OOAK Table Tennis Forum

One of the issues here is that rubber which comes from the factory boosted is deemed legal, while the same rubber boosted by a player is deemed illegal. As has been said ad nauseam is that it is impossible to distinguish between these two situations.

What is caught is if the boosting is done in a sloppy way:

if the overall thickness of the combination of sponge + rubber is more than allowed
if the boosting is done unevenly so that the rubber surface is not flat
if the booster contains VOC and has been done too recently

Of course this sloppiness could come from either the factory doing the boosting or the player doing the boosting.

I have been present when a sheet of Tenergy was taken out of its packet and subjected to a VOC sniffer and it failed. Hence the advice to players to air their rubbers for at least 72 hours before they are likely to be tested.

_________________
Retriever (sometimes golden, but often leaden)
Moderator, Inverted Retriever Technique sub-forum - http://ooakforum.com/viewforum.php?f=74

I don't think the current situation is untenable. If what people say is true, and everyone using Hurricane "dopes", then there's a lot of it going on and no way to detect it. So be it. Apparently a lot of the top players wink and nudge about it, but no one really feels it's terribly important to make things consistent.

The original ban against speed glues was for health reasons, not to reduce equipment performance - the old speed glues contained dangerous chemicals (chlorinated solvents, for one) and people (and young players) were being subject to these fumes. And if you were gluing, you had to glue a LOT - before every playing session, and then every 2-3 hours. After playing you'd have to tear the rubber off the blade because it was going to shrink, if it shrank on the blade you could ruin it. People complain about what Tenergy and Tensors cost these days, but they forget what speed glues used to cost - they weren't cheap, and you didn't just use a little bit - you literally poured the stuff out of the can onto the rubber, making a puddle which you'd smear around. That 125 ml can you bought for $8.99 would last maybe two weeks if you didn't play a lot. I remember ASTI came up with a "less toxic" speed glue, it still stank up the basement. They also invented something called "Booster" (essentially, the speed glue without the glue) to save cost, but it wasn't allowed to be used at tournaments (I still have a couple cans of it). Add to this your $30 sheet of Bryce wasn't going to last very long. So there are many reasons NOT to go back to VOC glues or allow them again, and not all of them are health-related.

These new boosters are supposedly nontoxic - at least they're not toxic through whatever fumes they produce (they still do stink, but you have to actually sniff it up close to tell) so I don't see any health-related reason to forbid their use. There may be other reasons - maybe some people feel it gives attackers too much of an advantage maybe - that's up for discussion, I suppose. So we're back where we are now. The use of boosters by the end user is banned by 2.04.07, while the same rule does not ban the use of boosters by the manufacturers. Yes, this is unfair. Was it done deliberately to give an economic advantage to manufacturers so the end-user can't just buy cheap rubber and boost it? It's possible, I suppose... if you're into conspiracy theories. But since we can't detect them anyway, why make a stink about it? Just keep using the boosters if you want to, Igor's never going to know unless you tell him. I mean, if the entire Chinese national team (they all use Hurricane variants) is "bat doping" and Racket Control isn't detecting it, how is HE going to know? Mind you - the current boosters aren't cheap, either (a bottle will set you back $30-50) but that bottle does last a while and the effect does, too. It's not gone in a couple hours.

Now, supposing it IS desirable to make everything consistent and ALLOW boosters for everyone. How are they going to do it? Rescind 2.04.07 while keeping the no-VOC rule, the 4mm rule, etc.? Sure, it'd work, but as I said, it might have unintended consequences (e.g. it would make epoxying long pip tips, among other modifications, legal). I don't think there's a simple way to do it, it'll take some thought.

Iskandar

I came across this, and thought it had something to do with "bat doping"... No, it's some sort of Gen-X gamer-speak.



*Sigh* These guys should go and learn the actual game... They're only getting to exercise their thumbs here. Note the 40mm ball.

That said, I am impressed that someone managed to turn table tennis into a realistic video game like this (anyone remember the original Atari Pong?). Wonder who those characters are modeled after? Note that one's a penholder.

Iskandar

Doesn't the ITTF already banned this thing about speed glue like since 2011. and don't they have like a bounce test or voc test to tell whether or not some bat has been "doped"?

the_legend_xxko wrote:


See my post at the top of this page - there is no way to distinguish between factory boosted rubber that you buy already boosted which is legal, and player boosted rubber which is illegal. Also the existing test only catches "sloppy" boosting.

Speed glue is caught if there is VOC testing at a tournament and the speed glued bat is tested.

Japan suggested a bounce test, but given that ITTF only approves the top sheet (the bit that hits the ball) but not the sponge, and that you can theoretically put any top sheet with any sponge as long as the overall combined thickness is less than 4mm, how many bounce tests would ITTF have to carry out to create the legal yardstick. Every single top sheet in the LARC with every single sponge available (whether currently sold under an approved on LARC top sheet or not) plus an extra bounce test for pimples out top sheets which can be used in Ox (no sponge).

_________________
Retriever (sometimes golden, but often leaden)
Moderator, Inverted Retriever Technique sub-forum - http://ooakforum.com/viewforum.php?f=74

From what I remember of it, the proposed test would measure the height of the bounce of a steel ball bearing dropped from a fixed height. According to some people, rubber and sponge can't cause the ball to bounce higher, it always detracts from the height of the bounce (because rubber can't "bounce back" fast enough). If this is the case, then OX pips should produce the highest bounces.. Haven't heard anything about this for a LONG time. They've probably given up on the idea.

Iskandar

The Chinese have opposed tests to boosting strenuously. Will take a near miracle or a super innovation to change that.

_________________
Cobra Kai TT Exponent (Mercy effs up your Game)
One-Loop Man: One Loop... Again????
Lumberjack TT Exponent

"We don't rise to the level of our expectations, we fall to the level of our training" - Archilochus

Why not mandate rubber / sponge manufactured to be non-reactive to every known "doping" chemical ?
So regardless of what rubber / sponge combo, if it reacts to the Paraffin Oil / Orange Oil / Lemon Oil / Falco / Dianchi / Kailin / etc then it isn't legal ? You could flood all the bats and soak them in all the stuff and then dry them off later.

If any boosting happens it will be visible. Else everyone's stuff gets boosted regardless of if the player wants to boost or not.

An equal opportunities / level-playing field so to speak

_________________
__________________________________________________________
Backup C-pen blades:

• TSP Black Balsa 7.0 :
  1. FH/BH-YRakza9/XOmegaVT
  2. FH/BH-TSP Spectol/Yinhe Qing OX
• 729 Bomb C-P : FH/BH-DHS H2 Orig/DHS H3 Orig
• TSP Versal :
  1. FH/BH-XOmegaVA/YJupiter-II
  2. FH/BH-*blank*

Fun blades:

• Yasaka Battle Balsa(ST) : FH/BH- DHS TG2Neo/Gewo HypeXT 47
• Dr. Neubauer
  High Technology
  Cypress-Carbon(ST)
  ***************************** : FH/BH-YRakza7/YRakza7

==========================================================

Actually, they'd just need to test Tenergy 05 to establish the baseline, and then do the test at racket control to find treated rubbers. Anything bouncier than Tenergy 05 would therefore not be allowed...

And this "ITTF only approves topsheets" line is the argument that Falco uses to say that its boosters are NOT illegal (it's applied to the sponge, not to the topsheet, which remains "unaltered".. ). Interesting bit of sophistry...

Iskandar

http://ttnpp.com/store/booster/527-dian ... 33-34.html

"DianChi Oil (Chinese 典馳 典驰 油) is the best tuner now.It is used by a lot of the top players, Ma Long, Hao Shuai, Li XiaoXia, Guo Yan etc, even Timo Boll use Dianchi!!!Very durable, ~ 1 monthsVOC level"



Iskandar

If allowing booster/tuner while disallowing DIY FLPs was the goal, I think rewording 2.4.7 to explicitly restrict its scope to the topsheet would do the trick. Alternatively, you could modify 2.4.3.x (the definitions of 'ordinary pimpled rubber' and 'sandwich rubber') to define the topsheet, the sponge, and the allowable combinations of topsheet and sponge that form a racket covering separately and then reword 2.4.7 to refer to whatever name the redone 2.4.3.x gives to the topsheet.

Like you said, this would eliminate the sort of absurd situation where DHS can apply booster to H3 and sell it as H3 Neo [with the same ITTF number, if I'm not mistaken!] and it's legal but if a player does the same thing it's illegal. It would also eliminate the ambiguity about whether it's legal to put eg. Dornenglanz on P1R sponge.
For me though, the real benefit of doing this would be to eliminate water-based glues :V

_________________
Seeking joy and fitness in recreational modern defense.
My blog: "Two rubbers, one racket"
Kill the game against long Pimps with Coach Li!

Currently experimenting with short pips:
VKMO+ Gambler Volt-T + TSP Spectol Blue (1.5)
Joola CWX + Nittaku Hurricane III Pro Turbo Orange + Spinlord Gepard (1.8 )

ITTF has recently introduced an additional provision regarding the "chemical additives" in the newest edition of the T4 Technical Regulations "T4 RUBBER COVERINS".

http://mytabletennis.net/forum/forum_po ... ter#976887

DHS manufacturer cant apply any chemical additives, such as oil boosters, on DHS rubbers and sponges.

This is the bit added recent:

MOST RECENT AMENDMENT TO THE TEXT:
Suppliers that produce, market, sell, advertise or are otherwise associated with illegal substances and treatments may not apply for authorisation of any racket covering. Their equipment will not be permitted to appear on the LARC, and may not use the ITTF logo.

I doubt this will make any difference though, as the manufacturers can still boost their own rubber. Only a few Chinese brands sell rubbers as well as boosters, so it's not going to effect any of the major manufacturers.

_________________
OOAK Table Tennis Shop | Re-Impact Blades | Butterfly Table Tennis bats
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: Butterfly Tenergy Alternatives | Tenergy Rubbers Compared | Re-Impact User Guide

Aha.. so that's why there isn't any DHS Brand "bat dope". Probably saw this coming. I suppose Haifu will have to stop selling Seamoon, or stop selling Whale, one or the other. They'll probably spin off a "Seamoon Company".

I guess people wanting to use that Dianchi D rubber better think twice..

http://prott.vip/Product-Details.aspx?p ... ode=Dboard



Iskandar

Just more ITTF lip-service, pretending to be against boosters while looking the other way when almost every player boosts.

_________________



The MNNB Blog has had some pretty amazing stuff lately. Just click this text to check it out. | My OOAK Interview
Table Tennis Video Links: itTV | laola1.tv | ttbl | fftt | Challenger Series | mnnb-tv

My whole set-up costs less than a sheet of Butterfly Dignics