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 12 Apr 2024, 23:04


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  [ 7 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: 22 Feb 2024, 06:42 
Offline
Modern Chiseler.
Modern Chiseler.
User avatar

Joined: 05 Oct 2007, 06:49
Posts: 11148
Location: USA
Has thanked: 575 times
Been thanked: 578 times
Blade: WRM Gokushu2
FH: S&T Secret Flow 1mm
BH: S&T Monkey ox
This is interesting...

At the 2024 ITTF World Team Championships, USA's men's team was poised to advance to the knock out rounds as long as they won at least 2 matches and 2 more games against Kazakhstan. Jishan Liang played against Aidos Kenzhigulov from Kazakhstan in the 3rd match and won 3-1, giving the US a 2-1 lead. However, he was disqualified because one side of his racket was 0.19mm over the thickness limit. Jishan’s racket VOC was within range.

USATT submitted the following 4 points to the ITTF Jury Committee to contest the decision to disqualify Jishan Liang.

    ▫️ Jishan Liang had competed with the same racket for 3 days of competition prior to the disqualification call on day 5. Prior to the test in question, his racket had passed all visual inspections.
    ▫️ The umpires and referees have no time log indicating Jishan Liang was late to turn in his racket prior to his match. Jishan was not informed his racket would be tested after his match because of the time in which he submitted it.
    ▫️ The announcement of the racket failing came after Nikhil had lost to Kirill, despite the test result occurring earlier. This did not give the US Men’s team an opportunity to adjust their play to account for a disqualification.
    ▫️ Jishan’s racket was tested 4-5 times before it was deemed illegal. The necessity for multiple tests raises significant doubts about the reliability and trustworthiness of the testing process itself. Jishan’s racket, which stayed with the umpires and referees overnight, got tested again today and it was within the standard. They also conducted two separate tests and the readings were different.


Attachments:
usattstatement.jpg
usattstatement.jpg [ 136.81 KiB | Viewed 1058 times ]

_________________



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
Top
 Profile  
 


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

PostPosted: 22 Feb 2024, 13:50 
Offline
OOAK Super User
OOAK Super User
User avatar

Joined: 10 Jun 2007, 09:24
Posts: 1358
Location: Universe
Has thanked: 21 times
Been thanked: 102 times
https://18December2023_13_7_15_RC_infra ... _12_18.pdf

https://equipment.ittf.com/#/equipment/ ... nfractions

Yes, the young American representative ought to be exposed to public view as well. Have a whit of patience, please.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 23 Feb 2024, 04:45 
Offline
Full member

Joined: 07 Oct 2010, 10:01
Posts: 82
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 7 times
How many pros play with un-boosted Hurricane ? My bet is almost none. How many of these pros get caught boosting ?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 23 Feb 2024, 19:07 
Offline
Goes to 11
Goes to 11
User avatar

Joined: 13 Jan 2014, 20:27
Posts: 10683
Has thanked: 3 times
Been thanked: 1385 times
Hmm. 0.19mm is almost 5% of the maximum 4.0mm. That's a lot. What sort of rubber does he use? Boosted H3? I suppose that's one of the perils of using boosted H3 - you have to monitor it before it goes before the racket testers to make sure it's not over 4.0mm. Was it boosted just before the match?

Iskandar


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 23 Feb 2024, 23:36 
Offline
Darth Pips
Darth Pips
User avatar

Joined: 26 Jun 2007, 03:59
Posts: 4906
Location: St Francis, WI, USA
Has thanked: 169 times
Been thanked: 198 times
Blade: Stiga Cybershape Carbon
FH: Butterfly Tenergy 19 2.1
BH: Dr Neubauer ABS3 1.5
That's the thing about this situation, from what I read, it was tested multiple times and had multiple results. Then they saved it with the officials and re-tested the next day and it passed the test. 0.19 is a lot...and yet there were still enough variances in their testing method that there were times when it tested fine.
What I think isn't fair about the situation is that even with doubt as to the accuracy of the test, they DQ someone after the match.
You couldn't get convicted of a crime in court with that level of uncertainty. Was it the process that was poor? Was it the testers that didn't know how to properly test?
I guarantee you if this affected a team like China or Germany this DQ would not have happened.

_________________
"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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 24 Feb 2024, 15:54 
Offline
Full member

Joined: 02 Jan 2017, 16:36
Posts: 82
Has thanked: 6 times
Been thanked: 12 times
Blade: Matador
FH: Spinfire 2.1, Black
BH: Diabolic Special 1.0, Red
We don't know the results of the multiple testings. Maybe the testers were trying multiple times hoping that it would pass on subsequent tests, but it kept being tested as too thick. I doubt they wanted to DQ someone and after the fact, as that causes a lot of hassles and controversy.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: 26 Feb 2024, 22:52 
Offline
Darth Pips
Darth Pips
User avatar

Joined: 26 Jun 2007, 03:59
Posts: 4906
Location: St Francis, WI, USA
Has thanked: 169 times
Been thanked: 198 times
Blade: Stiga Cybershape Carbon
FH: Butterfly Tenergy 19 2.1
BH: Dr Neubauer ABS3 1.5
Another question I have is, if the theory is that the thickness was too much because he was boosting, why was it not failed for VOC? From what I remember, it passed the VOC test?

I suspect they went around the edge of the racket inspecting thickness and received different results in different spots, which could be the result of many different things. Again, I do not see how it is fair in any way to disqualify a player post-match for not failing VOC and for thickness results that are not consistent.

Also, there is no proof that he submitted his racket too late for pre-match testing.

All of this is very shady.

_________________
"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


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 7 posts ] 


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 3 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