OOAK Table Tennis Forum


A truly International Table Tennis Community for both Defensive and Offensive styles!
OOAK Forum Links About OOAK Table Tennis Forum OOAK Forum Memory
It is currently 15 Nov 2018, 00:46


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  [ 19 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: 21 Oct 2018, 19:47 
Offline
OOAK Super User
OOAK Super User
User avatar

Joined: 17 Feb 2007, 01:37
Posts: 1679
Location: Netherlands
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 220 times
Re-Impact M3 Select blade – designed to solve problems with the plastic ball.

Achim Rendler has come up with a new design for a blade to tackle the problems many players, it is said, still have with the new plastic 40+ ball. The blade is called M3 Select. It is a combination blade intended to have a fast, high-control forehand that should allow precision placement in attacks and a high-control, dampening backhand which should suit pimpled rubbers and anti-spin rubbers as well as inverted.

As for the forehand of the M3 Select, a specific problem that especially fast balsa blades seem to have with the plastic ball is a decreased control over placement in fast play. The reason for this is that the high catapult of the balsa is easily inadvertently activated when fast balls are produced, resulting in less spin and hence less curve, which means balls are more at risk to go long. In fact, this problem can (or should, in my opinion) be solved by adapting your technique: as long as you either loop with high spin and somewhat moderate speed, keeping your bat well closed, aiming for causing the opponent trouble only in handling the spin, or hit fast balls with a straight trajectory, keeping your bat more open, aiming for causing the opponent trouble only in handling the speed, and you do this systematically, keeping the two separate types of stroke really separate, there will be no problem. Still, a blade with a forehand that is easier to manage as regards its catapult will likely be attractive to many players. Of course, it is also a challenge to design – and Achim likes a challenge.

The backhand of the M3 Select should make long pips and anti-spin rubbers more effective (i.e. disruptive) without decreasing its control. That is a designer’s challenge as well, for as a rule disruption increases as the grip of the bat on the ball decreases, and less grip on the ball generally means less control. With balsa blades especially, spin-reversal (which is seen by many players as an important part of disruption) will be low on low impact, high on high impact – but high impact will activate the catapult and therefore decrease grip and control. Apparently, Achim has found a way to deal with this problem in his new design.

Yesterday I received an M3 Select for testing. It would have arrived months earlier, as Achim had started working on this design a good while ago, but he has had to deal with worse challenges in his personal life this year. He lost dear ones. He had to undergo surgery, which took him nearly three months to fully recover from. For anyone this would be hardship; for a-one-man business it can be killing. Fortunately, he has pulled through and is back at work and back in business now, with of course lots to do in order to deal with a backlog of orders.

Testing the M3 Select will take some time. According to Achim, the blade can be used for close to the table play, but also for mid-distance play, so I have to test it with different tactics and different rubbers, both on its forehand and its backhand. Over the next several weeks I intend to report here how these tests turn out [edit: as it turned out, I only needed one week; the somewhat lengthy ;) report is posted further below.].

_________________
Without opponent, no match.


Last edited by Kees on 27 Oct 2018, 02:53, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 


PostPosted: 23 Oct 2018, 19:59 
Online
New Member

Joined: 01 Jun 2012, 03:36
Posts: 41
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 8 times
Blade: DHS Long 5
FH: DHS H3 Neo prov blue spon
BH: Rasanter R 42
First of all condolence to Achim for the losses of his dear ones.

Nice to hear there is a new blade from Re-Impact.
@Kees, can you try a chinese rubber on your FH. I know Achim advice is always to play with thinner rubber but if it suits maybe you can try a Friendship Battle II (or H3). I am very interesting in this blade if its also suitable for chinese sticky rubbers.

Succes with the testing Kees!

Greetings


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 24 Oct 2018, 06:14 
Offline
OOAK Super User
OOAK Super User
User avatar

Joined: 17 Feb 2007, 01:37
Posts: 1679
Location: Netherlands
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 220 times
Boxersss wrote:
@Kees, can you try a chinese rubber on your FH. I know Achim advice is always to play with thinner rubber but if it suits maybe you can try a Friendship Battle II (or H3). I am very interesting in this blade if its also suitable for chinese sticky rubbers.


Battle is a high-catapult rubber in all of its varieties; that would - as a rule - make it less suitable for the high catapult forehand of a balsa blade. After initial tests, the M3 Select's forehand seems to me to be high catapult, so I would not normally test it with rubbers like Battle, even if I owned one. Besides, I like to test a new blade using only rubbers I know very well, so I can tell what effect the blade has exactly. This week I'll test it further using mostly KTL Rapid Sound, 2.0mm and Friendship Super FX 2.0mm and 1.5 mm on the forehand. That should give a good idea what kind of rubber suits the forehand in general, for close to the table play at least, which is the style I will be testing the blade for this week. By the end of the week I'll post the first report.

_________________
Without opponent, no match.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 24 Oct 2018, 17:15 
Online
New Member

Joined: 01 Jun 2012, 03:36
Posts: 41
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 8 times
Blade: DHS Long 5
FH: DHS H3 Neo prov blue spon
BH: Rasanter R 42
Thank you for the anwser Kees.

The far I know the Friendship Super FX 2.0mm is also a tacky chinese rubber. So i'am excited to hear how it plays on the M3. The throw angle(catapult) is indeed lower but not that much compared to the Battle II in my memories. Maybe I'am wrong.

Succes with the testing!

Greetings!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 24 Oct 2018, 17:55 
Offline
OOAK Super User
OOAK Super User
User avatar

Joined: 17 Feb 2007, 01:37
Posts: 1679
Location: Netherlands
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 220 times
Super FX is tacky; so is KTL Rapid Sound.

Just to determine the terms, to avoid confusion - the throw angle, as I understand it, is related to but not identical with the catapult of a rubber. Catapult (in Chinese descriptions of rubbers mostly referred to as "forward" and as a separate variable distinguished from "speed") means springiness, the degree to which a rubber pushes the ball out, hence also out of its grip. High catapult means low grip on the ball, therefore lower control. It also means very quick acceleration of the ball; but it does not as such mean high speed, as speed is determined by the transference of kinetic energy, and mass is an important factor there. A heavy set-up (rubber and blade combination) is much better at generating speed than a light-weight set-up, even if in the latter the blade or the rubber or both have high catapult.
The throw of a rubber, in contrast, is the degree to which a rubber is capable of curving the trajectory of the ball. Grip and speed are factors here. As catapult is a factor in the grip of a rubber, indirectly it is a factor as well. But grip is for the largest part determined by the tackiness of a rubber (the hardness of the sponge is a factor as well, but a smaller one). High grip combined with low speed make it easy to curve the trajectory; low grip and high speed make it difficult and tend to produce flat trajectories. European made rubbers, being as rule fast and much less tacky, generally have a lower throw than Chinese rubbers, even if European sponges tend to be softer.

_________________
Without opponent, no match.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 26 Oct 2018, 15:09 
Offline
New Member

Joined: 01 Jun 2017, 01:43
Posts: 15
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 5 times
Blade: Re-impact Preference
FH: Donic Acuda Blue P2 1.8 m
BH: Spinlord Keiler 1.5 mm
Today I tested the M3 Select for the second time.

For information:
My competition blade is Re-impact Preference with the rubbers Donic Acuda Blue P2 (FH; 1.8 mm) and Spinlord Keiler (BH; 1.5 mm). I tested the Re-impact M3 Select with the same rubbers.

My impressions at the moment:
- Forehand: easier to play a fast topspin then the Preference. The M3 Select plays a little more like a normal frame then the Preference. The Preference is maybe a little faster, but has less control when you will do a fast topspin.
Spin with M3 is good, more straight then the Preference, and a harder feeling. My conclusion for the forehand at the moment: the forehand has more control when making pressure. It is faster then the Rapier 44, but I think a little slower then the Preference.
- Backhand: the backhand with my Spinlord Keiler 1.5 mm is more difficult to play for me then with the Preference. With the Preference, I have a softer feeling, and I can lift the ball when necessary. With the M3 Select, I miss the soft feeling, the balls go more straight, and its difficult to lift. I played against an anti player. With the Preference, I can simply control the game by lifting the ball, this was not possible with the M3 Select. To hard feeling, and they went faster into the net. When hitting, there is more direct contact with the M3 Select, but that was, my thought, the only positive for this medium pimple in comparison with the Preference. I think for a hitter with short pimples, the backhand could be OK.

I will do more tests, but this where my first impressions.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 26 Oct 2018, 18:17 
Offline
Manufacturer: RE-IMPACT

Joined: 01 Dec 2011, 06:01
Posts: 169
Location: Lembruch Dumber lake, Diepholz, Lower Saxony, Germany
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 17 times
Hello, this is the german site noppentest.de. Here are already good test reports; see the link.



http://noppentest.de/forum/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=35652&sid=c09bf86611a37c609b9dfbde36f0b2b3


For translating I recommend the deepL translator

https://www.deepl.com/translator


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 27 Oct 2018, 01:38 
Offline
Super User

Joined: 22 Feb 2017, 04:18
Posts: 291
Location: Wakefield UK
Has thanked: 18 times
Been thanked: 45 times
Blade: S&T Black & White
FH: Aurus Select 1.9
BH: Keiler 1.2
Keiler is quite blade fussy and being able to lift backspin easily and with confidence is a key part of playing agressively but with control with it.

It will be interesting to see what Achim says about your findings on the BH . Seems we would both like a blade with the FH from the new M3 Select and a softer more like the Preference BH.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 27 Oct 2018, 01:54 
Offline
New Member

Joined: 01 Jun 2017, 01:43
Posts: 15
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 5 times
Blade: Re-impact Preference
FH: Donic Acuda Blue P2 1.8 m
BH: Spinlord Keiler 1.5 mm
ChasFox wrote:
Keiler is quite blade fussy and being able to lift backspin easily and with confidence is a key part of playing agressively but with control with it.

It will be interesting to see what Achim says about your findings on the BH . Seems we would both like a blade with the FH from the new M3 Select and a softer more like the Preference BH.

ChasFox, I totally agree! Keiler’s strong point is the combination of the ability to lift, hit, playing contra and the disruption. With the Preference it works very good. You can “control” the game with the Keiler (unless someone is able to do a very fast spin to the backhand). With the M3 Select, I can not put all the strong points of the Keiler on work, with losing the control of the game as consequence.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 27 Oct 2018, 02:51 
Offline
OOAK Super User
OOAK Super User
User avatar

Joined: 17 Feb 2007, 01:37
Posts: 1679
Location: Netherlands
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 220 times
Re-Impact M3 Select test results.

Introduction.

Initially, I planned on taking two or three weeks for testing several different combinations of rubbers on this blade, but as it turned out the M3 Select is a pretty predictable blade, so I had only to put in about ten hours of practice and play. The results are presented below in two sections, as the blade plays consistently differently when used with no sponge or thin sponge (up to 1 mm) on its backhand compared to when used with at least 1.8 mm sponge on either side.

The M3 Select is a combination blade, as is apparent from its design – on the forehand side there is a core ply of 6 mm balsa, on the backhand side of the core there is only a 2 mm balsa ply and between the two balsa plies is a 2mm cork ply which should decrease or contain the influence of the forehand structure on the backhand structure. The outer ply of the forehand seems to be ash, on the backhand it seems to be larch. I’ll admit I am not really a fan of this type of design; I prefer balsa cores to be split in equal halves which are glued directly together (without cork in between), which results in the blade having a less typical balsa-like character (lower catapult, a more predictable reaction curve) while it is still light-weight. But for a combination blade, adding the cork ply is probably inevitable, and for the backhand of this blade it works out very well indeed.

Section 1: the M3 Select with thin sponge or no sponge on its backhand side.

I tested the blade with Yasaka Phantom 0012, which is an OX LP, Friendship 755 on 0.6mm sponge, and Friendship 799 Mystery 1.8mm, all in red, on the backhand and inverted (KTL Rapid Sound, black, 2.0mm; Friendship Super FX black on blue sponge, 2.0mm and 1.5 mm) as well as SP (Friendship 802-1, in 2 mm) on the forehand, first for a close to the table backhand-block-forehand-loop-attack type of game, using LP and inverted. Blades of reference were Re-Impact Perfect and Re-Impact Preference, with the exact same set of rubbers in order to make a comparison valid.
With an LP and inverted set-up, the M3 Select’s forehand is about as fast as or perhaps slightly slower than the Preference’s, but much faster than the Perfect’s; its control is less than what the forehand sides of the other two blades offer, as its forehand catapult is very high, and its throw rather low. This means timing the contact with the ball must be very precise and as concerns placement the margin of error is quite small as well; in my opinion, the blade’s forehand requires advanced technique, whereas the Preference’s and Perfect’s forehands are much easier to deal with.
The blade’s backhand is much slower than both the Preference’s and Perfect’s and its catapult is quite low, not only on low impact but also remarkably so on medium impact (catapult will always be high on high impact, due to the balsa core) and control is accordingly high. The throw of the backhand is rather high, which means that blocking even with low-friction LPs you have to close your blade somewhat, which may feel counter-intuitive to players. Still, the backhand is impressively effective. Its well controlled catapult (which is a feat difficult to achieve in a design with thick balsa plies) means that probably my choice of LPs was on the conservative side and faster LPs as well as perhaps frictionless anti-spin rubbers could be used on the M3 Select with good results.
The overall feel of the blade is rather soft, and it seems to have some flex as well, possibly due to the handle which is made with soft balsa outer layers. It is one of the most light-weight blades in the Re-Impact catalogue.
Balsa, as a rule, is used best close to the table, where its lack of weight is an advantage: close up, your reaction time is a critical factor, and a lightweight blade helps in bringing the reaction time down. Going for lightweight rubbers in the set-up is therefore logical, but as LP’s are generally used with thin sponge or no sponge at all, and are therefore much more light-weight than other rubbers, the forehand inverted rubber does not have to be ultra lightweight in order to get a light-weight set-up.
It is important, though, that the catapult of the forehand rubber suits the blade’s. Catapult is the degree of springiness of a rubber or blade; it determines how quickly a rubber or a blade responds to contact with the ball, pushing it out, like a spring coil would do. Balsa (at least as it is used in Re-Impact designs) behaves like a very sensitive and responsive spring coil; so does a rubber with high catapult. Imagine attaching such a sensitive coil to another one. The front coil (representing the rubber) is compressed due to contact with an incoming body and then will expand, pushing the body away, but it will at the same push against the second coil (representing the balsa core in the blade) which will likewise be compressed and then expand, pushing against the front coil. If the front coil is about as sensitive and responsive as the second coil, their combined response is unpredictable – the individual responses of the coils may enhance their combined response or cancel it out to some degree. This is how using a rubber with high catapult on a high-catapult blade may result in a substantial decrease of control. In practice, you may find that when trying to loop with speed, using a high-catapult rubber on a balsa blade, at times the ball will shoot away much too abruptly with little spin, and at other times it may simply drop off. Therefore, the best control is to be had by using a rubber whose catapult is either much higher than the balsa blade’s or much lower.
Bouncing a ball on the forehand of the M3 Select it seemed to me to be quite a bit springier than the forehand of the Perfect. The Perfect’s catapult was moderate enough to allow high-catapult rubbers to be used on it, but for the M3 Select I decided to use a rubber with moderate catapult instead: KTL Rapid Sound, 2.0mm.
The choice for an LP on the backhand was also decided considering the catapult. The M3 Select’s backhand has low catapult, but as there is a total of 8 mm balsa in the blade, on high impact the 6mm forehand ply will inevitably get activated and catapult will be higher. Using the spring coil metaphor again, if it is contacted by a body with low impact, the coil will absorb most of the impact, so hardly respond at all, which amounts to a dampening effect; if impact increases, however, the coil’s response will increase exponentially. The dampening effect on low impact means that, using an LP, you will have high control over placement of the ball, but as on impact it will lose part of its energy, so it will lose part of its rotation, and a reversal effect will therefore be low. The reverse is the case on high impact: you will have high spin-reversal, as the ball will leave the bat abruptly, but therefore low control over placement. The most effective type of LP on responsive balsa blades would, then, always be one with very low speed (to compensate for the blade’s acceleration effect on high impact) and very high reversal (to compensate for the blade’s dampening effect on low impact which diminishes reversal), so the classic frictionless LP’s would simply be the best to use; but as they are banned, you need an alternative. Low speed is either achieved by a dampening sponge or an OX sheet that has no elasticity. The latter is rare, but Yasaka Phantom 0012 fits the requirements; I used it in red, for maximum reversal. I also used Friendship 755 on a 0.6mm sponge, as this sponge is quite inelastic as well and will therefore dampen the incoming speed some. Neither of these LP’s is frictionless, of course, but they will produce acceptable reversal. Since (in my opinion) you will not profit from reversal if you cannot control the placement of the ball, control comes first, so acceptable reversal will have to do.
A slow, frictionless anti-spin rubber would be a possibility as well, but I didn’t test that kind of rubber on the M3 Select; though, as it turned out, I probably should have. I did test it on other Re-Impact blades and found it rather difficult to control. Any kind of LP that is allowed by the ITTF will offer you some grip on the ball, which means you will still have some control when the blade’s catapult is activated. With a frictionless anti you do not have that control. I have not yet seen an anti that was capable of neutralizing a Re-Impact’s catapult sufficiently to do away with any kind of grip on the ball, which is why I prefer low-friction anti on them.

Now for the details of the test-results, that is, my subjective report relating only my own impressions.
The forehand with the Rapid Sound on it proved to be capable of producing serves with heavy spin (any kind and combination) while offering great control over placement. For a combination blade, which is used with LP on the backhand, this is important as you want lots of spin in the rally from the onset, to be manipulated disruptively with the LP.
Forehand lifting of incoming backspin required a technical adaptation. Whereas Perfect and Preference allow classic lifting (with a long stroke movement, contacting the ball on the highest point of the bounce) and offer great control over placement, especially as concerns the length, using the M3 for lifting this way is difficult. Due to its high catapult, when you try to contact the ball going forward (to make speed) and upward (to make spin) with an almost vertically held bat, the ball is pushed so quickly out of the rubber that it tends to shoot off with low control over the length (balls will go long). When you try and compensate for that by using less power going forward, the ball tends to drop off. So I changed to a different lifting technique. Contacting the ball early, when it is still coming up, with a vertically held blade you perform a compact quick drive with good wrist action but with only slightly more than moderate force – rather as if you were playing with short pips instead of inverted. Again, the blade’s catapult will push the ball abruptly out of the rubber, so you produce little spin if any, but are not hindered by the incoming backspin either. This quick drive will lift the ball low over the net, and land it deep on the other half, where, as it now will have very little topspin and a lot of speed, it will skid, or bounce very low, like a dead ball. Opponents had some difficulty with returning these balls, so the technique is also tactically effective. Even heavy backspin balls will be lifted by this quick drive; if needed, drive with slightly more force to lift more. Make a point of moving towards the ball and contact it well in front of you, as well as on the rise; contacting it on the highest point of the bounce tends to be too late. The stroke should also be very compact to make timing precise – start the stroke about hip-high and do not follow through long, staying beneath the shoulder level. Use only the underarm for the swing; rotating of the upper body (to produce power) is not needed, as the blade is fast enough and rotating the body may impair the precision of the stroke.
I also tried a slower rubber with a harder sponge (Friendship Super FX 2.0 mm blue sponge) and thinner sponge (the same, 1.5 mm) to find out if this would make classic lifting easier, but it hardly did. In fact, the 1.5 mm thick rubber offered the least control. So the quick compact drive would seem to be the standard stroke to for this blade to lift incoming backspin.
The forehand loop against incoming topspin turned out to be the most effective in a similar way: compact stroke, no body rotation, using only the underarm, this time with the blade closed of course. Contacting the ball on the rise is not really necessary, on the highest point will do fine, but you have to move towards the ball again and contact it in front of you to be precise with your timing. Even moderate force (as you will produce using only the underarm) results in great topspin and fast speed. The trajectory of the ball will be low and rather flat, and the ball will rush away on the other half. Control with this stroke is good enough to enable cutting the side-lines. Using sidespin with the topspin is very effective too.
I was surprised how little power was needed to produce fast and very spinny balls, at least close to the table. The M3 Select is a great blade for players who do not like or are not able to rotate the upper body in order to get fast balls with good spin; amongst other things, this is good news for players with back problems, knee problems, or shoulder joint injuries.

Even if you play a close to the table type of game, you may have to step back every once in a while. Fortunately, this blade allows it – a dropping ball, even if it gets close to the floor, can be looped effectively. If you are off to the forehand side, put good side-spin on the ball, and sending it around the net onto the other half is a cinch; control is that good. But don’t expect this kind of ball to be very fast; the blade (with this set-up) lacks the power to produce great speed away from the table, even if it is more than fast enough when you stay close. Alternatively, you might twiddle and chop using the LP (see below).
Forehand hitting and smashing was a bit of a disappointment. The blade feels rather soft and too light on high impact, even with the hard sponged 2.0 mm Friendship Super FX rubber, and will only produce enough speed with these strokes when the opponent is really close to the table. If the opponent steps away, smashing becomes ineffective. The best forehand tactics with this blade against an opponent who plays at mid-distance is smother-blocking his loops: close the blade, contact the ball passively when it is still on the rise, keep your wrist very relaxed and move a bit upward on contact. You will take the speed away (the balsa helps with this) and be able to place the ball short. Not an easy technique, but effective.

Using a Friendship 802-1 in 2.0 mm, the next thing I tested was the forehand’s behaviour with SP. If the compact strokes are used which I described above, control is high and speeds is high enough for an effective block-attack game. Incoming spin is rarely heavy enough to pose problems, as the SP itself is rather insensitive to it and the catapult of the forehand helps here. Flicks are very easy to perform, go low over the net with good speed which can be produced with little force. Blocking is very safe and precise; driving as well. Hitting is less effective than it normally is on a conventional blade – again, the blade felt a bit mushy when I hit flat with great force. Even so, the speed is sufficient as long as the opponent does not back off too far.

Forehand pushing against incoming backspin is reliable, with lots of spin and a low trajectory, as long as you hold the blade really open and actively produce backspin. A more passive push, for instance if you want to drop the ball short, is harder as the ball tends to dig in and climb out high.
Blocking with the forehand against incoming topspin is very controlled, but at low impact you have to close the blade more than on high impact, as on the latter the trajectory of the ball will be significantly flatter.

The backhand of the blade was a bit of a revelation. I used both the Yasaka Phantom 0012 (an OX LP) and the Friendship 755 on 0.6mm sponge and although these LPs have very different characters, there was no significant difference playing with either. Clearly, the blade dominates the rubbers. And in a very good way, too, as its dampening effect is substantial – as good as the best I ever encountered in Re-Impact blades.
Blocking incoming topspin, you have to close the blade a bit, or the ball will go quite high over the net. The dampening is very good on low and medium impact, and even on high impact there is some of it left, which is remarkable. As a consequence, you have excellent control over placement. Also, your opponent will hardly be able to force you away from the table, as incoming speed – except when the ball is smashed all-out – is easily dealt with.
Reversal is, not unexpectedly, moderate to low. However, if you are forced to step back and change to chopping, heavy backspin can be produced. Chops, if done shallow, going horizontally under the ball, will produce low speed, a nicely flat trajectory, and control over placement is great. This is probably your best stroke when away from the table.
Active blocks and drives against topspin tend to produce dead balls with enough speed. The trajectory of the ball will be quite flat, so it is safest to go for the corners.
Lifting backspin with an LP can be done using the same kind of quick compact drive as described for the forehand, or by pushing or side-sweeping. The reversal is moderate again, but enough to make the ball dip and get onto the other half.
By far the most effective way to respond to serves is to use a side-swipe; this guarantees the ball will stay low and somehow seems to produce the best reversal as well.
I would expect that using a more disruptive LP like Tibhar Grass D-tecs on this blade’s backhand is quite possible and would make the blade even more effective as concerns reversal, but I liked the way it played with the Yasaka and Friendship LPs very much.

As the blade proved to be very good for chopping away from the table with the LPs, I also tried chopping with the forehand away from the table. Even with the 2.0 mm Rapid Sound, chopping was excellent, with great control and spin, and a low trajectory, as long as I chopped shallow while holding the blade horizontally. This way the forehand’s catapult doesn’t come into the action and the balsa will actually slow things down comfortably for a solid defence. With thinner sponge, things get a bit more tricky; with the Friendship Super FX 1.5mm I felt I lost a lot control as the forehand’s catapult got activated to some extent. And as soon as I turned the blade, chopping at an angle instead of horizontally, control went overboard: balls shot away and went long.


Section two: the M3 Select with 1.8 or 2.0 mm sponge on both sides.

As soon as I changed from LP on the backhand to MP (Friendship 799, 1.8 mm – the white Mystery sponge, which is more light-weight, softer and more elastic than the classic orange sponge, and in fact resembles the sponge of the KTL Rapid Sound I used on the forehand), the blade changed its character. Its basic speed increased (now it was faster than the Preference), it felt more solid, and control went up as well. The best technique was still the one with compact strokes, but the effectiveness of play at mid-distance was greatly increased due to the increase of speed, and the blade now proved capable of very good hitting as well. The margin of error concerning the timing of the contact with the ball increased as well; it was still very good to contact the ball on the rise, but even after the highest point of the bounce I could re-loop with good spin and speed as well as good control. Everything was more easy now. Apparently the blade gets better when its balsa-effects are compensated some by sandwiching it between medium soft sponges of rubbers with medium catapult – changing from 1.8 mm to 1.5 mm and a harder sponge did not work out well, so 1.8 mm seems to be the minimum effective thickness in this kind of set-up.
The Friendship 799 is normally a medium fast and moderately disruptive medium pip, but on the M3 Select it came very close to the results I had had with the LPs, including modest reversal on crisp blocks and aggressive pushes. It was fast enough for crisp hitting, too.
It would chop as well and that makes me think that using an LP on relatively thick sponge (1.2 or even 1.5 mm) would be an option with this blade, effective for modern defence away from the table, as the forehand chops great anyway. I did change the MP for a classic anti-spin rubber on 1.5 mm sponge to test this style to some extent, but even if it worked for returning loops low and safe, it is quite hard to get really heavy backspin in your chops with conventional anti, so you have to rely on the aggressive potential of your forehand to win points.

The last combination I tried was the MP on the backhand and the SP (Friendship 802-1) on the forehand. Close to the table, this set-up is very effective as well. Hitting with the SP was now much better than it had been with the LP on the backhand, generating better speed and feeling solid on contact. In fact, this was the set-up that proved the easiest to play with, as it felt insensitive to incoming spin, fast, and offered great control. When you use compact strokes and contact the ball in front of you, preferably on the rise, or on the highest point of the bounce, this set-up demands the least power as well and would probably be the best of all to avoid stress on knees, shoulder and back.

Logically, I should have tried one more set-up, but as I mentioned earlier I didn’t test the M3 Select with frictionless anti-spin rubber (which I don’t own) on its backhand. From its overall behaviour I would guess, though, that this blade would do well with that kind of rubber, if it came on thick enough sponge (1.8 to 2.0 mm). With inverted it would probably work for modern defence, also away from the table; and with SP on the forehand it would suit a style like Amely Solja’s.

Conclusions.

All in all, the M3 Select seems to be – not for beginners, but for advanced players – quite good for a close to the table block-and-loop-attack game using LP on the backhand and inverted on the forehand, perhaps even better for a push-block-and-hit game with frictionless anti and SP, and also for a block-and-loop-attack game with MP on the backhand and inverted on the forehand or a block-and-hit game with MP on the backhand and SP on the forehand. Even modern defence away from the table would be an option.
I think the rubbers used should have medium catapult, medium soft sponges, and have a thickness of 1.8 to 2.0 mm (possibly 2.1 mm), except for the LPs, which can be used in OX, but may do better for chopping when used on relatively thick sponge. Even so, for modern defence players who do not need a light-weight blade, a traditional blade would be probably better, as it offers a larger variety of strokes (especially longer ones) and a greater margin of error. In my opinion this blade really works best with a compact technique.
Its special forte is that you do not need to produce great power: this is a blade that will do the work for you – and will get the job done as well. Having a great dampening backhand side, it allows you to stay close and when you have to step away from the table it offers the options you need for that, too. It is, therefore, also a great choice for players who would like to minimize the stress on their shoulder-joints, their backs, and their knees produced by conventional table-tennis techniques; and as such, this is a classic and top-notch Re-Impact blade.

_________________
Without opponent, no match.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 27 Oct 2018, 02:55 
Offline
OOAK Super User
OOAK Super User
User avatar

Joined: 17 Feb 2007, 01:37
Posts: 1679
Location: Netherlands
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 220 times
Keiler wrote:
ChasFox wrote:
Keiler is quite blade fussy and being able to lift backspin easily and with confidence is a key part of playing agressively but with control with it.

It will be interesting to see what Achim says about your findings on the BH . Seems we would both like a blade with the FH from the new M3 Select and a softer more like the Preference BH.

ChasFox, I totally agree! Keiler’s strong point is the combination of the ability to lift, hit, playing contra and the disruption. With the Preference it works very good. You can “control” the game with the Keiler (unless someone is able to do a very fast spin to the backhand). With the M3 Select, I can not put all the strong points of the Keiler on work, with losing the control of the game as consequence.


My guess is that the Keiler's catapult is too high for the M3 Select. A more conventional MP may do much better and will still produce significant disruption.

_________________
Without opponent, no match.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 27 Oct 2018, 03:16 
Offline
Super User

Joined: 22 Feb 2017, 04:18
Posts: 291
Location: Wakefield UK
Has thanked: 18 times
Been thanked: 45 times
Blade: S&T Black & White
FH: Aurus Select 1.9
BH: Keiler 1.2
Looking at the Noppen-test posts on this blade it seems that the BH has a fairly hard Larch outer veneer whilst I believe the Preference is Koto which may be softer. It is possible that Achim chose the larch as long pip users seem to favour a harder feel to aid spin reversal. The very positive report from Kees on his tests with LP's seems to confirm this.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 27 Oct 2018, 03:37 
Offline
New Member

Joined: 01 Jun 2017, 01:43
Posts: 15
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 5 times
Blade: Re-impact Preference
FH: Donic Acuda Blue P2 1.8 m
BH: Spinlord Keiler 1.5 mm
I can test Spinlord Keiler 1.8 mm at the backhand. Maybe that will be better then 1.5 mm for the M3 Select. We’ll see.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 27 Oct 2018, 18:39 
Offline
Manufacturer: RE-IMPACT

Joined: 01 Dec 2011, 06:01
Posts: 169
Location: Lembruch Dumber lake, Diepholz, Lower Saxony, Germany
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 17 times
I actually designed the M3 Select for normal players, for use with inverted rubbers on both sides, not especially for use with long pimples or anti-spin rubbers, but to enable him and players like him to deal effectively with the plastic ABS ball.

I wanted it to be a blade that would allow those who suffer from (potential) injuries to play without putting stress on the back or on the shoulder joints – these players are very much helped by playing a “compact style”, that is, using short strokes, contacting the ball on the rise and in front of them, and this compact style is also an excellent way to deal with the properties of the ABS ball. Of course, this feature is also good for all healthy players, because they have to adapt their playing style to the new ball anyway.

To achieve this, the blade should have a speed that would go harmoniously together with its control, also enabling play at mid-distance with rubbers that have rather soft sponges.

The point is to be able to put constant pressure on the opponent by keeping the pace of the rallies high, moving him from left to right denying him to get into position and forcing him to re-loop instead of dictating the game, as well as forcing him away from the table to make him vulnerable to short-placed stop-blocks.

The blade’s topspin potential would be less important, but its backspin potential with chops from mid-distance should be very great.

I think I have succeeded in achieving this. In contrast to the Preference or Turbo 82, this blade is intended for advanced players (over 1400 points in the German rating system) who have good technique. It contains a newly designed KSLS-system, which I developed with the help of Olaf Herschbach (“4olaf” is his nickname on forum.tt-noppen.de) and which I have given his name (HBS-system) to thank him for his fine cooperation; it allows me to fine-tune blades for use with the ABS ball.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 27 Oct 2018, 20:04 
Offline
New Member

Joined: 01 Jun 2017, 01:43
Posts: 15
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 5 times
Blade: Re-impact Preference
FH: Donic Acuda Blue P2 1.8 m
BH: Spinlord Keiler 1.5 mm
Achim,

I can also test Xiom Musa 1.8 mm on the backhand. I have an unused rubber. Until 1.5 years ago I played with inverted (23 years) on the backhand, so testing a normal rubber at the backhand will not be that great problem.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 19 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next




All times are UTC + 9:30 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 33 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 2018 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: