| OOAK Table Tennis Forum https://ooakforum.com/ |
|
| ITTF President, Adham Sharara, answers questions PART2 https://ooakforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=25&t=5357 |
Page 57 of 61 |
| Author: | adham [ 19 Sep 2009, 06:34 ] |
| Post subject: | Re: ITTF President, Adham Sharara, answers your questions |
bbkon wrote: bbkon wrote: Hi Adam Ive heard a rumour about ITTF planning to ban short pips? is that true. How come liu guoliang Spinpips was banned if this pips were used since 70's. bbkon Adham would you answer the question (above) i posted weeks ago about the pips? It's a rumour. I really don't know anything about Liu Guoliang's spin pips. |
|
| Author: | bbkon [ 19 Sep 2009, 09:25 ] |
| Post subject: | Re: ITTF President, Adham Sharara, answers your questions |
adham wrote: bbkon wrote: bbkon wrote: Hi Adam Ive heard a rumour about ITTF planning to ban short pips? is that true. How come liu guoliang Spinpips was banned if this pips were used since 70's. bbkon Adham would you answer the question (above) i posted weeks ago about the pips? It's a rumour. I really don't know anything about Liu Guoliang's spin pips. Spinpips were used since late 70's and when Liu was at the top at 1999 becoming world champion, ITTF removed them ,Why ITTF has waited 20+years to find out is not legal? thecnology has advanced a lot and the manufacturers (TSP)were not able to comply the ITTF requirements in 1999 but they were 20 years ago.. so that leads me to think: 1 can you be world champion using ilegal pips? 2 what are the requirement for a short pips to be legal? |
|
| Author: | dwruck [ 19 Sep 2009, 10:34 ] |
| Post subject: | Re: ITTF President, Adham Sharara, answers your questions |
Wouldn't the main requirement basically be the same as long pips, that there's a certain level of friction? That's all I can think of. |
|
| Author: | bbkon [ 19 Sep 2009, 10:49 ] |
| Post subject: | Re: ITTF President, Adham Sharara, answers your questions |
dwruck wrote: Wouldn't the main requirement basically be the same as long pips, that there's a certain level of friction? That's all I can think of. TSP is not gonna modify their pips for LIU, i guess if liu would have not won the pips would legal too, a rubber called g888 DHS used by several top players of china was examinated if would be still legal, do you get the idea? |
|
| Author: | mynamenotbob [ 19 Sep 2009, 10:58 ] |
| Post subject: | Re: ITTF President, Adham Sharara, answers your questions |
dwruck wrote: Wouldn't the main requirement basically be the same as long pips, that there's a certain level of friction? That's all I can think of. They were outlawed when the ITTF changed the aspect ratio rule. A lot of good pips were banned because of this rule which no one really thought through properly. |
|
| Author: | bbkon [ 19 Sep 2009, 11:07 ] |
| Post subject: | Re: ITTF President, Adham Sharara, answers your questions |
mynamenotbob wrote: dwruck wrote: Wouldn't the main requirement basically be the same as long pips, that there's a certain level of friction? That's all I can think of. They were outlawed when the ITTF changed the aspect ratio rule. A lot of good pips were banned because of this rule which no one really thought through properly. dont you think that its really strange that those pips were used by the best player of the world at that moment as long the hidden arm rule when the best server of the world was chinese ? why the serving rule was not enforced when waldner had the best serve of the world in the late 80's |
|
| Author: | Connor [ 19 Sep 2009, 14:18 ] |
| Post subject: | Re: ITTF President, Adham Sharara, answers your questions |
Mr Sharara, Rules for service have change during the past years for good reasons in order to ameliorate the sport in different ways. At the ITTF web site, there was 88 videos showing good and bad services with explanations. These videos was under the section “Umpires and Referees” (in the section Main page / Committee) and the reason it was there was probably because these videos was mainly done for referees in general. Unfortunately, they were not located at a place that most visitors were going to look. They were very instructive and they were translating the written rules in real players in action ( a big percentage of players are not aware about these rules because they are not interested to read all these rules mostly written in a legal and/or technical language). These videos are an excellent and easy way to promote table tennis on the internet all around the world in a sense that it is the most basic rule concerning the first thing you do in table tennis: the service. All the players who saw these videos (even experimented players) found them very interesting and they learn a lot about the service. Unfortunately, there is no link at the ITTF website to go directly to these 88 videos but there are still available at this link: http://www.ittf.com/Committees/Umpires_ ... index.html Referees who saw these videos was very happy because they are, at the same time, an instrument to educate competition players about rules for the service and they were wishing that they should be more accessible to the public in general. 1- Why did the ITTF remove the link at the ITTF website to see these videos? 2- Don’t you think that promoting these videos through all the web site associations in the world ( and any web site in regards of table tennis) will be a good thing to gain popularity for the table tennis? |
|
| Author: | adham [ 20 Sep 2009, 00:07 ] |
| Post subject: | Re: ITTF President, Adham Sharara, answers your questions |
Adham would you answer the question (above) i posted weeks ago about the pips?[/quote] It's a rumour. I really don't know anything about Liu Guoliang's spin pips.[/quote] Spinpips were used since late 70's and when Liu was at the top at 1999 becoming world champion, ITTF removed them ,Why ITTF has waited 20+years to find out is not legal? thecnology has advanced a lot and the manufacturers (TSP)were not able to comply the ITTF requirements in 1999 but they were 20 years ago.. so that leads me to think: 1 can you be world champion using ilegal pips? 2 what are the requirement for a short pips to be legal?[/quote] The rule is very clear. Maybe the pips did not meet the rule anymore? or maybe the manufacturer did not want to get the authorization any more because of low sales. I really do not know what happened in 1999. Maybe you could ask the manufacturer of that product. To answer your question: 1. If the pips were used in 1999 then they must have been legal 2. The requiremnets are very clear in the ITTF rules and in the corresponding Technical Leaflet for racket coverings. |
|
| Author: | bbkon [ 20 Sep 2009, 03:37 ] |
| Post subject: | Re: ITTF President, Adham Sharara, answers your questions |
adham wrote: Adham would you answer the question (above) i posted weeks ago about the pips? It's a rumour. I really don't know anything about Liu Guoliang's spin pips.[/quote] Spinpips were used since late 70's and when Liu was at the top at 1999 becoming world champion, ITTF removed them ,Why ITTF has waited 20+years to find out is not legal? thecnology has advanced a lot and the manufacturers (TSP)were not able to comply the ITTF requirements in 1999 but they were 20 years ago.. so that leads me to think: 1 can you be world champion using ilegal pips? 2 what are the requirement for a short pips to be legal?[/quote] The rule is very clear. Maybe the pips did not meet the rule anymore? or maybe the manufacturer did not want to get the authorization any more because of low sales. I really do not know what happened in 1999. Maybe you could ask the manufacturer of that product. To answer your question: 1. If the pips were used in 1999 then they must have been legal 2. The requiremnets are very clear in the ITTF rules and in the corresponding Technical Leaflet for racket coverings.[/quote] There is no clear information about pips(short) besides if the player would be using TSP and that player is the world champion there would be more reason to pay the licensing fees abou that rubber, i dont know how you are not aware about the decisions made by the equipment board if that happened when you were ITTF president in 2000..well i give up since none of your answers shed light about that issue. |
|
| Author: | mynamenotbob [ 20 Sep 2009, 04:40 ] |
| Post subject: | Re: ITTF President, Adham Sharara, answers your questions |
I'm sure Adham can fill in the blanks, but from what I understand the situation with Spin Pips is this: As part of the longterm ITTF strategy to slowly grind away long pimple players, it was decided to change the long established and accepted aspect ratio rule from 1.3 to 1.1. This outlawed some of the prime chopping rubbers such as TSP P1, Butterfly Feint Long, Yasaka Phantom 0011/0012 and the original Juic Leggy. Sadly this rule also adversely affected players using short pips as well. TSP Spin Pips, used by world champion Liu Guoliang and Canadian champion Johnny Huang were also banned, as were the famous Leyland short pips, which are the heritage of the whole sport. Contrary to the notion that the manufacturer simply let the approval of the rubbers lapse, the ITTF actually turned a deaf ear to all pleas to correct this injustice via an exemption or other means. |
|
| Author: | Smartguy [ 20 Sep 2009, 06:14 ] |
| Post subject: | Re: ITTF President, Adham Sharara, answers your questions |
adham wrote: AA wrote: ...how many rubbers did the ittf test b) The ITTF tested a sufficient number of rubbers on several occasions from different retail batches Now I am curious, too. Please, give us the exact number. |
|
| Author: | mynamenotbob [ 20 Sep 2009, 06:43 ] |
| Post subject: | Re: ITTF President, Adham Sharara, answers your questions |
Smartguy wrote: adham wrote: AA wrote: ...how many rubbers did the ittf test b) The ITTF tested a sufficient number of rubbers on several occasions from different retail batches Now I am curious, too. Please, give us the exact number. Also it's not clear to me that the TTMaster rubbers were actually even under the 25mN limit. The technicality on which they were banned was apparently that the grip on the pimple necks was different than what was on the pimple tops. My questions are: 1. How much of a difference in mN was there between the tops and sides of the pips? 2. Were the pips actually at or above the 25mN limit? 3. Are both the necks and tops measured when pimpled sheets are submitted to the ITTF for approval? |
|
| Author: | Smartguy [ 20 Sep 2009, 11:19 ] |
| Post subject: | Re: ITTF President, Adham Sharara, answers your questions |
adham wrote: 2. I personally do not know how the machine works, I leave that to the experts. But the machine used by the ITTF is certified by the proper authorities in the matter and is located in a laboratory in Germany that is also certified by the proper authorities. There are several ways to measure friction or rubber properties, and of course there are several machines and brands that can do that. The machines used by the ITTF were accepted by the court as reliable and official. The method of testing is not a secret, in fact it is a standard non-arbitrary method. But when testing, the ITTF has its own criteria that it uses to be able to quickly discover irregularities. This technology and information belongs to the ITTF because we use it for detection and random testing. The criteria to "produce" the rubber are well known and provided to the manufacturers and if they follow them, then their product would meet the ITTF's criteria. The "testing" belongs only to the ITTF obviously. I would like to tell you, how I understand your explanation. I see here 2 possibilities. 1. In the process of authorisation you send pimples without sponge to a certified laboratory in Germany and they test the pimples whether they meet ITTF criteria using a special certified machine. The method of testing is not a secret. Then you buy suspicious pimpled rubber, separate the pimples from the sponge and send pimples without sponge to the same certified laboratory in Germany and they test the same pimples whether they meet the same ITTF criteria using the same special certified machine. The method of testing in this case is however different and secret. That does not make sense to me at all. I am afraid very few people will believe this story. 2. You did not say actually, that you sent the suspicious pimpled rubber for the second test to the certified laboratory. Than it is quite understandable, that your test without the certified machine is secret. Because your test without the machine can not be equally reliable. Otherwise you would not have sent pimples to this laboratory in Germany at all. I really think you should clarify this issue at least for the sake of credibility of ITTF. |
|
| Author: | bbkon [ 22 Sep 2009, 03:05 ] |
| Post subject: | Re: ITTF President, Adham Sharara, answers your questions |
ITTF made a favour to walnder and europe ,they did what nobody could do at the table, beating liu banning hisraquet. its extremely fishy banning a rubber that the biggest threat of europe was using WHAT IS NEXT BANNING HURRICANE AND HAIFU? |
|
| Author: | adham [ 22 Sep 2009, 03:59 ] |
| Post subject: | Re: ITTF President, Adham Sharara, answers your questions |
Smartguy wrote: adham wrote: AA wrote: ...how many rubbers did the ittf test b) The ITTF tested a sufficient number of rubbers on several occasions from different retail batches Now I am curious, too. Please, give us the exact number. I personally do not know the exact number. It's a certified lab that does the tests for us and they have a specific protocol that they followed. This was presented at the court case and accepted. The point is that the number of samples (whatever number) was sufficient and accepted by law. |
|
| Page 57 of 61 | All times are UTC + 9:30 hours |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|