to me directly, but I've seen it happen to players in my league over the last 10 years with the Kreanga Carbon and frictionless LP. It creates a lot of aggro that persists over several months, rather than just the one-off situations that go on with tournaments. These blades are, by the letter of the law, not legal IMO. How much that matters in practical terms I don't know (i.e. do they infringe the spirit of the law). But where there is doubt, it's always a risk. ------------- This was a great signature until I realised it was overrated. |
Posted By: yogi_bear
Date Posted: 07/19/2020 at 11:11am
|
If i base that on the arguements presented then the flyatt blades from nittaku, the gewo aruna hinoki carbon are illegal too since the have edge guards attached at the edge of the bladeheaf which means are also not continuous even if they are smaller. The arguements are against continuity and eveness right and not the size?? Or people are just nit picking on this brand and turn a blind eye on other brands since tis is a new company? ------------- Independent online TT Product reviewer of XIOM, STIGA, JOOLA, SANWEI, GEWO, AIR, ITC, APEX, YASAKA and ABROS ITTF Level 1 Coaching Course Conductor, ITTF Level 1 Coach |
Posted By: Skynet
Date Posted: 07/19/2020 at 11:58am
Hi Yogi. I can only speak for myself, but why should I be nitpicking and "needlessly" criticize a new, ambitious and obviously creative company? When for example Xiom and later Nexy entered the market I was (and still am) very interested in their products. Questioning the "legality" of these blades has nothing to do with the company being new; don't be ridiculous. As for the Nittaku Flyatt Carbon, yes, from my point of view this blade is also at least borderline illegal, because with this blade you really cannot conclude how the ratio between the wood and the carbon layers is. But that's a different problem. You have mentioned yourself in one post that it would be logical to contact the ITTF before you would go into production of these blades (because the design is pretty new). However, until a few days ago, the ITTF equipment department was not aware of these blades, and based on the information that are available, the initial response was, that these frame blades do not meet the technical requirements of the ITTF. After a follow-up question, they responded the next day that they do not see any real technical advantages of these frame blades. Mrs. Herweg also stressed that she does not think that the company intentionally wanted to create something illegal; she sounded very relaxed. However she also mentioned (for the second time!) that these blades would be illegal and as of right now an umpire would be allowed to reject the blade to be used in an official match. Since the email communication was "private", this cannot be considered an official statement by the ITTF. You are absolutly right in saying that we should wait what the ITTF will officially declare. I was told that they will get in contact with the company about the blades in order to get more information. Possibly the company will have to send samples to the ITTF. If Abros (Kihyun) has already produced hundreds or even thousands of these frame blades and then get told by the ITTF that they would be illegal, than that would be quite a financial loss, wouldn't it? In short, this design violates 4. 2.4.5 "The blade, any layer within the blade and any layer of covering
material or adhesive on a side used for striking the ball shall be
continuous and of even thickness." twice: - the playing surface of the top ply consists of two parts (frame + actual top ply = non-continuous) => Violation No. 1 - the frame is not only the frame; according to the pictures available the core ply gets thicker at the edges, thus creating the frame = uneven thickness of the plies => Violation No. 2
|
Posted By: UpSideDownCarl
Date Posted: 07/19/2020 at 12:38pm
To me, it sounds like there is not much more to be said about the topic of legality after this post. Thanks Skynet. BH Man did make me laugh though. :)
------------- NSA SpyPhone Sending by Telepathy from the Subterranean Workshop |
Posted By: Shifu
Date Posted: 07/19/2020 at 2:25pm
| I asked the ITTF and they said that for now it’s not within rules but the referee decides and that there also are plans for some kind of blade LARC |
Posted By: yogi_bear
Date Posted: 07/19/2020 at 3:11pm
Not enough. ITTF and Abros are also discussing this and has not yet reached a final decision. I, myself, would like to also know the verdict officially. ------------- Independent online TT Product reviewer of XIOM, STIGA, JOOLA, SANWEI, GEWO, AIR, ITC, APEX, YASAKA and ABROS ITTF Level 1 Coaching Course Conductor, ITTF Level 1 Coach |
Posted By: NextLevel
Date Posted: 07/21/2020 at 5:56am
This is fair, but with all due respect, you really should apologize to people to whom you ascribed all kinds of motives for simply reading and logically interpreting the ITTF regulations. We all know that the ITTF doesn't always enforce regulations (serving) and that there is a huge amateur community that plays with unregulated equipment (some people boost with VoCs or speed glue outside competition). Also national associations can make their own rules. But if we follow the ITTF rules, blades with that construction are illegal. It doesn't matter who makes them, and just because we don't know all the examples doesn't mean that they aren't illegal. ------------- https://youtu.be/jhO4K_yFhh8?t=115" rel="nofollow - I like putting heavy topspin on the ball... Cybershape Carbon FH/BH: H3P 41D. Lumberjack TT, not for lovers of beautiful strokes. No time to train... |
Posted By: yogi_bear
Date Posted: 07/22/2020 at 3:47am
To be fair i did not single you out but rather i am just stating out an opinion. I can confirm what Claudia said because I emailed her and she replied. Their interpretations of a frame guard or edge guard is the one that stands and I have said before unless they place an official statement that this is not legal, which officially now is NOT, then it is not legal. I did say about the consultation on the premise that they did made consultations according to thrm. It is not on ky side to question them just accept them in good faith. I, myself said it is logical to consult the legalities before producing such blades and yes it is quite a loss and they are back to the drawing board.
------------- Independent online TT Product reviewer of XIOM, STIGA, JOOLA, SANWEI, GEWO, AIR, ITC, APEX, YASAKA and ABROS ITTF Level 1 Coaching Course Conductor, ITTF Level 1 Coach |
Posted By: yogi_bear
Date Posted: 07/22/2020 at 3:54am
I did not specifically point out to a certain forumer but if it suits your satisfaction i ask for apology on the feelings i have ran over with direct statements. Though i have seen worse statements and criticisms here in the forum to me and other people but we took it wholeheartedly and never asked for one. ------------- Independent online TT Product reviewer of XIOM, STIGA, JOOLA, SANWEI, GEWO, AIR, ITC, APEX, YASAKA and ABROS ITTF Level 1 Coaching Course Conductor, ITTF Level 1 Coach |
Posted By: dual700
Date Posted: 07/24/2020 at 11:51am
Yogi, thanks for the review, I really enjoy your reviews.  However, how come you tested 2 blades with different rubbers? When I test a new blade(s), I simply move the same rubbers, to eliminate variables, IMO.
|
Posted By: penholderxxx
Date Posted: 07/24/2020 at 11:10pm
' Yogi, thanks for the review, I really enjoy your reviews.  ' - dual700 I will second this and I would say Yogi's reviews are informative and meaningful. Thks Yogi. ------------- Iloveplayingtabletennis |
Posted By: yogi_bear
Date Posted: 07/25/2020 at 11:03am
They are just too different to compare. If they belong in the same series and have minor differences, i would use the same rubbers. ------------- Independent online TT Product reviewer of XIOM, STIGA, JOOLA, SANWEI, GEWO, AIR, ITC, APEX, YASAKA and ABROS ITTF Level 1 Coaching Course Conductor, ITTF Level 1 Coach |
Posted By: dual700
Date Posted: 07/25/2020 at 2:41pm
But you did compare them hence my comment  "This is a better looping blade compared to the C50 Frame blade because it has the arc, control and feel that makes you loop the ball easily. The weight of the blade goes towards the head part and it might make some people uncomfortable but that is the catch. The arc was about 2 inches higher than that of the C50. This is a great looping blade that is more on a technical side. This is much more versatile than a lot of blades I know because it acts like an all around blade for short pushes or drop shots, blocking or smashing but has a speed of an offensive blade. The A50 might not be as thick as the C50, but it has power and speed that you would need. I would say looping is the best feature for the A50 Frame blade." Anyway, thank you so much again.
 |