OOAK Table Tennis Forum


A truly International Table Tennis Community for both Defensive and Offensive styles!
Live Table Tennis Videos Table Tennis News Live OOAK Forum Links About OOAK Table Tennis Forum OOAK Forum Memory
It is currently 22 Jul 2017, 18:26


Don't want to see any advertising? Become a member and login, and you'll never see an ad again!



All times are UTC + 9:30 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 44 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3
Author Message
PostPosted: 18 Jul 2014, 05:21 
Offline
Senior member

Joined: 13 Feb 2009, 04:33
Posts: 186
Has thanked: 20 times
Been thanked: 0 time
Kees wrote:
Sanwei Code


Thx, since its so cheap, I'll surely give it a try :D

_________________
"Si se imagina, se puede ^^"

Galaxy T-11+
FH: Donic Bluefire M3
BH: Donic Bluefire M3


Top
 Profile  
 

PostPosted: 07 Aug 2014, 17:08 
Offline
Super User

Joined: 11 Mar 2013, 21:12
Posts: 849
Has thanked: 5 times
Been thanked: 37 times
I've played enough with different LPs and thought through lessons learned that an analysis of the differences will probably be accurate.

Spin reversal (vs geometry)
For the most part for all current LPs, reversal entirely on stroke/speed against the surface than some innate property of the rubber.

They all share the same geometry: the 1.1 ratio cylinder, the biggest diff being how tightly packed. The softer/tackier rubber compounds closer together will have a bit less reverse potential but there's order magnitude difference in friction between contacting the sides vs the "top-corner". Thus every rubber has its range of modest friction against the tops, to low friction against the top edge, to medium friction against the sides.

IMO the confusion here lies when players evaluate LPs against each other with the same stroke. So a flexible (easy to bend) pip will be in low-friction range with a light chop, while a stiffer pip will barely bend and be in the modest friction range. Same for a heavier chopper who'll think the stiff pip reverses more than the flex one which'll be in the bent/medium-friction range. This also isn't a one-dimensional problem because some players evaluate more for chop/block motions rather than distance/stroked chops, and some still have fwd/high-throw chops and some vertical/low-throw strokes.

Contrast this vs frictionless LPs, which will have much lower friction throughout the range, ie be less effected by how much bending takes place. These will be easier to use and generally have more reversal throughout.

The main takeaway here is that comparison which don't control for these vars aren't terribly useful and might as well be arbitrary for anyone but that given player.

Rubber compound type

Just as traditional chinese vs euro/jap inverted has its own characteristics (chinese tackier natural rubber vs more elastic synthetics) there some difference between their respective LPs since they're generally made with similar "kind" of compounds as the inverted.

This presents some parallels like "mechanical elasticity" of the pips, but their function is entirely different since this usefulness for top-top rallies isn't the same for reversing (or generating) spin with pip sides.

Principles would dictate that all things equal grippy but not tacky pips reverse more on blocks, while tackiness helps stop the ball and turn the spin around when the sides are engaged. The popular Japanese chopping pips tend to be soft to absorb speed and bend easily for the sides to grip. Meanwhile harder pips provide better attacks and reversal on active strokes into the ball, allowing greater range of strokes at the table using different parts of the pip.

Also worth noting is that just as the compounds for chinese inverted topsheets have changed over the years to become more elastic and less tacky (for the same models) the same changes are likely for their LP sheets. Another related issue in the same vein is that chinese LPs are notoriously inconsistent between batches not only in compound specifics but actual mold shape. Eg. some Globe 979, DF 1615 are flat and some are texture topped.

Sponge
There generally greater variety of sponge used in LPs than inverted (all max elastic), and I believe most of the more drastic "differences" users detect between them are due to sponge rather than inherent top-sheet characteristics which we've seen depend more on the stroke used.

For example, the ubiquitous Palio 531A is middle of the road chinese LP in OX but comes a fairly fast 0.7mm sponge that makes it much more offensive (and hard to chop on even medium blade). Contrast to inelastic foamy 1.0mm+ sponges which absorb impact and are slower despite the thickness.

Without sponge, the pips "break" more drastically on an angled chop and the intersections between the ranges above become more distinct. But without the moveable backing, it's also harder for them to bend over completely and the low-friction range is extended.

Thus the easiest way to engage the pip sides (if such thing is desirable, for most friction) is a soft/flex pip on a soft thickish sponge.

Ribbed vs flat top

There was also some discussion on the first page of ribbed vs smooth. This diff isn't going to matter on any stroke that bends the pips (ever moderate contact at an angle). For everything else consider that total friction is a function of contact surface given equal friction-coefficient. On contact from an oblique angle (ie light brush shot) a ribbed surface (with parts sticking out) is going to present more surface area, whereas for a shot parallel into the pips it will present less (the sticking-out parts are less surface than a flat one) so it will reverse spin more on blocks.

Thus the answer here is that it depends on how it's played. Flat surface will produce more no-spin rather than reversal on pure blocks, etc. To apply the info above, this changes on chop-blocks which bend the pips somewhat and this distinction goes away (and therefore any statement about ribbed vs flat when evaluated with a chop-block is pointless).

Pip orientation

This shouldn't be significant, ie placebo effect. Each pip interacts with the ball individually, and the area of interaction will always be a circle which contains on average the same number of pips regardless of orientation.

Conclusion

In terms of topsheets, most of the current chinese LPs tend to be more similar than different. There are some minor distinctions like textured vs flat top, softness, and packing closeness (388-1/979/1615 are sparse, Neptune/531A denser, 755 in between, etc), but how these effect the game is more closely related to the player's stroke than any inherent "reversal" of the rubber. If anything, the great variety of sponge backing (esp standard vs foamy) is what makes for the significant variations in impressions.

In light of all this, EJs looking for the "perfect" pip to supplement their existing strokes can't depend much on other's reviews, but for new users just about anything works with some adaptation. Just take care not to get an harder/elastic attacking sponge for a defensive game.


Last edited by agenthex on 04 Nov 2014, 09:12, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 07 Aug 2014, 19:55 
Offline
Dark Knight
Dark Knight
User avatar

Joined: 13 Dec 2006, 12:34
Posts: 31310
Location: Adelaide, AU
Has thanked: 1438 times
Been thanked: 902 times
Blade: Trinity Carbon
FH: Victas VS > 401
BH: Dornenglanz OX
agenthex wrote:
I've played enough with different LPs and thought through lessons learned that an analysis of the differences will probably be accurate.

Spin reversal (vs geometry)
For the most part for all current LPs, reversal entirely on stroke/speed against the surface than some innate property of the rubber.

They all share the same geometry: the 1.1 ratio cylinder, the biggest diff being how tightly packed. The softer/tackier rubber compounds closer together will have a bit less reverse potential but there's order magnitude difference in friction between contacting the sides vs the "top-corner". Thus every rubber has its range of modest friction against the tops, to low friction against the top edge, to medium friction against the sides.

IMO the confusion here lies when players evaluate LPs against each other with the same stroke. So a flexible (easy to bend) pip will be in low-friction range with a light chop, while a stiffer pip will barely bend and be in the modest friction range. Same for a heavier chopper who'll think the stiff pip reverses more than the flex one which'll be in the bent/medium-friction range. This also isn't a one-dimensional problem because some players evaluate more for chop/block motions rather than distance/stroked chops, and some still have fwd/high-throw chops and some vertical/low-throw strokes.

Contrast this vs frictionless LPs, which will have much lower friction throughout the range, ie be less effected by how much bending takes place. These will be easier to use and generally have more reversal throughout.

The main takeaway here is that comparison which don't control for these vars aren't terribly useful and might as well be arbitrary for anyone but that given player.

Rubber compound type

Just as traditional chinese vs euro/jap inverted has its own characteristics (chinese tackier natural rubber vs more elastic synthetics) there some difference between their respective LPs since they're generally made with similar "kind" of compounds as the inverted.

This presents some parallels like "mechanical elasticity" of the pips, but their function is entirely different since this usefulness for top-top rallies isn't the same for reversing (or generating) spin with pip sides.

Principles would dictate that all things equal japanese pips reverse more on blocks but their elasticity/springiness can generate more spin on harder strokes (similar to inverted), but I haven't tried enough japanese LPs to validate this broadly.

Also worth noting is that just as the compounds for chinese inverted topsheets have changed over the years to become more elastic and less tacky (for the same models) the same changes are likely for their LP sheets. Another related issue in the same vein is that chinese LPs are notoriously inconsistent between batches not only in compound specifics but actual mold shape. Eg. some Globe 979, DF 1615 are flat and some are texture topped.

Sponge
There generally greater variety of sponge used in LPs than inverted (all max elastic), and I believe most of the more drastic "differences" users detect between them are due to sponge rather than inherent top-sheet characteristics which we've seen depend more on the stroke used.

For example, the ubiquitous Palio 531A is middle of the road chinese LP in OX but comes a fairly fast 0.7mm sponge that makes it much more offensive (and hard to chop on even medium blade). Contrast to inelastic foamy 1.0mm+ sponges which absorb impact and are slower despite the thickness.

Without sponge, the pips "break" more drastically on an angled chop and the intersections between the ranges above become more distinct. But without the moveable backing, it's also harder for them to bend over completely and the low-friction range is extended.

Thus the easiest way to engage the pip sides (if such thing is desirable, for most friction) is a soft/flex pip on a soft thickish sponge.

Ribbed vs flat top

There was also some discussion on the first page of ribbed vs smooth. This diff isn't going to matter on any stroke that bends the pips (ever moderate contact at an angle). For everything else consider that total friction is a function of contact surface given equal friction-coefficient. On contact from an oblique angle (ie light brush shot) a ribbed surface (with parts sticking out) is going to present more surface area, whereas for a shot parallel into the pips it will present less (the sticking-out parts are less surface than a flat one) so it will reverse spin more on blocks.

Thus the answer here is that it depends on how it's played. Flat surface will produce more no-spin rather than reversal on pure blocks, etc. To apply the info above, this changes on chop-blocks which bend the pips somewhat and this distinction goes away (and therefore any statement about ribbed vs flat when evaluated with a chop-block is pointless).

Pip orientation

This shouldn't be significant, ie placebo effect. Each pip interacts with the ball individually, and the area of interaction will always be a circle which contains on average the same number of pips regardless of orientation.

Conclusion

In terms of topsheets, most of the current chinese LPs tend to be more similar than different. There are some minor distinctions like textured vs flat top, softness, and packing closeness (388-1/979/1615 are sparse, Neptune/531A denser, 755 in between, etc), but how these effect the game is more closely related to the player's stroke than any inherent "reversal" of the rubber. If anything, the great variety of sponge backing (esp standard vs foamy) is what makes for the significant variations in impressions.

In light of all this, EJs looking for the "perfect" pip to supplement their existing strokes can't depend much on other's reviews, but for new users just about anything works with some adaptation. Just take care not to get an harder/elastic attacking sponge for a defensive game.

Very insighfull post agenthex, that makes a lot of sense! :clap:

_________________
OOAK Table Tennis Shop | Table Tennis Reviews / Articles | Table Guide | Robot Guide | Re-Impact Blades
Setup1: Re-Impact Smart, Viper OX, Victas VS 401 Setup2: Re-Impact Barath, Dtecs OX, TSP Triple Spin Chop 1.0mm Setup3: Re-Impact Dark Knight, Hellfire OX, 999 Turbo
Recent Articles: Tenergy Alternatives | Tenergy Rubbers Compared | Re-Impact User Guide | Novel way to glue OX pips


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 17 Feb 2015, 19:50 
Offline
Super User

Joined: 17 Feb 2015, 08:29
Posts: 469
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 39 times
Blade: Butterfly Def2
FH: Tibhar Evolution MXS
BH: Joola Octopus 0.5mm
i have same problem... can't decide what pip i should use :S
i generally play all kind of strokes, it depends on opponent
in my league i have like 50% topspinners and 50% allrounders (i didnt mention anti / pimples)
sometimes i need to deal with low spin balls where grippy pips are easier to use (rotation gives u control)
sometimes i need to deal with high spin balls where i dont need to add any
i tested more or less 20 pips (mostly OX cause they give me most control)

Palio ck531a OX has the most spin reversal (stiff and low grip)

TSP Curl P1R OX has the most in adding spin and sensitive to spin (flex and high grip)

because i need all, good spin reversal and good adding to spin to vary
after reading post maybe i will try Dawei 388D (i tested only 388D-1 and it's not good to adding to spin)

for example currently using tsp p3 alpha R ox have medium reversal and low adding to spin

i think soft and flexible pimples with low to medium grip should be best
any proposals ?

_________________
Butterfly Defence 2 / Spinlord Dornenglanz OX / Yasaka Rakza 7 2.2mm -178g


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 17 Feb 2015, 20:01 
Offline
Senior member

Joined: 06 Feb 2015, 14:37
Posts: 136
Location: Port Huron, MI
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 7 times
Well the answer is simple... take one of each, cut them in half, and now you just have to hit with top of the paddle with the one that generates spin, and the bottom of the blade with the one that is closest to "no friction". There, problem solved! (BMFG)

_________________
Ratt Factory "ghost" (oversize kiri, balsa, kiri) innova UL/ Tibhar Grass D.tecs
Ratt Factory "mouse" (mahogany, kiri, kiri, kiri, mahogany) T05/ giant dragon talon
Tibhar Furious/ juic 999/ Tibhar Grass D.Tecs
Yasaka balsa plus/ RITC 837/ RITC 755 (friendship)
Newgy 1040 robot


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 17 Feb 2015, 20:15 
Offline
Super User

Joined: 17 Feb 2015, 08:29
Posts: 469
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 39 times
Blade: Butterfly Def2
FH: Tibhar Evolution MXS
BH: Joola Octopus 0.5mm
cgswss wrote:
Well the answer is simple... take one of each, cut them in half, and now you just have to hit with top of the paddle with the one that generates spin, and the bottom of the blade with the one that is closest to "no friction". There, problem solved! (BMFG)

so p1r with half of pips made by lacquer :lol:

_________________
Butterfly Defence 2 / Spinlord Dornenglanz OX / Yasaka Rakza 7 2.2mm -178g


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 18 Feb 2015, 05:42 
Offline
Joo Too
Joo Too
User avatar

Joined: 15 Dec 2008, 18:31
Posts: 3113
Location: Dendermonde, Belgium
Has thanked: 782 times
Been thanked: 343 times
Blade: BTY Joo Se Hyuk ST
FH: DHS Hurricane 3-50 Soft R
BH: TSP Curl P1-R 1.5 B
garbol wrote:
because i need all, good spin reversal and good adding to spin to vary
after reading post maybe i will try Dawei 388D (i tested only 388D-1 and it's not good to adding to spin)


i think soft and flexible pimples with low to medium grip should be best
any proposals ?


You want your pip to have two properties that are the complete opposite of each other. You'll be looking for a long time if you want both to be good.

If you want something that approaches what you want, then Dtecs is the one. It is, however, low in control.

_________________
There's always stuff to improve!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 18 Jan 2016, 06:53 
Offline
Full member

Joined: 27 Mar 2012, 01:42
Posts: 55
Location: Netherlands
Has thanked: 3 times
Been thanked: 1 time
I had a little of a search myself but I cannot do without the curl p1r anymore. All other LP's... I can play with them but not nearly as well. Especially chopping

_________________
Setup: Donic Defplay Senso / Yasaka Rakza 9 2.0mm / TSP Curl P1R OX
2nd setup: Donic Defplay Senso / Yasaka Rakza X 2.0mm / TSP Curl P1R 1mm


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 18 Jan 2016, 12:59 
Offline
Ping Pong Diplomat
Ping Pong Diplomat
User avatar

Joined: 18 Feb 2010, 21:44
Posts: 1097
Location: Canada
Has thanked: 224 times
Been thanked: 254 times
Blade: Victas KMO
FH: Yasaka Rising Dragon
BH: Cloud and Fog III
agenthex wrote:
I've played enough with different LPs and thought through lessons learned that an analysis of the differences will probably be accurate.

Spin reversal (vs geometry)
For the most part for all current LPs, reversal entirely on stroke/speed against the surface than some innate property of the rubber.

They all share the same geometry: the 1.1 ratio cylinder, the biggest diff being how tightly packed. The softer/tackier rubber compounds closer together will have a bit less reverse potential but there's order magnitude difference in friction between contacting the sides vs the "top-corner". Thus every rubber has its range of modest friction against the tops, to low friction against the top edge, to medium friction against the sides.

IMO the confusion here lies when players evaluate LPs against each other with the same stroke. So a flexible (easy to bend) pip will be in low-friction range with a light chop, while a stiffer pip will barely bend and be in the modest friction range. Same for a heavier chopper who'll think the stiff pip reverses more than the flex one which'll be in the bent/medium-friction range. This also isn't a one-dimensional problem because some players evaluate more for chop/block motions rather than distance/stroked chops, and some still have fwd/high-throw chops and some vertical/low-throw strokes.

Contrast this vs frictionless LPs, which will have much lower friction throughout the range, ie be less effected by how much bending takes place. These will be easier to use and generally have more reversal throughout.

The main takeaway here is that comparison which don't control for these vars aren't terribly useful and might as well be arbitrary for anyone but that given player.

Rubber compound type

Just as traditional chinese vs euro/jap inverted has its own characteristics (chinese tackier natural rubber vs more elastic synthetics) there some difference between their respective LPs since they're generally made with similar "kind" of compounds as the inverted.

This presents some parallels like "mechanical elasticity" of the pips, but their function is entirely different since this usefulness for top-top rallies isn't the same for reversing (or generating) spin with pip sides.

Principles would dictate that all things equal grippy but not tacky pips reverse more on blocks, while tackiness helps stop the ball and turn the spin around when the sides are engaged. The popular Japanese chopping pips tend to be soft to absorb speed and bend easily for the sides to grip. Meanwhile harder pips provide better attacks and reversal on active strokes into the ball, allowing greater range of strokes at the table using different parts of the pip.

Also worth noting is that just as the compounds for chinese inverted topsheets have changed over the years to become more elastic and less tacky (for the same models) the same changes are likely for their LP sheets. Another related issue in the same vein is that chinese LPs are notoriously inconsistent between batches not only in compound specifics but actual mold shape. Eg. some Globe 979, DF 1615 are flat and some are texture topped.

Sponge
There generally greater variety of sponge used in LPs than inverted (all max elastic), and I believe most of the more drastic "differences" users detect between them are due to sponge rather than inherent top-sheet characteristics which we've seen depend more on the stroke used.

For example, the ubiquitous Palio 531A is middle of the road chinese LP in OX but comes a fairly fast 0.7mm sponge that makes it much more offensive (and hard to chop on even medium blade). Contrast to inelastic foamy 1.0mm+ sponges which absorb impact and are slower despite the thickness.

Without sponge, the pips "break" more drastically on an angled chop and the intersections between the ranges above become more distinct. But without the moveable backing, it's also harder for them to bend over completely and the low-friction range is extended.

Thus the easiest way to engage the pip sides (if such thing is desirable, for most friction) is a soft/flex pip on a soft thickish sponge.

Ribbed vs flat top

There was also some discussion on the first page of ribbed vs smooth. This diff isn't going to matter on any stroke that bends the pips (ever moderate contact at an angle). For everything else consider that total friction is a function of contact surface given equal friction-coefficient. On contact from an oblique angle (ie light brush shot) a ribbed surface (with parts sticking out) is going to present more surface area, whereas for a shot parallel into the pips it will present less (the sticking-out parts are less surface than a flat one) so it will reverse spin more on blocks.

Thus the answer here is that it depends on how it's played. Flat surface will produce more no-spin rather than reversal on pure blocks, etc. To apply the info above, this changes on chop-blocks which bend the pips somewhat and this distinction goes away (and therefore any statement about ribbed vs flat when evaluated with a chop-block is pointless).

Pip orientation

This shouldn't be significant, ie placebo effect. Each pip interacts with the ball individually, and the area of interaction will always be a circle which contains on average the same number of pips regardless of orientation.

Conclusion

In terms of topsheets, most of the current chinese LPs tend to be more similar than different. There are some minor distinctions like textured vs flat top, softness, and packing closeness (388-1/979/1615 are sparse, Neptune/531A denser, 755 in between, etc), but how these effect the game is more closely related to the player's stroke than any inherent "reversal" of the rubber. If anything, the great variety of sponge backing (esp standard vs foamy) is what makes for the significant variations in impressions.

In light of all this, EJs looking for the "perfect" pip to supplement their existing strokes can't depend much on other's reviews, but for new users just about anything works with some adaptation. Just take care not to get an harder/elastic attacking sponge for a defensive game.

....this is a brilliant post. Well done sir. Accurate and clear.

Sent from my HTC One M9 using Tapatalk


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 09 Jul 2016, 06:50 
Offline
Super User
User avatar

Joined: 13 Jun 2017, 00:31
Posts: 236
Location: Maryland, USA
Has thanked: 4 times
Been thanked: 33 times
Blade: Premade Bty
FH: Inverted Red
BH: Inverted Black
vanjr wrote:
Here is a book I could write:
"Complete Idiots Guide to LP for Choppers"

Text- Feint long 2 or TSP Curl P1-r

the end.

The book for blockers/LP attack would be MUCH longer.

Uh, so could I get feint long 2 as a beginner (assuming i get past the understanding spin phase)? And also, how would it perform when pushing? And are chops spinny against topspin compared to curl p1r?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 08 Feb 2017, 20:52 
Offline
A.D.D.I.C.T.T.
A.D.D.I.C.T.T.
User avatar

Joined: 09 Nov 2012, 23:15
Posts: 1656
Location: Newcastle, UK
Has thanked: 153 times
Been thanked: 133 times
Blade: BTY Innershield
FH: BTY Tenergy 64 (2.1)
BH: TSP Spectol (1.7)
How does Dawei 388D compare with Curl P1-R?

_________________
[Old Gear/Other Setups] DHS Power G7, Adidas P7, Galaxy Mars v2, TSP Curl P1-R, Friendship 802, Butterfly Innershield, Xiom Omega IV Elite, Stiga Chop n' Drive, Butterfly Tenergy 64, Butterfly Tenergy 80, Butterfly Tenergy 05, Stiga Calibra LT Sound, Stiga Calibra Tour S, Tibhar Grass D.TecS
===========================
My blog: "Learning to play: as a modern defender": http://ooakforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=58&t=22254


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 09 Feb 2017, 07:28 
Online
Iron Pips
Iron Pips
User avatar

Joined: 14 Jun 2010, 22:07
Posts: 3361
Location: Göteborg, Sweden
Has thanked: 492 times
Been thanked: 254 times
Blade: DMS Revolution
FH: DHS Hurricane 3 NEO
BH: DMS Mega Block 1.5
dunc wrote:
How does Dawei 388D compare with Curl P1-R?

Much easier to chop with, loads of back spin without having to chop very hard, linear and not as deceptive as Curl perhaps, but more passive reversal and therefore more forgiving. One of the best chopping LPs to start with.

_________________
My blog: Def-attack's attempts to find balance between defence/attack | Serving techniques and strategy section


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 09 Feb 2017, 08:35 
Offline
A.D.D.I.C.T.T.
A.D.D.I.C.T.T.
User avatar

Joined: 09 Nov 2012, 23:15
Posts: 1656
Location: Newcastle, UK
Has thanked: 153 times
Been thanked: 133 times
Blade: BTY Innershield
FH: BTY Tenergy 64 (2.1)
BH: TSP Spectol (1.7)
What kind of feel when pushing DA?

_________________
[Old Gear/Other Setups] DHS Power G7, Adidas P7, Galaxy Mars v2, TSP Curl P1-R, Friendship 802, Butterfly Innershield, Xiom Omega IV Elite, Stiga Chop n' Drive, Butterfly Tenergy 64, Butterfly Tenergy 80, Butterfly Tenergy 05, Stiga Calibra LT Sound, Stiga Calibra Tour S, Tibhar Grass D.TecS
===========================
My blog: "Learning to play: as a modern defender": http://ooakforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=58&t=22254


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 09 Feb 2017, 13:31 
Offline
Super User
User avatar

Joined: 14 Aug 2016, 15:12
Posts: 348
Has thanked: 23 times
Been thanked: 57 times
Blade: Palio TCT
FH: Palio CJ8000
BH: Kokutaku Tuple 110
Some compressed reviews and description of character can be read here (in German): http://www.noppen-test.de/forum/viewtopic.php?t=27921 and here http://forum.tt-news.de/showthread.php?t=140976

I am not on LP (yet) but to me it seems to be quite useful, especially together with the information found in this thread.

_________________
Red is blogging here >> http://ooakforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=58&t=30522


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 44 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3




All times are UTC + 9:30 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Copyright 2012 OOAK Table Tennis Forum. The information on this site cannot be reused without written permission.

Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group




Don't forget to 'LIKE' our forum on Facebook if you enjoy the content: