OOAK Table Tennis Forum

That could be it then.
The pimples were very short and also wide, there was hardly a gap. They were brilliant and had so much control.
The company still makes them and but now abiding within the new rules. But they are nowhere near as good and look different.
I used to use Winning NP 1 (which is classed as an orthodox pimple, but without a backing) and I put on my own fast sponge.
Also Winning NP 8 were very similar and came already with sponge. But the pimples where slightly taller.
If I was clever enough I could send you photos cause I still have them in a box somewhere.
Also the ones that succeeded them.
Anyway anyone got any news about Victas 201
Although I have already ordered a sheet now to try.

ITTF have issued some reminder to all the equipment manufacturers, as follows:
There was a memorable accident back in 2002 that ITTF had withdrawn its approval of Butterfly Impartial pips-out version 17 for having unduly shorty stubs that lower than the minimum limit of 1.0 millimeter.
Butterfly reinstated the rubber in the year 2017, upon being renamed a little.

BUTTERFLY LARC 2019_A
023/ Impartial XS / Out
024/ Impartial XB / Out

/Be happy/

I think the original Winning NP 1 where also shorter than 1mm I think probably .75mm.
So that must be the reason. Very annoying as they were very good. So much control.

Hi there,

I bought a sheet of the vo102 in 1.8mm. I'd like to know if there is a big difference between 1.8 and 2.0, and between 1.8 and max. Do Thicker version of the sponge allow us to produce more spin ? Is there a big speed difference ?

Some of the thinner sponges are to slow in my opinion.
Before the lock down I had just started using Victas 102 with Max sponge.
I think it would be to slow in anything less.

With short pips, the thinner sponges are faster when you smash. Thick sponges are easier to generate spin with, and are faster when you loop.