OOAK Table Tennis Forum

I fully support many of your concerns Chris. I don't believe this change in rule is being proposed to make the ITTF list standard, just to target the FLP brigade whose style remains unpopular amongst the masses. 75% majority seems high but like you, I don't doubt its failure.

I do think it makes sense to have a central ITTF list that is followed by all you can't dispute the logic behind this at all - but only if that list makes sense. The chopping and changing of approval - and by this I'm specifically citing the TTMaster rubbers from last season - makes trying to enforce this list a joke. Once approved, a rubber should remain approved. So if it carries the ITTF logo it's fine to use forever - that would surely get rid of the concerns I have and maybe put some pressure on the ITTF to get their rulings right the first time around. Right now, they approve it then change their view 6 months on, hardly a situation that us local league players can cope with, or financially afford.

Good luck with the anti. You will be OK with it I'm certain, but not great because the angles are different to what you know by instinct. I remember my trials well, playing decent and tricky shots then suddenly dumping into the net or going long. It felt unpredictable, but then from just a brief hit that should be expected. I'm certain given time you can adapt as many other players have done. Just don't have too many expectations for the weekend and enjoy trying it out.

_________________
Tango Ultra 2mm black, DMS Storkraft 1.6mm red, DMS Invictus
Well done bat!

Richard - I don't believe that the ETTA can target specific rubbers? Surely the only way they can remove FLP is to do what other associations have done and "follow the ITTF list"?

Anyway, we'll see the outcome from the meeting in June, but I can't see how they can single out a specific type of rubber and "ban it". Not even the ITTF could do that, so they just made it "unapproved". It is perfectly acceptable for the ITTF to have rubbers that are approved, but it is totally unacceptable for them to single out a style of play that they don't like and then remove these rubbers on that basis.

I've said this time and time again, there is no complaint from players when they use really fast rubbers that produce massive spin. What right do they have to be able to use this equipment any more than players who choose to use equipment that deals with that spin and speed? Singling out certain types of players because they don't like it is simply wrong!

The approved rubber list is a whole different kettle of fish. If you follow a rule that says a rubber is not approved (for whatever reason) then that's fine. But you can't follow the ITTF list and then pick and choose which rubbers can and cannot be used. I also agree with your points about once a rubber is approved, it's approved for life.

I think the ITTF are even worse than the FIA with all their rule changes

Anyway, back on topic I'll give the ABS a good workout at the weekend. Like I said, there is nothing on the tournament and I'm going just to have some fun. Strangely I'm looking forward to trying out ABS and I'll let you know how things go

_________________
Blade: Ross Leidy custom blade
Forehand: Butterfly Tenergy 05-FX 1.7mm
Backhand: Dr Neubauer Gangster and Desperado 2 (testing both) OX

Butterfly Amicus Professional robot
-----
Ever tried, Ever failed? No Matter.
Try again, Fail Again, Fail Better!

Keith - Like I said in my above post, irrespective of the playing properties of a rubber, if the ruling is to follow the ITTF list, then that is what we will have to follow. I agree that normal inverted rubbers do not have any properties (apart from spin) that cause upset to other players. However this isn't the point. The point here is that you cannot enforce an approved list on leagues and then say "well it's OK if you rubber isn't approved as long as it's normal inverted". By the letter of the law, this is wrong and technically illegal.

Anyway, you know me, I'll play with anything

_________________
Blade: Ross Leidy custom blade
Forehand: Butterfly Tenergy 05-FX 1.7mm
Backhand: Dr Neubauer Gangster and Desperado 2 (testing both) OX

Butterfly Amicus Professional robot
-----
Ever tried, Ever failed? No Matter.
Try again, Fail Again, Fail Better!

Oh, I do agree with you that by the letter of the law both should be inspected, and that actually on the ground no-one will look at the inverteds - at least not at local league level anyway. My point above is that it is perhaps actually not that unfair as the frictionless pips have properties that the ITTF is trying to ban, whether for justifiable reasons or not, whereas the unapproved inverted rubbers will not have any property that the ITTF cares about.

The group that it may actually be unfair to is if you use a frictioned pip that for one admin reason or another hasn't been reapproved - perhaps for being obsolete. Because as you say, if any rubber is going to be challenged it will be the L.Ps.

In practice, my experience is that 99.9% of local league players couldn't care less about the opponents bat; some don't like playing against L.Ps and antis, sure ; but most wouldn't know or care what the ITTF list is. Even if the leagues put it on their website (as one of mine did and two didn't) very few people would go as far as to print it and even fewer to challange the opponent as it will just cause bad feeling.

At local league level I think we just need to get on with it and forget the finer detail of the ITTF regs. If the leagues say that FLPs are banned then I hope players don't use them but if one were opposite me I wouldn't challenge them; I've got to a point where no pips bother me and when I lose to a pips player I do exactly that; lose to the [better] player and not the bat. I get far more bothered about dodgy serves or, even worse, poor sportsmanship.

Incidently - and this is directly to Chris as you may know the player - I saw the finest local league pips play I've ever had the pleasure to watch Tuesday this week when K.P. was the pivotal player in our side making the Basildon premier div KO final against the team that must have been strong favorites to win the whole competition. It was an absolute pleasure to watch (and to play in the doubles with). Whoever says pips are dull should watch players like that! Your dad may have played against him on Monday. I think he'd be popular on this forum, left handed with ox sp forehand and ox lp backhand on an unbranded blade!

_________________
Timo Boll ALC ST
FH Tibhar Evolution MX-P Max
BH Tibhar Evolution FX-S 1.8
185g

I think I wasn't clear. Their proposal is to follow the ITTF list. But what I was trying to say (and failing) was that the intent behind this is to bin the FLP's, nothing more.

However, I do think they could target the FLP's specifically if they wanted, on the basis they are clearly treated rubbers.

_________________
Tango Ultra 2mm black, DMS Storkraft 1.6mm red, DMS Invictus
Well done bat!

Richard / Keith, thank you for your comments back It's great to have a good TT discussion!

Keith - I absolutely agree with you and the points you raise. In reality, nobody will check the inverted rubbers, but last season I did have a number of players in my local league checking my bat. All of them seemed to know that FLP had been "banned" and were keen to check out what I was using. The point here is that I changed to Insider (which at the time was legal) and they still moaned when I beat them! These players aren't like you Keith, because when they lose to me they blame the fact that I'm playing with a pimple rubber rather than the fact that I'm actually quite handy with it

Having said that, I've been totally destroyed by some players this season who know exactly what Inferno does. When I come off the table against them they say "you see, you shouldn't be using a stupid rubber like that, you have a good backhand and you should play with normal rubbers". I can't win

Anyway, this debate could go on forever The last thing I'll say on the matter, which is highlighted by your final comment about your LP player who reached the final, is that LP's can be fun to watch. I've had some of my best games against really good attacking players where we've both really had to work hard to win the points. It's great to play in those sorts of games and gives the game a different angle to just watching two attacking players going at each other. It's just a shame that the "powers that be" have decided that defending is out and they want to push the attacking game. It shouldn't be down to the governing body to decide what style should be allowed or not, because that is something the player themselves need to decide upon.

Richard - Yes, I absolutely agree and this is my worry. If the sole purpose is to bin FLP's and to achieve this they follow the list, then my concern is that they will not look at the wider impact of this. My concern is that they are so obsessed about getting rid of FLP's that they will not even stop for a minute to consider what this decision actually will mean. Perhaps, as Keith has alluded to, it'll mean nothing. However you can be sure that there will be players out there that will follow it (and quite rightly so as it is the ruling), but that will cause friction, arguments and unnecessary tension at friendly local league matches.

Anyway, time will tell

_________________
Blade: Ross Leidy custom blade
Forehand: Butterfly Tenergy 05-FX 1.7mm
Backhand: Dr Neubauer Gangster and Desperado 2 (testing both) OX

Butterfly Amicus Professional robot
-----
Ever tried, Ever failed? No Matter.
Try again, Fail Again, Fail Better!

I think all of the players that complain about pimples should try having a go with them and they'd quickly realise it's not as easy as they'd imagined.

If we ever have occasion to play a competitive match we'll have to video it, then the forum can see both our techniques and, if I lose, whether I'm as good as my word not complaining about pimples!

Are you booked on the BATTS coaching weekends Chris? I booked on both yesterday and there were very few places left.

_________________
Timo Boll ALC ST
FH Tibhar Evolution MX-P Max
BH Tibhar Evolution FX-S 1.8
185g

out of 10?

9.6

You'll have trouble keeping the ball on the table. Never mind playing effectively. The reactions of frictionless anti are just different than lp, flp or traditional anti.

It may be the long term answer, especially if you depend on a passive block but if you try to make the adjustment under game pressure you may quit the game altogether. You want to start with a coach, very patient partner or opponent way below your level.

_________________
coming back after 2 years off
don't freaking know what I'm using from day to day!

Hmmmm maybe not a 9.6

I've had a quick hit with it and it feels fine. More practice tonight and then I'll see how it stands up in a few games.

Don't worry, it's not going to make me quit. I'd rather start now and lose all of my games but then improve with it, rather than delay playing with it competitively until next season.

I have to say though, it does feel VERY slow...

_________________
Blade: Ross Leidy custom blade
Forehand: Butterfly Tenergy 05-FX 1.7mm
Backhand: Dr Neubauer Gangster and Desperado 2 (testing both) OX

Butterfly Amicus Professional robot
-----
Ever tried, Ever failed? No Matter.
Try again, Fail Again, Fail Better!

wait a minute...

You said you never hit with the ABS but I remembered(and checked the thread) you had a go with the AS a while back. That's different.

I change my answer to 6.9

My biggest problem is that I can't make myself stop using my active chop-block which is very hard to do at all with AS and actually seems to subtract reversal even when I manage to do it without popping the ball up.

_________________
coming back after 2 years off
don't freaking know what I'm using from day to day!