OOAK Table Tennis Forum :: Super Block Extreme

Please explain why Dr. Neubauer ABS2 is legal!!??

I understand, but why players permit play frictionless anti but not frictionless long pips? If ban long pips why not anti also?

I understand, but why players permit play frictionless anti but not frictionless long pips? If ban long pips why not anti also? Both frictionless!!!

ITTF launches a compaign to subdue aftertreatments on the pimples

27.08.2019 - Since 2008, smooth long nubs are prohibited. Although this decision led to the fact that only grippy long pimpled rubbers were approved by the ITTF, but he could not prevent that just in the amateur area after the purchase was treated. The Material Department of the ITTF now wants to counteract this malady and is looking for a new and applicable for each player test procedure.

UV-light, microwave or epoxy spray - there are no limits to the imagination when 'miniature freaks' try to make their rubbers unpredictable to their opponents. The fact is, the aftertreatment of coverings is prohibited. This applies to pimples as well as to 'smooth' pads. The ITTF has been taking care of the tuning of the latter for a few months, now it is also tackling the after-treatment of pimples. "Because this makes the game more unpredictable," says ITTF Equipment Manager Claudia Herweg. "If the pimple tip is smooth, but the neck is grippy, it is very difficult for the opponent to judge the ball when it has come in contact with both surfaces. This unpredictability hurts the sport and we have to stop that as an ITTF. "

Problem of the amateurs, not the professionals

Since the ban on smooth long pimples, the pads are tested in a laboratory before approval, so that no models with too low grip come on the market. Of course, this does not prevent players from having their floor coverings retreated or post-treated after purchase. "There has been a real industry here in Germany - with traders who treat their coverings and do not offer treated," says Herweg. "In the professional field, the problem is virtually nonexistent, but is limited almost only to the amateur field. And here we get very negative letters from players from China, the US and Europe, because they feel cheated, as one of their opponents has allegedly played with skiddy pimples. "

A complaint to the ITTF does not bring the players in the game itself, because in the hall can not be controlled, so to speak, whether the rubber is handy enough. "According to table tennis rules, the referee in the 'Racket Control' can not allow a surface if he believes that he does not have the necessary frictional resistance," says Herweg. "But that's too vague and not solid enough. We need a test procedure. "For this reason, since last week, the ITTF has been officially asking for proposals and concepts for checking pimpled surfaces. Requirements are that the new method can be applied directly in the hall, that the device is as easy to transport and operate as possible and costs relatively little money. The absolute maximum is 1000 euros, but it would be best if if the device would be for under ten euros. In addition, both coverings are to be unmasked, the pimples have been completely aftertreated, as well as those in which only the surface of the heads is too smooth. The pad should not be damaged during the test and the check should be repeatable.

Interesting idea from Italy

Claudia Herweg is confident that a test procedure can be approved in the next year, but no later than the year after that. In fact, a few promising proposals have already been received, for example from RWTH Aachen, whose Institute of Mechanics would like to award the search for a test method as a master's thesis. Another very auspicious idea came from Italy, where a measuring device is already in use, with the help of which the illegal post-treatment should have been almost completely suppressed (see video below). Till October 18, the tinkerers worldwide still have time to submit their ideas to the World Association. Should a meter be selected and approved by the ITTF, then it is up to the national federations to decide if they want to use it in their leagues as well.

Very quixotic the ITTF allows frictionless antis (at least for now!) but banned frictionless pips

Never/dont' use either.

Vadim wrote:

I understand, but why players permit play frictionless anti but not frictionless long pips? If ban long pips why not anti also? Both frictionless!!!

When frictionless pips were banned frictionless anti did not exist. It was developed by Dr N in response to the pips ban. Frictionless anti is still not as widely manufactured or used, and maybe not enough complaints about it (yet) to prompt another new rule. Perhaps also it does not achieve the same level of disruption as frictionless pips? I have no experience since have not used either.

TTbuddy wrote:

Very quixotic the ITTF allows frictionless antis (at least for now!) but banned frictionless pips

Never/dont' use either.

Dusty054 wrote:

Vadim wrote:

I understand, but why players permit play frictionless anti but not frictionless long pips? If ban long pips why not anti also? Both frictionless!!!

The first frictionless antis were developed as an answer to the ban of the friction pips and were way to fast and absolutely uncontrollable. Over time they have improved much and are now much slower and have better control. However, they are still more difficult to control than the frictionless pips and in particular attacking is much more difficult. With other words, the now banned frictionless pips were much easier to play with for the average guy.

Matt Pimple wrote:

I have sometimes wondered why, even now more than 10 years after the pips ban, there is still only two relatively small manufacturers producing frictionless anti, whereas frictionless pips were also produced by many of the larger manufacturers prior to the ban. Perhaps the control issue you mention is a main reason? Also their durability is an issue I think? The reluctance of the major manufacturers is interesting.

Author:	isean [ 02 Sep 2019, 01:23 ]
Post subject:	Re: Super Block Extreme
Does this mean that something is wrong with the rubber, some ITTF requirements are violated?

Author:	skilless_slapper [ 02 Sep 2019, 03:42 ]
Post subject:	Re: Super Block Extreme
The ITTF banned frictionless long pips like 10+ years ago. This rubber is a frictionless long pip (feels totally smooth, just about zero grip on it) and does not meet the minimum friction requirement the ittf arbitrarily made.

Author:	Vadim [ 10 Sep 2019, 01:40 ]
Post subject:	Re: Super Block Extreme
'

Author:	Def-attack [ 10 Sep 2019, 06:32 ]
Post subject:	Re: Super Block Extreme
Vadim wrote: Please explain why Dr. Neubauer ABS2 is legal!!?? Friction rules only concerns pimple out rubbers, not smoth rubbers (like anti).

Author:	Vadim [ 10 Sep 2019, 07:38 ]
Post subject:	Re: Super Block Extreme
I understand, but why players permit play frictionless anti but not frictionless long pips? If ban long pips why not anti also? Both frictionless!!!

OOAK Table Tennis Forum https://ooakforum.com/

Super Block Extreme https://ooakforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=35989	Page 2 of 3

Author:	Retriever [ 10 Sep 2019, 07:55 ]
Post subject:	Re: Super Block Extreme
Vadim wrote: Quote: I understand, but why players permit play frictionless anti but not frictionless long pips? If ban long pips why not anti also? Just another example of "interesting" ITTF rules. The Technical leaflet regarding rubbers, T4, which is what the manufacturers have to comply with, has a rule regarding the minimum kinetic friction for pimples out rubbers but not for pimples in rubbers. Note that according to the rules this minimum friction rule is only for manufacturers, not racket control at tournaments, T9. However the ITTF has recently put out a tender for inexpensive friction measuring devices for use at racket control. Here is the ITTF equipment page which, after some news items (boostering!) has the tender, lists of approved equipment, technical leaflets etc.: https://www.ittf.com/equipment/ A similar situation holds with boosting rubbers - it is not illegal for manufacturers to sell rubbers that are boosted, but it is illegal for rubbers to be boosted afterwards by players.

Author:	Dusty054 [ 10 Sep 2019, 08:02 ]
Post subject:	Re: Super Block Extreme
Vadim wrote: I understand, but why players permit play frictionless anti but not frictionless long pips? If ban long pips why not anti also? Both frictionless!!! When frictionless pips were banned frictionless anti did not exist. It was developed by Dr N in response to the pips ban. Frictionless anti is still not as widely manufactured or used, and maybe not enough complaints about it (yet) to prompt another new rule. Perhaps also it does not achieve the same level of disruption as frictionless pips? I have no experience since have not used either.

Author:	TTbuddy [ 10 Sep 2019, 08:30 ]
Post subject:	Re: Super Block Extreme
Very quixotic the ITTF allows frictionless antis (at least for now!) but banned frictionless pips Never/dont' use either.

Author:	Vadim [ 11 Sep 2019, 15:11 ]
Post subject:	Re: Super Block Extreme
,

Author:	igorponger [ 12 Sep 2019, 00:37 ]
Post subject:	Re: Super Block Extreme
Quote: ITTF launches a compaign to subdue aftertreatments on the pimples 27.08.2019 - Since 2008, smooth long nubs are prohibited. Although this decision led to the fact that only grippy long pimpled rubbers were approved by the ITTF, but he could not prevent that just in the amateur area after the purchase was treated. The Material Department of the ITTF now wants to counteract this malady and is looking for a new and applicable for each player test procedure. UV-light, microwave or epoxy spray - there are no limits to the imagination when 'miniature freaks' try to make their rubbers unpredictable to their opponents. The fact is, the aftertreatment of coverings is prohibited. This applies to pimples as well as to 'smooth' pads. The ITTF has been taking care of the tuning of the latter for a few months, now it is also tackling the after-treatment of pimples. "Because this makes the game more unpredictable," says ITTF Equipment Manager Claudia Herweg. "If the pimple tip is smooth, but the neck is grippy, it is very difficult for the opponent to judge the ball when it has come in contact with both surfaces. This unpredictability hurts the sport and we have to stop that as an ITTF. " Problem of the amateurs, not the professionals Since the ban on smooth long pimples, the pads are tested in a laboratory before approval, so that no models with too low grip come on the market. Of course, this does not prevent players from having their floor coverings retreated or post-treated after purchase. "There has been a real industry here in Germany - with traders who treat their coverings and do not offer treated," says Herweg. "In the professional field, the problem is virtually nonexistent, but is limited almost only to the amateur field. And here we get very negative letters from players from China, the US and Europe, because they feel cheated, as one of their opponents has allegedly played with skiddy pimples. " A complaint to the ITTF does not bring the players in the game itself, because in the hall can not be controlled, so to speak, whether the rubber is handy enough. "According to table tennis rules, the referee in the 'Racket Control' can not allow a surface if he believes that he does not have the necessary frictional resistance," says Herweg. "But that's too vague and not solid enough. We need a test procedure. "For this reason, since last week, the ITTF has been officially asking for proposals and concepts for checking pimpled surfaces. Requirements are that the new method can be applied directly in the hall, that the device is as easy to transport and operate as possible and costs relatively little money. The absolute maximum is 1000 euros, but it would be best if if the device would be for under ten euros. In addition, both coverings are to be unmasked, the pimples have been completely aftertreated, as well as those in which only the surface of the heads is too smooth. The pad should not be damaged during the test and the check should be repeatable. Interesting idea from Italy Claudia Herweg is confident that a test procedure can be approved in the next year, but no later than the year after that. In fact, a few promising proposals have already been received, for example from RWTH Aachen, whose Institute of Mechanics would like to award the search for a test method as a master's thesis. Another very auspicious idea came from Italy, where a measuring device is already in use, with the help of which the illegal post-treatment should have been almost completely suppressed (see video below). Till October 18, the tinkerers worldwide still have time to submit their ideas to the World Association. Should a meter be selected and approved by the ITTF, then it is up to the national federations to decide if they want to use it in their leagues as well.

Author:	charmander defender [ 12 Sep 2019, 01:51 ]
Post subject:	Re: Super Block Extreme
The next episode : The ITTF is now trying to track down the illegal boosting of inverted rubbers, so , so damaging to the sport but they have not started yet because they will be soon offering requests for bids on devices .... hahaha,... Why hasn't the ITTF started to request for bids on devices that ban the illegal boosting of rubbers ??? mmmmm,..... some pros might not be too happy,... ...... one friend of mine asked a pro to stick his rubbers - he had run out of glue - . When he gave the bat back, he could not control his setup for a week !!!!!!! .... this is a true story, my friend does not lie ,.... the pro was from Portugal,.... he played in the super division here ....... that is REALLY the dark side of tt,...not the pips in the amateur world or even in the pro tour as the final games are always played by inverted players . So many lies in the pro sport , be it tt, soccer,rugby,... whatever,...

Author:	Matt Pimple [ 12 Sep 2019, 02:48 ]
Post subject:	Re: Super Block Extreme
TTbuddy wrote: Very quixotic the ITTF allows frictionless antis (at least for now!) but banned frictionless pips Never/dont' use either. Dusty054 wrote: Vadim wrote: I understand, but why players permit play frictionless anti but not frictionless long pips? If ban long pips why not anti also? Both frictionless!!! When frictionless pips were banned frictionless anti did not exist. It was developed by Dr N in response to the pips ban. Frictionless anti is still not as widely manufactured or used, and maybe not enough complaints about it (yet) to prompt another new rule. Perhaps also it does not achieve the same level of disruption as frictionless pips? I have no experience since have not used either. The first frictionless antis were developed as an answer to the ban of the friction pips and were way to fast and absolutely uncontrollable. Over time they have improved much and are now much slower and have better control. However, they are still more difficult to control than the frictionless pips and in particular attacking is much more difficult. With other words, the now banned frictionless pips were much easier to play with for the average guy.

Author:	Dusty054 [ 12 Sep 2019, 09:21 ]
Post subject:	Re: Super Block Extreme
Matt Pimple wrote: The first frictionless antis were developed as an answer to the ban of the friction pips and were way to fast and absolutely uncontrollable. Over time they have improved much and are now much slower and have better control. However, they are still more difficult to control than the frictionless pips and in particular attacking is much more difficult. With other words, the now banned frictionless pips were much easier to play with for the average guy. I have sometimes wondered why, even now more than 10 years after the pips ban, there is still only two relatively small manufacturers producing frictionless anti, whereas frictionless pips were also produced by many of the larger manufacturers prior to the ban. Perhaps the control issue you mention is a main reason? Also their durability is an issue I think? The reluctance of the major manufacturers is interesting.

Author:	Derf59 [ 13 Sep 2019, 00:57 ]
Post subject:	Re: Super Block Extreme
Dusty054 wrote: Matt Pimple wrote: The first frictionless antis were developed as an answer to the ban of the friction pips and were way to fast and absolutely uncontrollable. Over time they have improved much and are now much slower and have better control. However, they are still more difficult to control than the frictionless pips and in particular attacking is much more difficult. With other words, the now banned frictionless pips were much easier to play with for the average guy. I have sometimes wondered why, even now more than 10 years after the pips ban, there is still only two relatively small manufacturers producing frictionless anti, whereas frictionless pips were also produced by many of the larger manufacturers prior to the ban. Perhaps the control issue you mention is a main reason? Also their durability is an issue I think? The reluctance of the major manufacturers is interesting. 10 years ago, there was also only 1 REAL manufacturer of frictionless pimple Dr Neubauer and "producing frictionless pimples" was his main earnings (in term of sales) Most others producers (Tibhar, TSP, Donic, ...) have each other 1 (or 2) frictionnless pimple (Grass Devil, Bamboo, Piranja, ...) but selling such kind of rubber is not their main activity. It's not interesting for a society to developp such king of rubber if it represents only 0,01% of earnings. It's for me the reason that only now 2 firms Dr Neubauer and DMS (you have also at the begining Joola because they were sponsor of Amelie Solja)

Page 2 of 3	All times are UTC + 9:30 hours
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/