Alex Table Tennis - MyTableTennis.NET Homepage
  Help Desk Help Desk  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Abros Blades + ABS Ball - New Korean Company!
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Abros Blades + ABS Ball - New Korean Company!

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12
Author
yogi_bear View Drop Down
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 11/25/2004
Location: Philippines
Status: Offline
Points: 6765
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote yogi_bear Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07/15/2020 at 5:01pm
Originally posted by Skynet Skynet wrote:

Originally posted by Dr.Cho Dr.Cho wrote:

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


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 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...

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
Back to Top
Sponsored Links


Back to Top
jfolsen View Drop Down
Silver Member
Silver Member


Joined: 03/15/2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 877
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote jfolsen Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post 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.
Back to Top
BH-Man View Drop Down
Premier Member
Premier Member
Avatar

Joined: 02/05/2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 4825
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote BH-Man Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post 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
Back to Top
BH-Man View Drop Down
Premier Member
Premier Member
Avatar

Joined: 02/05/2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 4825
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote BH-Man Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post 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)


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
Back to Top
BH-Man View Drop Down
Premier Member
Premier Member
Avatar

Joined: 02/05/2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 4825
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote BH-Man Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post 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
Back to Top
BH-Man View Drop Down
Premier Member
Premier Member
Avatar

Joined: 02/05/2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 4825
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote BH-Man Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post 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
Back to Top
BH-Man View Drop Down
Premier Member
Premier Member
Avatar

Joined: 02/05/2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 4825
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote BH-Man Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07/15/2020 at 6:17pm
Originally posted by jfolsen jfolsen wrote:

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.

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
Back to Top
Dr.Cho View Drop Down
Super Member
Super Member
Avatar

Joined: 10/07/2012
Location: FLORIDA
Status: Offline
Points: 304
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Dr.Cho Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post 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.

Back to Top
penholderxxx View Drop Down
Super Member
Super Member


Joined: 09/19/2016
Location: Malaysia
Status: Online
Points: 354
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote penholderxxx Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post 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
Back to Top
AndySmith View Drop Down
Premier Member
Premier Member
Avatar

Joined: 11/12/2008
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 4348
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote AndySmith Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07/17/2020 at 5:15am
Originally posted by BH-Man BH-Man wrote:

Originally posted by jfolsen jfolsen wrote:

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.

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.

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.
Back to Top
yogi_bear View Drop Down
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 11/25/2004
Location: Philippines
Status: Offline
Points: 6765
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote yogi_bear Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post 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
Back to Top
Skynet View Drop Down
Member
Member
Avatar

Joined: 10/22/2019
Location: Germany
Status: Offline
Points: 95
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote Skynet Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07/19/2020 at 11:58am
Originally posted by yogi_bear yogi_bear wrote:

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? 



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


Edited by Skynet - 07/19/2020 at 2:28pm
Back to Top
UpSideDownCarl View Drop Down
Beginner
Beginner
Avatar

Joined: 12/08/2017
Location: Brooklyn
Status: Offline
Points: 7
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote UpSideDownCarl Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07/19/2020 at 12:38pm
Originally posted by Skynet Skynet wrote:

....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.

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.  :)


Edited by UpSideDownCarl - 07/19/2020 at 12:40pm
NSA SpyPhone Sending by Telepathy from the Subterranean Workshop
Back to Top
Fabian1890 View Drop Down
Super Member
Super Member
Avatar

Joined: 01/15/2017
Location: Germany
Status: Offline
Points: 325
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Fabian1890 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post 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

Edited by Fabian1890 - 07/19/2020 at 2:26pm
Back to Top
yogi_bear View Drop Down
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 11/25/2004
Location: Philippines
Status: Offline
Points: 6765
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote yogi_bear Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07/19/2020 at 3:11pm
Originally posted by Fabian1890 Fabian1890 wrote:

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

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
Back to Top
NextLevel View Drop Down
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 12/15/2011
Location: Somewhere Good
Status: Online
Points: 13192
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote NextLevel Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07/21/2020 at 5:56am
Originally posted by yogi_bear yogi_bear wrote:

Originally posted by Fabian1890 Fabian1890 wrote:

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

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.

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.
I like putting heavy topspin on the ball...
Carbonado 245
FH: D09C 1.9 R/B
BH: D09C 1.9 B/R
Lumberjack TT, not for lovers of beautiful strokes.
Back to Top
yogi_bear View Drop Down
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 11/25/2004
Location: Philippines
Status: Offline
Points: 6765
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote yogi_bear Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07/22/2020 at 3:47am
Originally posted by Skynet Skynet wrote:

Originally posted by yogi_bear yogi_bear wrote:

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? 



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

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. 


Edited by yogi_bear - 07/22/2020 at 3:55am
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
Back to Top
yogi_bear View Drop Down
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 11/25/2004
Location: Philippines
Status: Offline
Points: 6765
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote yogi_bear Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07/22/2020 at 3:54am
Originally posted by NextLevel NextLevel wrote:

Originally posted by yogi_bear yogi_bear wrote:

Originally posted by Fabian1890 Fabian1890 wrote:

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

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.

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.
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
Back to Top
dual700 View Drop Down
Gold Member
Gold Member
Avatar

Joined: 08/11/2009
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1520
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote dual700 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07/24/2020 at 11:51am
Yogi, thanks for the review, I really enjoy your reviews. Clap

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.
Back to Top
penholderxxx View Drop Down
Super Member
Super Member


Joined: 09/19/2016
Location: Malaysia
Status: Online
Points: 354
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote penholderxxx Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07/24/2020 at 11:10pm
' Yogi, thanks for the review, I really enjoy your reviews. Clap ' - dual700


 I will second this and I would say Yogi's reviews are informative and meaningful. Thks Yogi.

Iloveplayingtabletennis
Back to Top
yogi_bear View Drop Down
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 11/25/2004
Location: Philippines
Status: Offline
Points: 6765
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote yogi_bear Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07/25/2020 at 11:03am
Originally posted by dual700 dual700 wrote:

Yogi, thanks for the review, I really enjoy your reviews. Clap

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.
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
Back to Top
dual700 View Drop Down
Gold Member
Gold Member
Avatar

Joined: 08/11/2009
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1520
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote dual700 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07/25/2020 at 2:41pm
Originally posted by yogi_bear yogi_bear wrote:

Originally posted by dual700 dual700 wrote:

Yogi, thanks for the review, I really enjoy your reviews. Clap

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.
They are just too different to compare. If they belong in the same series and have minor differences, i would use the same rubbers. 
But you did compare them hence my comment Big smile

"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.ClapThumbs Up


Edited by dual700 - 07/25/2020 at 2:42pm
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12
  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 0.078 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 ©2003-2020 Alex Table Tennis Ltd. All rights reserved.