OOAK Table Tennis Forum

I joined my leagues Committee after having an argument in a car park with our Chairman late at night. I thought it was enough to always turn up for my matches and pay my fees on time. His comment was if you don't like what we are doing or think you have ideas that need to be listened to join the committee and stop crying about it. Get involved. It's not easy. It's unpaid. It can take up a lot of time. And no it's not for everyone. But please, stop going on about what the ITTF doesn't do for you and do something about it for yourself.

Because some members don't like to read swearing on a forum which is supposed to be about table tennis. Because if you have to resort to swearing you've already lost the argument. Because this whole thread is turning in to a "who can shout the loudest" competition and many of the valid points which are being raised and questions asked are getting lost in amongst the emotion and aggressive language which is being used here. This is meant to be a discussion thread.



Has no one noticed this is Adham's thread and yet there have been over 20 posts by other people since his last post. That's the first time I've seen this much inactivity by Adham. As far as I'm aware the ITTF don't represent the majority of players here and has never claimed to. Your national association represents you. It's the national associations who have the power to drive the ITTF. If they chose not to do that then that is your Associations fault AND YOURS for not pushing your National Association. For those who have no confidence in your national association, do something about it rather than simply complain. Stand for election to your Association or your local league and if you can't or aren't willing then how much do you really care about this sport? Where does it really lie in your priorities in life. I make no judgement on what is important to anyone as that is up to the individual but please stop blaming the ITTF for this - and no I am not a fan of either the ITTF. The ETTA stood up for what it believed in and rightly or wrongly allowed the use of non authorised rubbers in league play below County standard. If they can do it so can your national association. If you feel you can't affect the ITTF ignore them and concentrate your efforts on your National Associations, if your National Association won't listen canvas your league, if your league won't listen canvas your club. Why must everything start at the top. Sometimes working from the bottom is the easier and more effective thing to do. If concentrating on lobbying along these lines doesn't work, ask yourself why and address those issues.

Adham has already said this many times over and I'm finding the whole thread getting stale as we rehash and rehash issues about the ITTF not representing us the players. There is a thread here on this forum called "All ideas to promote table tennis".

viewtopic.php?f=25&t=4900

The first post was made by haggisv on Nov 7th 2008. It's had a total of 7 posts on it. 7 posts in nearly 10 months. People talk on here about how little the ITTF is doing to support us the mass who play the game. I'll turn the question round. What are we "the mass" doing to support the game. If people are so passionate about this game why aren't you posting there. Instead of criticising Adham and the ITTF lets hear what you are doing, or your league or what ideas you have to promote table tennis there. Criticising the ITTF is easy. Looking in at ourselves and what we do is harder. Maybe we don't do that because we won't like what we see.

I joined my leagues Committee after having an argument in a car park with our Chairman late at night. I thought it was enough to always turn up for my matches and pay my fees on time. His comment was if you don't like what we are doing or think you have ideas that need to be listened to join the committee and stop crying about it. Get involved. It's not easy. It's unpaid. It can take up a lot of time. And no it's not for everyone. But please, stop going on about what the ITTF doesn't do for you and do something about it for yourself.

In the meantime trawling through what has already been asked since Adham's last post I'd like to bring the thread back to actual questions and give Adham a chance to respon (as speedplay has already noted)

1. Is it true that the ITTF is going to ban the use of different sponges with different top sheets
2. If it is true at what level of competition will this rule be enforced and who will make that decision
2. IF it's true, how does the ITTF expect this rule to be enforced at local league level

Sorry for the directness of my comments especially if this upsets some.

Dear Adham!

Can you please tell us about the ITTF proposals of start authorising table tennis blades?

1. Is this just an idea/proposal, or has it already been decided?

2. What is motivation for this proposal?

3. What are the benefits to the players?

I'm aware the ITTF makes rules for top level players, but I'm sure you know that rules always filter down to the lower levels eventually, so it would be good to see that implication for these players a well.

Thank you!

Mr Adam Sharara
and
Mr Igor (national umpire Russia)

Referring to Mr Igor post dated of 05 sept 2009 about the thickness of rubbers:

In reference about your e-mail correspondence with Mr Gustavsen that the ITTF sent instructions to all of the world`s major rubber-makers and instructed them to reduce the total thickness of rubbers not over 3.85mm:

1- Your e-mail correspondence with Mr Gustavsen asking to reduce thickness not over 3.85mm seems to confirm that all rubbers in the world with the actual maximum thickness of 4.0mm (topsheet + sponge) are illegal because it is impossible to stick the rubber to the blade without adding glue and going over 4.0 mm.

For all these years and until the situation will change, referees are disqualifying players all around the world because of this rule and manufacturers sold and are still selling illegal rubbers!!!

A question about that was already asked to Mr Adam Sharara at this post subject at the page 27 (dated of 04 may 2009) by the author “Kim Is My Shadow” in reference of the proposition of the Chinese Association. The question was:

“If this was implemented would anyone who had bought a rubber which was 4mm in thickness before applying glue, not be able to use it? ”

Mr Sharara did not answer this question.
____________________________________________________________________

2- Why it took so long (from 1959 to 2009) from the ITTF to take action about this rule ?
The ITTF approbation appears on the topsheet (ITTF logo, etc.) and there is no approbation for the sponge. Because these two parts are forming one product, (because they are glued together) and because the ITTF logo is a confirmation of the respect of rules, the ITTF had certainly the right to give restrictions to manufacturers about the maximum thickness (rubber + sponge).
In another way, it is the responsibility of the ITTF that players will have enough thickness remaining to put glue to respect the maximum thickness aloud (4.0mm). And it is the responsibility of the players to respects the thickness aloud to put glue.
___________________________________________________________________

3- Because this situation is existing for fifty years, why the ITTF did not use their rights to ask manufacturers to reduce the thickness to be conform of the rules when they are putting their ITTF logo on the top of a product ?
__________________________________________________________________

4-At the last AGM 2009 the proposition by the China Association (for the rule 2.4.3 to reduce the thickness from 4.0mm to 3.8mm) was rejected like Mr Adam Sharara wrote (at this post subject, page 27 dated 04 may 2009).
What happened between the time it was rejected and the time you received your e-mail stating that the new maximum thickness is now 3.85mm ?
___________________________________________________________________

5-Mr Igor, in reference of your e-mail with Mr Gustavsen, you are indicating in this topic subject (dated 05 sept 2009 that the new maximum thickness that world’s major rubber-makers will produce is 3.85mm and in another post, the same day, you wrote that it is 3.80mm. Which one is good?

Here is the link of your other post:
viewtopic.php?f=25&t=8434
___________________________________________________________________

I believe that Mr Adam Sharara is aware about this situation because it is concerning a lot of players and he will give answers for these questions.

Mr Adham Sharara

Ar the rule 2.4.3 it said that the maximum thickness including adhesive for a rubber and the sponge is 4.00mm.

1- Could you explain when manufacturers are selling rubbers indicating MAXIMUM for the thickness (for example 2.5mm sponge + 1.5mm rubbers) how can you put glue or adhesive or PSA (pressure-sensitive-adhesive sheet) without being increasing the thickness and becoming not illegal?

If my source is good, this rule is in effect from 1959. So if I’m right, for the last 50 years, any players who bought rubbers with maximum thickness (topsheet + sponge) was illegal.

At the last Championnats Canadian Senior, which was held last july 2009, referees had disqualify one of the top players in Canada, (Mr.Guy Germain a good friend of you), because the glue was creating a thickness exceeding 4.00mm by the thickness of a hair. From this time, he stopped playing finding ridiculous this rule after nearly 50 years of practicing table tennis.

_____________________________________________________________________

At the technical leaflet T4 (last updated march 5, 2009) at the section: Definitions Qualitative criteria it said:
The manufacturers should be aware that the practice of "re-gluing", i.e. removing the racket covering, adding adhesive and re-applying the covering immediately before a match, might cause rubber / sponge to expand. When the resulting thickness is measured by an umpire it may be found to be illegal.

In the same Technical leaflet T4 at the section: Quantitative criteria it said:
It is the player’s responsibility to limit the total thickness of his racket covering to no more than 4.0 mm, including top sheet, sponge and adhesive.

2- Mr Sharara, how players can respect the total thickness of their own racket when manufacturers are not obligated to indicate the thickness of the topsheet and the sponge?

Considering that the thickness of the topsheet could be 2.0mm (maximum thickness aloud) and that players don’t have this information, they are taking a risk to buy rubbers with a 2.0mm sponge or more, because the total thickness could be 4.0mm leaving no space available for the thickness of the glue.

3- How could the ITTF gives the responsibility to players to be legal but not obligating manufacturers to indicates the thickness of their products ???
_________________________________________________________
I read in this forum that at the last AGM 2009, the Chinese table tennis association had proposed to modify the paragraph 2.4.3 to find a solution about this situation and here it is:
2.4.3 A side of the blade used for striking the ball shall be covered with either ordinary pimpled rubber, with pimples outwards having a total thickness including adhesive of not more than 2mm, or sandwich rubber, with pimples inwards or outwards having a total thickness excluding adhesives of not more than 3.8mm and including adhesives of not more than 4mm.
It was defeated like you said receiving only 70% of the votes (minimum 75% to be adopted)

4-Is the ITTF is planning to do something for this situation in a near future?

Thank You.
Connor
Quebec, Canada

1. It is a request from manufacturers and associations to start an authorization system for the SPONGE and the BLADES just like for the rubbers. This is still at the research stage at the moment to study the feasibility. The SPONGE will be first. At the moment the ITTF only authorizes the rubber but not the sponge.

2. We have encountered many ambiguities about detaching and regluing sponge to rubber etc. There is also the whole issue of tuning and boosting sponge but not the rubber, etc. So it is felt that both parts should be the "racket covering". Regarding BLADES, we have discovered that some manufacturers actually shave the blade (concave shaving) in order to allow for thicker rubber to be used, or to allow for the expansion of the rubber when boosted. So the manufacturers that follow the rules are not happy. They find that it is cheating and unfair. We agree. Also some national associations have complained as they suspect that some players may be using these type of blades at the ITTF events. So we wish to control this matter before it goes out of hand and ensure a level playing field. Until now we used the honour system and relied on the manufacturers to produce the equipment according to the ITTF rules. Unfortunately some are not following the rules (85% wood, flat, even, etc.) and it forces us to put a system in place to control the equipment before it goes to market.

3. Mainly an even playing field and knowing that if a blade carries the ITTF logo and authorization then it is according to ITTF rules. The same applies to the sponge. Basically the same type of "stamp of recognition" that rubbers have today. For players using legal blades there will be no difference at all. Of course there will be a phasing in period, and also the blade will be monitored at racket control stations at our events, just like the rest of the racket is checked.

no one, especially me, will force you to answer, but is it a mere coincidence that these questions are left unanswered? i`m sure it was only because of lack of time...



"so let me be specific and kindly point out where exactly you have answered these questions specifically and if not, kindly do so to actually do some effort in trying to restore the ittfs image:

1) an ominous letter reached the ittf complaining about a "rather frictionless" tt-master ruber. what exactly were the ittfs next steps?
a) did the ittf find that every single insider or swingback if after it they had been approved did not meet the requirements any longer (meaning that they were different to the original version) or were there mere inconsistencies in the production?
b) if so, how many rubbers did the ittf test and how many of these rubbers did not meet the requirements?
c) where exactly on paper does the ittf state how many "inconsistant" rubbers lead to the elimination of a specific rubber?
d)how many mN did these sheets reach?

2) how does the machine work that tests the friction and why is the ittf reluctant in providing further information on this matter?

3) what exactly happened to the tt-master crossbow, it was approved and then mysteriously vanished from the list. "

Hi Adham,

1. Would this mean that sponges and top sheets currently sold separately would no longer be allowed to be used in tournaments?

2. If blades need to be approved, would discontinued, custom or homemade blades be disallowed?

3. Is any thought being given to the feasibility of enforcing this throughout table tennis?

Since most associations would automatically implement this if the ITTF goes ahead with it, it sounds like it might cause a lot of confusion and additional expense for us amateur players.