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 14 Jul 2020, 09:21


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  [ 54 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: 03 Jun 2011, 04:26 
Offline
Modern Chiseler.
Modern Chiseler.
User avatar

Joined: 05 Oct 2007, 06:49
Posts: 11064
Location: USA
Has thanked: 493 times
Been thanked: 542 times
Blade: Grubba ALL+
FH: Marder 1mm
BH: Dornenglanz ox
Debater wrote:
Regardless of what I think of the rules and regs, if I'm playing someone in a competion or league which applies either the laws of table tennis or the ITTF regs then I think I have a moral right to expect my opponent to play within the rules and regulations of the competitoin I've chosen to enter and which they too have chosen to enter.

At the upper end of the sport there is the expectation that the opponent will have tuned his bat for optimum performance -- and anyone who doesn't do so is at a disadvantage. Seems kind of comical that recreational players are so worried about restrictive international equipment regulations only meant for elite international-level players, while the players whom the regulations were actually intended for see no problem with circumventing them because the regulations are recognized for what they are: bad regulations. :headbang:

_________________



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

No matter how good you are at something, there's always about a million people better than you.
Homer J. Simpson


Top
 Profile  
 


Don't want to see this advertisement? Become a member and login, and you'll never see an ad again!

PostPosted: 03 Jun 2011, 06:32 
Offline
OOAK Super User
OOAK Super User
User avatar

Joined: 11 Nov 2008, 21:06
Posts: 1213
Location: England
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 1 time
This thread seems to be getting to where I'd hope it'd go. Namely is it always moral to follow a law or sometimes is the law wrong and the moral action would be to oppose it. I find the idea that all laws are good laughable, regardless of the intention of some laws they may be misused or out of date.

Someone told me recently, that there is a castle in England where it is still legal to kill a Welshman with an arrow if they try and enter on a certain date. I believe there are also places that allow you to stone people to death, are they moral actions because they are legal?

I don't think legality and morality are interchangeable, the point about the land of ping been a prime example to me.

Atm I cosider that TT is not governed as it should be, I don't believe the governing bodies are straight enough with us for some of there changes and i odn't agree with soem of there changes. I think some of the measures they have employed to restrict ITTF pplayers playing in non-ITTF events are questionalble, I blieve that the outlawing of previous equipment to have been doen in an underhanded manner and so immoral (state your reason, the kids (or Ebby) doesn't like it and see if you can get it passed, don't bring it in through the side door without proper discussion). I also don't like hte suggestion of a new material ball, as I am sure it will only hurt allother styles than loopers and they seem to be again backdooring a bigger ball (average between 40 and 40.6, vs 39.5-40.5) yes make it tighter but why not 38.8 to 40.2 or for the good for the sport 37.7-38.2. With there prvious actions who'd bet against them making it as close to 40.6 as technology would allow.

They seem to have absolute power in the game and we know what they say about power.

_________________
Equipment Review Index
Joola Turbo: FH: Joola Peking (2mm) , BH: Joola Peking (2mm)
Another one bites the dust.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 04 Jun 2011, 07:01 
Offline
Modern Chiseler.
Modern Chiseler.
User avatar

Joined: 05 Oct 2007, 06:49
Posts: 11064
Location: USA
Has thanked: 493 times
Been thanked: 542 times
Blade: Grubba ALL+
FH: Marder 1mm
BH: Dornenglanz ox
You know all those lectures Adham gave us about following traffic rules even if no one else is and comparing that to using treated rubbers? Here's what Adham wrote about him and ITTF Board member Thomas Weikert walking from their hotel in NYC to SPiN.

“We will be there in no time” I said to Thomas. “I notice that no one respects the no-walk signs at the intersections, we will get there even faster” Thomas said as he increased the pace. Well, I have to tell you that Thomas, like his compatriot Hans Giesecke, can walk at a very speedy pace and treads with huge steps corresponding to his height and long legs. I am the President, he is the Vice President, and so I have to keep up with him.

http://www.ittf.com/_front_page/ittf_fu ... ition_ID=&

_________________



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

No matter how good you are at something, there's always about a million people better than you.
Homer J. Simpson


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 04 Jun 2011, 07:13 
Offline
OOAK Super User
OOAK Super User
User avatar

Joined: 02 Mar 2010, 19:16
Posts: 1400
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 64 times
antipip wrote:
This thread seems to be getting to where I'd hope it'd go. Namely is it always moral to follow a law or sometimes is the law wrong and the moral action would be to oppose it. I find the idea that all laws are good laughable, regardless of the intention of some laws they may be misused or out of date.

Someone told me recently, that there is a castle in England where it is still legal to kill a Welshman with an arrow if they try and enter on a certain date. I believe there are also places that allow you to stone people to death, are they moral actions because they are legal?

I don't think legality and morality are interchangeable, the point about the land of ping been a prime example to me.

Atm I cosider that TT is not governed as it should be, I don't believe the governing bodies are straight enough with us for some of there changes and i odn't agree with soem of there changes. I think some of the measures they have employed to restrict ITTF pplayers playing in non-ITTF events are questionalble, I blieve that the outlawing of previous equipment to have been doen in an underhanded manner and so immoral (state your reason, the kids (or Ebby) doesn't like it and see if you can get it passed, don't bring it in through the side door without proper discussion). I also don't like hte suggestion of a new material ball, as I am sure it will only hurt allother styles than loopers and they seem to be again backdooring a bigger ball (average between 40 and 40.6, vs 39.5-40.5) yes make it tighter but why not 38.8 to 40.2 or for the good for the sport 37.7-38.2. With there prvious actions who'd bet against them making it as close to 40.6 as technology would allow.

They seem to have absolute power in the game and we know what they say about power.


Well, it's what we say in our culture: Laws are made by men as reflection of their own values and beliefs... Moral men make moral laws, immoral men make immoral laws.

Many laws sit somewhere in between.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 04 Jun 2011, 07:30 
Offline
Horse Hockey!
User avatar

Joined: 03 Dec 2009, 03:25
Posts: 978
Location: North Carolina, USA
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 31 times
antipip wrote:
If laws are unjust, is it really immoral to break them; should they be opposed and exposed? Is there not a point where peope have to take a stand?

A quote from the United States' Declaration of Independence (1776) seems appropriate:

Quote:
When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

_________________
Giant Dragon Kris Special : RITC 802 w/Dawei 2.2 35d fh : : Donic Blue Fire M3 2.0 black bh
Member of Charlotte Table Tennis Club, Charlotte, North Carolina, USA
Visit Charlotte Table Tennis Club on Facebook


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 04 Jun 2011, 14:11 
Offline
Stir Crazy

Joined: 04 Oct 2010, 16:19
Posts: 928
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 17 times
mynamenotbob wrote:
You know all those lectures Adham gave us about following traffic rules even if no one else is and comparing that to using treated rubbers? Here's what Adham wrote about him and ITTF Board member Thomas Weikert walking from their hotel in NYC to SPiN.

“We will be there in no time” I said to Thomas. “I notice that no one respects the no-walk signs at the intersections, we will get there even faster” Thomas said as he increased the pace. Well, I have to tell you that Thomas, like his compatriot Hans Giesecke, can walk at a very speedy pace and treads with huge steps corresponding to his height and long legs. I am the President, he is the Vice President, and so I have to keep up with him.

http://www.ittf.com/_front_page/ittf_fu ... ition_ID=&

I'm sorry, MNNB, but you really are very, very selective in how you represent the ITTF and its office bearers.

Yes, you are perfectly correct: Sharara is a hypocrite if he "lectures" people on "following traffic rules even if no one else is". He should follow the rules and not say one thing but do another. Well spotted on the hypocrisy front.

At the same time, the fact that he is a hypocrite in this instance does NOT invalidate his original point - people should follow the rules even if no-one else is.

Secondly, on the selectivity front, aren't you the one who claims that you don't just post negative comments about the ITTF, but you also give credit where it's due? What about the opportunity you have missed to talk about the positives in the article? Why aren't you saying something about the fact that Sharara and Thomas Weickert walked 28 blocks to get to a SPIN club? Where is your commentary on the positive comments Sharara makes about Sarandon, the corporate use of the club, the presence of professionals helping amateurs, "Managers mixing with their staff and everyone having a great time", his involvement in the discussion and telling "them about the finals in Rotterdam and the 120 million people who watched it in China", and the possibilities present in "the ITTF’s and USATT’s idea of bringing a top event to NY"?

_________________
"So long, and thanks for all the fish
So sad that it should come to this"
Sung by the dolphins in The hitchhiker's guide to the galaxy


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 04 Jun 2011, 15:10 
Offline
Modern Chiseler.
Modern Chiseler.
User avatar

Joined: 05 Oct 2007, 06:49
Posts: 11064
Location: USA
Has thanked: 493 times
Been thanked: 542 times
Blade: Grubba ALL+
FH: Marder 1mm
BH: Dornenglanz ox
Tassie52 wrote:
Yes, you are perfectly correct: Sharara is a hypocrite if he "lectures" people on "following traffic rules even if no one else is". He should follow the rules and not say one thing but do another. Well spotted on the hypocrisy front.

At the same time, the fact that he is a hypocrite in this instance does NOT invalidate his original point - people should follow the rules even if no-one else is.

Secondly, on the selectivity front, aren't you the one who claims that you don't just post negative comments about the ITTF, but you also give credit where it's due? What about the opportunity you have missed to talk about the positives in the article?

Adham's choice to break rules that "no one respects" has a lot to do with the theme of this thread. In fact, it is a perfect example of what happens with "paper tiger" rules with no enforcement. In the real world we can't expect otherwise.

The other information you mentioned would be off-topic in this thread and more appropriate in a new thread in the "Interviews & Articles" section.

_________________



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

No matter how good you are at something, there's always about a million people better than you.
Homer J. Simpson


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 05 Jun 2011, 06:21 
Offline
Super User

Joined: 06 Dec 2008, 10:22
Posts: 624
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 6 times
Tassie52 wrote:
What I am required to be is a law abiding citizen.

...One choice is to find concrete evidence of a. corruption, b. high level cheating.


Do I understand it correctly: if there is "a. corruption, b. high level cheating", we are not required to be is a law abiding citizen?

Now my second question, let's say, a hypothetical one: if a certain rule is passed illegally (in violation of a legal procedure), than should we follow this illegal rule?

Please, do not say: "Who decides, if the rule is passed illegally?", let's assume, it is obvious to everyone.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 06 Jun 2011, 00:24 
Offline
Count Darkula
Count Darkula
User avatar

Joined: 01 Dec 2007, 15:07
Posts: 17501
Location: Dark side of Australia!!
Has thanked: 422 times
Been thanked: 290 times
Blade: Bty Gergely T5000
FH: TSP Regalis Blue Max
BH: Tibhar Grass Dtecs
Smartguy wrote:
Tassie52 wrote:
What I am required to be is a law abiding citizen.

...One choice is to find concrete evidence of a. corruption, b. high level cheating.


Do I understand it correctly: if there is "a. corruption, b. high level cheating", we are not required to be is a law abiding citizen?

Now my second question, let's say, a hypothetical one: if a certain rule is passed illegally (in violation of a legal procedure), than should we follow this illegal rule?

Please, do not say: "Who decides, if the rule is passed illegally?", let's assume, it is obvious to everyone.


If a. and b. exist, it does not release anyone from being a law abiding citizen (LAB), but as a LAB you should try to expose it (or seek help to) if you have concrete evidence.

If a law is created by illegal procedure that law is invalid, but it needs be proven it is invalid and struck off first, otherwise a transgression occurs that can only be cleared restrospectively after the invalid law is proven such.

_________________
I'm always in the dark, but the Dark sheds lights upon everything!! :twisted: Beauty is only pimple deep! Beauty is in the eye of the pipholder!
S/U 1: Blade: Bty Gergely . FH Black Andro Rasant 2.1 . BH Red Tibhar Grass Dtecs
S/U 2: Blade: Bty Gergely . FH Black Hexer+ 2.1 . BH Red GD Talon
S/U 3: Blade: Bty Gergely . No rubbers...thinking of adding Red Dtecs and Black Rasant
Aussie Table Tennis Shop / Aussie Table Tennis Facebook Page / Equipment Review Index / Read my Reb Report Blog: click here.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 06 Jun 2011, 21:39 
Offline
Super User

Joined: 06 Dec 2008, 10:22
Posts: 624
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 6 times
RebornTTEvnglist wrote:
If a. and b. exist, it does not release anyone from being a law abiding citizen (LAB), but as a LAB you should try to expose it (or seek help to) if you have concrete evidence.


Maybe we can agree on this: the term "law abiding citizen" implies legally passed laws and not illegally passed ones?

E.g. we respect private property, but if anyone illegally takes your racket from you and claims it his property, you are not going to respect that, are you?

I mean, it would be absurd to require to follow an illegally passed law/rule.

A different question is, how to abolish an illegally passed law/rule.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 07 Jun 2011, 02:17 
Offline
Modern Chiseler.
Modern Chiseler.
User avatar

Joined: 05 Oct 2007, 06:49
Posts: 11064
Location: USA
Has thanked: 493 times
Been thanked: 542 times
Blade: Grubba ALL+
FH: Marder 1mm
BH: Dornenglanz ox
Smartguy wrote:
A different question is, how to abolish an illegally passed law/rule.

Talking about table tennis, short of someone taking the ITTF to a real court of law where there is a chance of justice prevailing, there needs to be different people on the ITTF Board of Directors, which through the "ITTF Infallibility Rule" (3.02.01.01) has the absolute power to ban any equipment they want without oversight. From Adham's statements after the Swedish Association shot down all the ITTF's original alleged reasons for the FLP ban, it sounds like the BoD evoked their infallibility by simply claiming FLPs are "bad for the sport" and making some lame justification involving kids as they usually do.

_________________



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

No matter how good you are at something, there's always about a million people better than you.
Homer J. Simpson


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 07 Jun 2011, 09:57 
Offline
Super User

Joined: 06 Dec 2008, 10:22
Posts: 624
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 6 times
mynamenotbob wrote:
...ITTF Board of Directors, which through the "ITTF Infallibility Rule" (3.02.01.01) has the absolute power to ban any equipment they want without oversight. From Adham's statements after the Swedish Association shot down all the ITTF's original alleged reasons for the FLP ban, it sounds like the BoD evoked their infallibility by simply claiming FLPs are "bad for the sport" and making some lame justification involving kids as they usually do.


I have never read a statement of Adhams referring to the 3.02.01.01 concerning FLP ban.

His explanations was like they introduced a minimum friction level to prevent treatment of pips.

I do not think it would be in sense of the rules to consider a rubber to be "detrimental to the sport" as long as the rubber perfectly matches the rules. It is different, if the rules are changed and the rubber does not match them any more.

It does not look like the BoD banned FLP as "detrimental to the sport". They went a different way. They have a right to make "detailed explanations and interpretations of regulations, including equipment specifications" (3.01.02.07). The problem is, that there is no regulation about friction level in the rules, therefore they have no legal ground for "explanations and interpretations" of friction level. Hence their "minimum friction level" is illegal.

In other words, to justify the introduction of the "minimum friction level" there should be something like "rubbers should have sufficient friction" in the rules. This would be unclear and require "explanations and interpretations". But we do not have anything like that in the rules.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 07 Jun 2011, 13:09 
Offline
Modern Chiseler.
Modern Chiseler.
User avatar

Joined: 05 Oct 2007, 06:49
Posts: 11064
Location: USA
Has thanked: 493 times
Been thanked: 542 times
Blade: Grubba ALL+
FH: Marder 1mm
BH: Dornenglanz ox
Smartguy wrote:
I have never read a statement of Adhams referring to the 3.02.01.01 concerning FLP ban.

Adham never referenced 3.02.01.01 by name, but the specific reasons the frictionless were not reinstated are as follows.

Quote:
The Swedish proposition did not receive much support, only about 4-5 members voted in favour (43 members in attendance). The real reasons are as follows:

- This is NOT an issue of any importance at the ITTF level
- Associations are not forced to implement the rule in their country. In fact the English Board member voted against the proposal and said that in England they allow players to play with any equipment they want
- Most felt that frictionless long pimples are bad for our sport
- Most felt that it is better to develop young players without the long pips frictionless rubber.

Adham's statement was in response to a query from haggisv from this forum. http://aussietabletennis.blogspot.com/2 ... chive.html

The only place a minimum friction is mentioned is in a technical leaflet and it is only applicable to manufacturers.

_________________



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

No matter how good you are at something, there's always about a million people better than you.
Homer J. Simpson


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 07 Jun 2011, 20:41 
Offline
Stir Crazy

Joined: 04 Oct 2010, 16:19
Posts: 928
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 17 times
Smartguy wrote:
Tassie52 wrote:
...One choice is to find concrete evidence of a. corruption, b. high level cheating.

Do I understand it correctly: if there is "a. corruption, b. high level cheating", we are not required to be is a law abiding citizen?

IF there is "a. corruption, b. high level cheating". There has to be some requirement of proof. Statements of the "it is obvious to eveyone" kind do not constitute proof.

At the same time, history is full of stories of great heroism where people have intentionally stepped outside the law in order to bring about change. The earlier quoted American civil rights movement and the Indian Salt March are perfect examples. When we talk about "unjust laws" applying to something as trivial as the ban on FLPs, we need to do a reality check. It is absurd to compare the indefensible treatment of black Americans with having to take a piece off rubber of some sports equipment. And we also have to ask about what is trying to be achieved. We can't lose sight of the aim of civil disobedience: to bring about change.

We have a thread which specifically asks "Do you break the ITTF's Racket rules?" 29% of the respondents say they do! What is the aim of their stepping outside the laws of TT? Is it to bring about change? Of course not - not one of those rule breakers does it with the express intention of sending a message to the ITTF, because if they did, they would be publicising their actions in their local associations and on this forum and we would be hearing about their "fight for freedom".

Instead, what we have is a sizeable proportion of our members who break the rules in competition: note, only 3 respondents to the poll say they "Don't play in a league or club which is required to apply these rules". Which must therefore mean that 10 of the 34 people who answered the question are using illegal blades in competition. To claim that they are allowed to do so because the laws of TT are "unjust" is a cop out. It's also a fallacy to claim that it's okay to break the rules because Adham Sharara says the rules were meant to be applied at the elite level. Obviously local associations have chosen to use the ITTF's policies for their own competitions and, therefore, those who are using illegal rackets are breaking the rules of their own associations. And NOT for the purpose of changing anything.

(Apologies for the length of this post - I couldn't find a way to say it shorter! :oops: )

_________________
"So long, and thanks for all the fish
So sad that it should come to this"
Sung by the dolphins in The hitchhiker's guide to the galaxy


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 07 Jun 2011, 23:16 
Offline
Super User

Joined: 06 Dec 2008, 10:22
Posts: 624
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 6 times
mynamenotbob wrote:
The only place a minimum friction is mentioned is in a technical leaflet and it is only applicable to manufacturers.


And to racket controller, too. Like explanations about "matt" and "bright red".

The question is, is "the minimum friction level" legal or not.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 54 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next


Don't want to see this advertisement? Become a member and login, and you'll never see an ad again!



All times are UTC + 9:30 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 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