OOAK Table Tennis Forum

So ? But instead of knock-out all the way like it used to be 10 years ago, we now have group round-robins in the qualififation stages (since 2003), so in fact more matches than before.

_________________
Adham Sharara

OK, why don't you list for us these "wrong" things. And wrong according to whom?

_________________
Adham Sharara

I agree.

_________________
Adham Sharara

OK, you wanted to talk about the future but are asking me a question about the past. Of course, it is nothing wrong about your question, but it shows, that we are in a process, were the future can not be discussed separately from the past and the present.

Just list all the tings that you consider "wrong" and let us know who is it that considers them wrong. Then we will make sure that no more "wrongs" are made by the Board, if indeed they made "wrong" things as you claim.

_________________
Adham Sharara

The minimum friction rule is "a wrong." However looking toward the future, with two national associations and the ITTF President against it (plus unprecedented levels of treated pips now being used because of it), I'm hopeful that this rule will soon be revisited and eliminated since there is now a specific rule dealing with treated rubbers.

_________________



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

I have already expressed my concerns on this forum, but no problem, here are the relevant links:

viewtopic.php?p=83849#p83849

viewtopic.php?p=85115#p85115

viewtopic.php?p=68440#p68440

Adham was against it? It is a really good news for me. That means he was not the driving force behind the minimum friction rule. Obviously he has no power to make the members of the Board of Directors follow his will. Hence we have to deal with the members of the Board of Directors. And of course with the National Associations, the should watch better, what is going on the Board of Directors. In my opinion, the Board of Directors had no right at all to introduce the minimum friction rule. Here you can find some arguments: viewtopic.php?p=68440#p68440

Thanks Smartguy. That was interesting reading. I also thought the 2006 resolution from the Equipment Committee to the BOD was very deceptive as it made it sound as if all low friction rubbers were treated. Also the issue of treated rubbers and the issue of the ITTF choosing to intentionally handicap the blocking style because they mistakenly believe blockers using untreated low friction rubbers have no skill are two separate issues and should not have been confusingly jumbled together on an initiative needing only a simple majority for passage. This was just badly handled from the beginning and I greatly respect Adham for being opposed to it.

RESOLUTIONS TO THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS
Simple majority required

A Put forward by the Equipment Committee

Technical Leaflet T4A

A requirement that for the racket coverings the rubber surface should be uniform and without coating shall be included in the Technical Leaflet.

This is a new type of requirement in T4, in order to get closer to measuring playing properties. The background is the following:

Treated rubbers: This term is used for pimples-out racket coverings that have a coating on top of the pimples or have been through some other process in order to reduce the friction. The intention is to confuse an opponent when a player is making a stroke, which normally would give a spin to the ball. Instead the ball has little or no spin, making it hard for opponent to make a good return.

We estimate today that we have 25 - 30 rubbers on our List of Authorized Racket Covering, which we believe come under this heading. The reason they are there is that we did not have a good enough method to identify this.

Now we may have found a laboratory, which can measure what is named micro friction on the top and the sides of the pimples.

What we would like to do now is to collect data. After having made some measurements we hope we could establish a minimum friction level for rubber for racket coverings.

The target is to introduce later this minimum friction level for all pimples-out coverings as part of the authorization.

We hope thereby to underline more the players' skill and less the importance of the material.

This could be a first step for test of the playing properties of rubbers instead of merely some physical ones.

_________________



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

So, basically you are referring to the following decisions:

1. Ban of the so-called "speed-glue", which in effect is the ban on VOCs
2. Ban of VOCs (same as above point)
3. Minimum friction level

I have already answered you extensively on these matters. The decisions by the BoD were not "wrong". The decisions were made according to our rules. The fact that you do not agree with them do not make them "wrong". If you were a member of the BoD you would vote against, like some others did. But at the end we implement the decision as passed by the majority.

Regarding the ban of VOCs, there is no doubt in anyone's mind that tghis was a right decision. How can you live in today's world and not ban the use of VOCs in sport. Chemicals do not belong in the hands of young athletes exposing them to dangers. Chemicals belong in the factories under the control of experts. And even so, most countries are now eliminating VOCs from all products as much as possible.

Regarding the minimum friction level you may have a point that it was not necessary. I am willing to agree with you on this. But this is just my personal opinion as expressed many times before. However, I fully understand the need for a minimum level to detect treated rubbers (as we do very often) and I also understand those that proposed it, just like those that proposed a maximum thickness many years ago, and that was controversial then, now it is totally accepted.

In fact, your three examples are only 2 examples. Both have been treated extensively in this Forum. Tghere is no doubt about the decision to ban VOCs, we would be irresponsible if we did not (should have been done many years ago). So in fact, the only "wrong" that you are able to find is the minimum friction level. Well, not bad for a BoD to have only one possible (your opinion) wrong in 10 years. Better than many top corporations like Chrysler, GM, AIG, etc.

_________________
Adham Sharara

Be careful, the BoD had all the rights, and has passed its authority to the Equipment Committee to establish the actual level. In fact the Technical Leaflets are prepared by the various committees and approved by the BoD or even the power is transferred to the relevant committee to establish the standards when the matter is very technical. So, all was done according to the rules. If not, then it would not be accepted. Please believe me that all was done according to our rules, we do not do anything otherwise.

Whether I agree with the rule or not is irrelevant. This is a technical detail in which I do not get involved and leave these matters to the experts. My philosophy is "Live and let Live". If it were up to me I would let you play with a frying pan. But in international federations there is a need for uniform standards to govern the sport. I fully understand and respect this notion.

_________________
Adham Sharara

There is a common perception that the minimum friction rule came out of resentment and jealousy from influential quarters in Germany (including from a former world finalist) that a marginally successful player like Dr. Neubauer dramatically raised his level and had his greatest success after changing to low friction pips, winning many ITTF and Euro veterans championships. Very sad if this is the case.

_________________



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

Personally I doubt this very much.

_________________
Adham Sharara

There's an interesting ongoing discussion regarding this topic:

viewtopic.php?f=9&t=7036

_________________



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

TO ALL:
Friends,
Please stop mooting clone questions on the President`s forums..
By now, Adham responded over 300 about "pips friction".
It is sure beyond standard human patience and may eventually send Adham mad, I afraid.
Are you wishing to have an insane Captain onboard?

I am to save our brave captain. Here is a secret formula of the pips coating
--- ACRYLACETATE will make any pips frictionless.
Some of instant-effect glues are a pure acrilacetate stuff.
Sorry, Mr President
But it is the only way i know to stop the flood of tears and help you out safe and sound