OOAK Table Tennis Forum

Legendary hardbatter Marty Reisman recently wrote an open letter that has sparked a lot of discussion. This is it:

Historical Distortion

I have watched in silence as the posts on this site go endlessly over technological and other extraneous issues which the posters seem to believe have some relevance to the game we played in the Classic Era ... the game that we tried to resurrect under the banner of "hardbat". But it is past time that I spoke up … and so, in this and subsequent postings I intend to address some of these controversies.

At the outset, let me say unequivocally that the motivating impulse behind the resurrection of "hardbat" was not to give a home to sponge players to play a modified sponge-light, 3-Ball, serve-intensive variation of the modern game sans sponge. Who in his right mind would SEEK to do that?

Rather, the intent was to restore the classic game of table tennis to USATT tournaments so its beauty, dialogue, and spectator appeal would not be lost, and also to provide to players of the modern era, a peek into their rich heritage – a heritage few modern players know about – to a world of table tennis when spectator interest was at its peak and American table tennis players were truly world-competitive. The world where technique, not technology, was the focus of the game.

Contrary to what anyone may believe, the constant barrage of opinions, observations, suggestions and insights in reference to the current hardbat game that appear regularly on this forum bears little relationship to classic table tennis as was played during The Golden Era, because at the elemental equipment base-level, the current hardbat game incorporates elements of deceit, fraud and deception made possible by the very nature of the modern hardbat rubbers, not one of which existed prior to 1952.

Most hardbat players of today, in reality, are playing and discussing a mutant variation of the sport, being neither Classical nor Sponge. Just because the modern rubber does not have an underlying sponge layer does not automatically qualify it to parade under the banner of the classic game -- the game that was played by Barna, Bergmann, Leach, Vana, Andreadis, Sido as well as everyone else prior to the advent of sponge. Have no illusions, today's hardbat game is not the classic game by a longshot, yet that was its reason for being.

A more apt description of the game as currently played should be Junk Hardbat. It's certainly not Classic table tennis because the purity of that game was based on utilization of spin for control, not befuddlement of the opponent. Yet this is a key element of Junk Hardbat -- and the selection of such rubber to produce such havoc is indisputably a prime consideration of most of today's hardbat players.

Present-day hardbat rubbers, most particularly Dr Evil, Butterfly Ox, Hallmark Magic Pips, Yasaka, Cobalt even the Reisman Classic, etc, despite what anyone thinks, are capable of producing disturbing springiness and aberrational spins, elements which have contaminated and undermined what we sought to resurrect, bastardizing it in a manner having no relationship whatsoever to the classic game as it was played with Leyland, Dunlop, and Slazenger coverings, and the like.

Regrettably, the table tennis game that was played during the Golden Era has been so bent out of shape by the spin-oriented mentality of the longtime spongers gravitating between sponge and hardbat that the art of the classic game relating to strokes, technique, footwork and strategy is never even discussed as it once was when its artistry and stroke-analysis were the topics of discussion among neophytes and experts alike.

As an unrepentant purist and foremost expert on the subject of Leyland, and based upon my ability to assess the precise effect that respective junk rubbers have on the ball, as well as my knowledge of having played the game for almost 70 years, I find these discussions by most posters on this forum to be totally without merit – on a fool's errand really – as they attempt to analyze, compare and decide on the best junk coverings that are currently being paraded as classic rubbers but that are actually more closely related to a peanut butter sandwich than to rubbers used in the Classic Era.

The fact that we cannot any longer obtain Leyland rubber is no reason for despair or a throwing up of hands. With a revival of interest in table tennis that seeks to level the playing field, a decent paddle with rubber conforming to the playing characteristics of the Classic Era can be manufactured and successfully marketed. Had Killerspin sought classic expertise instead of choosing to follow its own lights, such a paddle could already be in existence.

In all my years as a player during the Classic Era, the effect of the rubber was never a topic of discussion because none of the extreme outcome-influencing products even existed. The absurdity by some players, apparently bereft of talent, to experimentally tamper with the modern rubbers to further increase efficiency by sandpapering the pips or adding linen-backing to rubber sheeting indicates a growing desire and a never-ending quest to bring even a greater degree of sponge insanity – and elements of chaos – into what is already only an extremely poor remnant of the classic game.

To those of you who are not tuned into the purity and the art of the genuine game of the Classic Era – which, I suspect, is most of you (for reading books and seeing a few newsreel clips is not the same as experiencing years of such play) – who are hell-bent on finding and using the most effective rubbers possible, all I can say is that it is just such a sponge-driven mentality that has contributed to transforming my intent into a watered-down version of pimples-out sponge, a far cry from my half-century-long ambition to resurrect Classic table tennis with all its integrity.

The inescapable fact is that most everyone here is playing, promoting, discussing and analyzing a considerably butchered and bastardized version of the game of the Golden Era, so let's not try to palm it off to the world, to each other, to me and especially to generations to come, that this is Classic table tennis, because it's not. When you see it played you'll know it. So will everyone on the planet.

Reisman

_________________
OOAK Table Tennis Shop | Re-Impact Blades | Butterfly Table Tennis bats
Setup1: Re-Impact Smart, Viper OX, Victas VS 401 Setup2: Re-Impact Barath, Dtecs OX, TSP Triple Spin Chop 1.0mm Setup3: Re-Impact Dark Knight, Hellfire OX, 999 Turbo
Recent Articles: Butterfly Tenergy Alternatives | Tenergy Rubbers Compared | Re-Impact User Guide

Interesting to see Marty referring to the currently approved hardbat rubbers as "junk rubbers." It all boils down to our friends at the ITTF, which banned the classical era short pip rubbers. As a result, manufacturers didn't want to produce rubbers without ITTF approval and came out with the rubbers we have today, which Marty says...

"are capable of producing disturbing springiness and aberrational spins, elements which have contaminated and undermined what we sought to resurrect, bastardizing it in a manner having no relationship whatsoever to the classic game as it was played with Leyland, Dunlop, and Slazenger coverings, and the like."

_________________



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

My whole set-up costs less than a sheet of Butterfly Dignics

Yes, gives a whole new meaning to what we current perceive as 'junk rubbers'?

I do wonder what the justification was of the ITTF to ban the classical era short pip rubbers?

_________________
OOAK Table Tennis Shop | Re-Impact Blades | Butterfly Table Tennis bats
Setup1: Re-Impact Smart, Viper OX, Victas VS 401 Setup2: Re-Impact Barath, Dtecs OX, TSP Triple Spin Chop 1.0mm Setup3: Re-Impact Dark Knight, Hellfire OX, 999 Turbo
Recent Articles: Butterfly Tenergy Alternatives | Tenergy Rubbers Compared | Re-Impact User Guide

are these classical era hardbat rubbers even manufactured anymore?

_________________
Chasse Patate

As I understand it, the ITTF changed the pip density limit on their infamous "Technical Leaflet T4" thus banning the classical Leyland rubber over the personal objections of Reisman and USATT Hardbat Committee Chairman Scott Gordon. This happened under Adham's watch in 2004 (so much for going to your country's association).

In 1959, the ITTF specifically set the pip density to include the classic rubbers. However in 2004, in their zealousness to further limit the effectiveness of long pips, the ITTF changed the limit -- not caring that they were making a big part of the sport's heritage illegal in the process. Typical ITTF.

_________________



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

My whole set-up costs less than a sheet of Butterfly Dignics

Of the approved hardbat racket coverings in the U.S....

Leyland: NO -- This is the one everyone wants
Andro Classic: YES
Butterfly Orthodox: YES
Dunlop Barna Original: NO
Friendship RITC "Dr Evil": YES
Hallmark MagicPips: YES
ATP Reisman: NO There still is some, but I don't think they make it any longer
TSP Millitall: Not Sure
Yasaka A-1-2: YES
Yasaka Cobal:t YES

_________________



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

My whole set-up costs less than a sheet of Butterfly Dignics

TSP Millitall isn't manufactured anymore, it has been replaced by the Millitall II.

Here's the answer I made to Marty Reisman's post on Yahoo Hardbat Group :

"Let's be realistic: classic table tennis, like it was played in the "Golden Era", is now dead and buried, and even if the ITTF had immediately banned the first sponge bats in the 50's, and that all players would still use hard rubbers nowadays, table tennis would have evolved in terms of material and technique, and become different compared to the 40's. That's the case of most (all?) sports during the passed 60 years, and table tennis wouldn't have escaped to that rule. So now, the reflexion that we must have is not how to get back to the real classic table tennis, but how to develop hardbat (junk or not) in the "Sponge Era".

USA chose to create a short list of authorised rubbers, to avoid the spiniest ones, and be as close as possible to the classic rubbers, but according to Marty, even these rubbers are very different from the Leyland or Barna, and no new rubber has been added to this list for a long time, even if a lot of other references would deserve to be. And anyway, even with that kind of material, most players use adapted "sponge skills" to play hardbat, rather than a classic style, because it's the way they learn to play.

Germany chose to play hardbat with the current table tennis rules (except the one concerning the rubbers of course), and authorises all short pips rubbers without sponge, even the spiniest ones. Matches are generally played in 11 points sets, and with 40 mm balls. In 2006, there were 554 players in the German hardbat ranking, and in 2008 and 2009, there were a few tournaments with more than 100 entries (140 this year in Sandershausen).

In France, we have no real rules for the moment, but what I notice is that, generally, matches are played in 21 points sets, and even if all short pips without sponge are authorised for the moment, people generally use the less spiny rubbers, like Dr Evil, BTY Orthodox, Reisman, Andro Classic… With our association, "Hardbat France", we have the project to propose to the clubs, who want to organize hardbat events, 5 different "tournament classes", going from the "US rules events" to the "everything is authorised" (well, not the sponge or long pips rubbers of course, but hard rubber, cork, sandpaper and even no covering at all ), and even "everyone plays with the same model of bat". We'll see what people prefer.
In August 2008, when we created our French hardbat ranking, we were 300 players ranked, compiling the results of several tournaments I kept from 2004. In the next one, we'll be more than 700, and we hope to reach 1000 in August 2010.

In Belgium, it's the same as in France for the moment, and there will be for the first time a hardbat serie in an international table tennis tournament, in Ostend on next August 14.

So, considering all of that, I don't think that one of our countries holds the absolute truth, but maybe it would be time to start a general reflexion about the future of hardbat, instead of creating our own rules, everyone on its side.
(I hope that my English is clear enough for everybody )."

_________________
Hardbat France, the first French association to promote hardbat
http://www.hardbat-france.fr/

Wow, this is an interesting topic, and great to read the opinions of one of the all time legends of the sport. And who would know better than he does, what effects the new "hardbat approved" rubbers have!

_________________
"The greatest teacher, failure is"
USATT Rating: 1725
Blade: Stiga Cybershape Carbon
FH Rubber: Butterfly Tenergy 19 2.1
BH Rubber: Dr Neubauer ABS3 1.5

Thanks a lot Francis, very informative!

_________________
OOAK Table Tennis Shop | Re-Impact Blades | Butterfly Table Tennis bats
Setup1: Re-Impact Smart, Viper OX, Victas VS 401 Setup2: Re-Impact Barath, Dtecs OX, TSP Triple Spin Chop 1.0mm Setup3: Re-Impact Dark Knight, Hellfire OX, 999 Turbo
Recent Articles: Butterfly Tenergy Alternatives | Tenergy Rubbers Compared | Re-Impact User Guide

Maybe anyone who has used these new rubbers more than Marty or anyone who is used to using modern strokes.

I've played with Dr. Evil for over a year and almost exclusively when playing hardbat. It is a very predictable rubber. The only hardbat rubber that I've tried that seems unpredictable is the Andro Classic. It has some mild long-pips spin reversal action that I've not seen with any other hardbat rubber.

As for pips density, my reading of the new T4 rules suggests that it should be possible to make a rubber that is very close to the same pixel density of the old Leyland rubber. As it is, Andro Classic (a Barna Original clone - which isn't to say that it is a clone of "original" Barna rubber from the '50s) is fairly close. The Leyland rubber that I have seems to be within the 30 pips per square centimeter rule and the pips themselves have a diameter larger than the 1mm minimum. The spacing between pips seems to be borderline and may be slightly less than 1mm, but very slightly. So unless there is something I'm missing, a rubber maker should be able to get very close to the pips size and arrangement of Leyland rubber. Maybe the problem is that when you get that close to the specified limits, the ITTF gets extra persnickety and manufacturing tolerances make it impractical to push that close to the limits?

Marty's article talks about historical distortion. The simple fact is that we all distort reality. We shouldn't assume Marty is an exception. He has spent a lot of time and effort promoting hardbat, blaming sponge all the way. Well, today, the look and feel of hardbat doesn't match the Golden Era and Marty is blaming the equipment. I don't buy it for one minute. Instead, I "blame" fifty years of the evolution playing styles and techniques, a predisposition for players to imitate top players, and the fact that no top level talent is pursuing hardbat seriously. Face it. Today's hardbat is being played by us amateurs. Some of are fairly skilled. But how many of us are spending the hours playing that were spent by the greats of the Golden Era? Marty, like any other person, can certainly lose objectivity. Did Marty ever learn to loop? Did he ever learn to lob? I dunno. I've never seen him do either. But I watch Filipino sandpaper players making strokes that look like loop strokes and when I fiddle with sandpaper, I find I can do the same quite effectively. Is sandpaper weird and deceptive also?

Prior to the rule changes that allowed sandwich rubber, ordinary pimpled rubber came in all kinds of densities. Just check the ITTF museum photos for yourself. While certain rubbers may have been preferred by the top players, they were not universally used. I see no reason why we need to have exact duplication of Leyland rubber today. Sure, it would be nice. I think it would prove my point that playing style is dictated by things other than just equipment and that mandating Leyland rubber on a Hock blade wouldn't change things around nearly as much as Marty's post might lead you to believe.

The only thing I've found tricky or deceptive all about the modern hardbat rubbers (Andro Classic excepted) that I've tried (ATP Reisman, Butterfly Orthodox, Andro Classic, Dr. Evil, ATP Leland Prototype, and non-approved Gambler Peacekeeper) is that inverted players have a difficult time reading the spin at times. It isn't that the rubber is inherently deceptive. It just responds differently than inverted - usually with less spin than expected - and that confuses people. Hardbat players playing hardbat players don't seem to get confused at all.

Marty is dead right that today's hardbat game is different. However, blaming it on the rubbers being used is, IMO, a pretty big mistake.

BTW, here's a link to a composite photo of different hardbat rubbers taken at the same magnification. You can see that the pip sizes aren't that dramatically different. Certainly not so different that otherwise good rubbers are now "junk."

http://www.jayandwanda.com/tt/rubber/pipsMeasure_SM.jpg

_________________
Jay Turberville
http://www.jayandwanda.com
Hardbat: Nittaku Resist & Dr. Evil

Great post, especially the bit above!

_________________
OOAK Table Tennis Shop | Re-Impact Blades | Butterfly Table Tennis bats
Setup1: Re-Impact Smart, Viper OX, Victas VS 401 Setup2: Re-Impact Barath, Dtecs OX, TSP Triple Spin Chop 1.0mm Setup3: Re-Impact Dark Knight, Hellfire OX, 999 Turbo
Recent Articles: Butterfly Tenergy Alternatives | Tenergy Rubbers Compared | Re-Impact User Guide

Being an old fart I remember watching Mr. Reisman playing in a tournament many years ago, he was awesome. Technology changed the game I was at the English Open that year in the 70s when the Chinese player started the junk rubber game. He beat the worlds best sometimes in single digit games, he "aced" D. Surbeck several times, not what one wants in classic TT. Later Cai Zinwang sp? showed us what a real junk rubber game was. So I guess now is the time for the players to tell the ITTF what then want in the game. IMHO

There can be no doubt that technology - namely sponge and then sandwich rubber - changed the game. I guess my main point is that over then last fifty years there have been other influences as well. So we shouldn't be surprised that when we go back and play with equipment that is functionally similar that the classic game as played by the best players in the day does not magically appear.

BTW, these days hardbat is considered by many to be "junk" equipment.

_________________
Jay Turberville
http://www.jayandwanda.com
Hardbat: Nittaku Resist & Dr. Evil

Yes, I personally don't like that term...

_________________
OOAK Table Tennis Shop | Re-Impact Blades | Butterfly Table Tennis bats
Setup1: Re-Impact Smart, Viper OX, Victas VS 401 Setup2: Re-Impact Barath, Dtecs OX, TSP Triple Spin Chop 1.0mm Setup3: Re-Impact Dark Knight, Hellfire OX, 999 Turbo
Recent Articles: Butterfly Tenergy Alternatives | Tenergy Rubbers Compared | Re-Impact User Guide

The 2003 or 2004 Pip Density Reduction Regulation reduced the pip density of pips from 50 per sq.cm down to 30 per sq.cm (a 40% reduction)

However most people are under the mistaken impression that this regulation (not a rule) was passed to limit Liu Guoliang but I am not sure how this effected him because since he used spinny inverted pips on other of his racket, I do not understand how it would have effected his game because a partial reason for his dominance other than the RPH that he sort of pioneered, was the variation in his game due to the contrast between his speed-glued up spinny inverted compared to far less spinny dead ball producing flat ball hits from his short pips. So why does he need more top-spin (possible with a higher pip density short pips) ? I don't buy that.

The true reason however, for ITTF (Scholer) bringing in the Pip Density Reduction regulation was a preventive & preemptive measure to further limit the capabilities of long pips not short pips. They said Scholer hated long pips but IMO he hated Dr.Neubauer stealing his market share of racket, rubber sales in Germany.
What happened after 1998 Durban Aspect Ratio Massacre was that there were some complaints about how ridiculous that regulation change even before most players began to even remotely comprehend this was Scholer vs Dr.Neubauer round 1, But after 1998, Dr.Neubauer simply modified other pip design parameters such as pip flexibility, pip friction etc and was laughing all the way to the bank & of course Scholer was furious.
Hence the need for the 2003 Pip Density reduction Regulation which was Scholer vs Dr.Neubauer round 2
And of course the 2008 Frictionless Pips Ban which was Scholer vs Dr.Neubauer round 3

But the most hypocritical part of all this was the hardbat bigwigs complaining about all this because since the hardbatters complain about excessive spins in sponge domain tabletennis, how does it make sense for the hardbatters wanting to retain the more spin production capability in hardbat ? That does not make sense to at all.