Question about stretching rubber on blade

[DukeGaGa]

Nice. Yeah, I doubt that top professional players would be mistaken about something like this.

Do the CNT players do this also?

Xu Xin glueing rubber here, no stretching can be seen.https://www.bilibili.com/video/BV1zE411s7qa

And pretty sure Ovtcharov is talking about dwell time being shorter, since he's comparing spinnier to faster, but who knows. All I know is from the physics, the ball speed won't be faster unless you have the power to utilize it.

Also, if you want a harder rubber, why not just buy the harder version of it? Or a softer version if you need softer ones. Stretching is very hard to get exactly the same each time you glue, you are talking about using human muscle, which doesn't come with a force gauge, and can get stronger or weaker over time, to do a job repeatedly with days, weeks or even months apart, and hoping to get the same results.

 

[dajdosta]

lol I guess you just completely ignored my post there

Nice post but I am not sure if it is that simple, rubber is not spring and question is to what extent it follows Hooke’s Law.
It's best to do some measurements. Until then it's best to go "by feel". 😎

 

[dajdosta]

Xu Xin glueing rubber here, no stretching can be seen.https://www.bilibili.com/video/BV1zE411s7qa

And pretty sure Ovtcharov is talking about dwell time being shorter, since he's comparing spinnier to faster, but who knows. All I know is from the physics, the ball speed won't be faster unless you have the power to utilize it.

He was quite clear about it: harder and faster.
Also he certainly has the power to utilize it, that is why he does it.

Not every pro player does it and the effect probably depends on the type of rubber.

 

[DukeGaGa]

Nice post but I am not sure if it is that simple, rubber is not spring and question is to what extent it follows Hooke’s Law.
It's best to do some measurements. Until then it's best to go "by feel". 😎

Real things in life are never easy, you need to focus on the important part. Or you can just test it out by putting the same rubber on either side of a blade, then hold the paddle on a flat hard surface like a table using a clamp of some sort to grip the handle as we are not testing the bounciness of the table, then put a layer of plastic film on top of the rubber to remove the "tacky" aspect of the rubber, then drop the same ball multiple times on the same spot for about 100 times each side and measure the height, then flip it over use the sameplasticf film and do the same test, the difference in the average height from either side will tell you if harder is bouncier.

But first, we need to clarify what everyone's "fast" means, as I'm not sure everyone is talking about the same thing here.

 

[DukeGaGa]

He was quite clear about it: harder and faster.
Also he certainly has the power to utilize it, that is why he does it.

Not every pro player does it and the effect probably depends on the type of rubber.

No, he wasn't clear on that, and I don't think you heard the second part of what he said.

He said stretching means harder and faster, and not stretching is softer and more spin. So in his mind "harder" is comparing to "softer", which is pretty obvious, and "faster" is used to compare with "spin". As it's the same rubber, the friction is kept the same, so the only way to get more spin is to have more contact time with the ball, so basically he is comparing the contact time, not the ball velocity. But in order to get here you need to look deeper into the meaning behind the words, i.e. not clear.

 

[dajdosta]

No, he wasn't clear on that, and I don't think you heard the second part of what he said.

He said stretching means harder and faster, and not stretching is softer and more spin. So in his mind "harder" is comparing to "softer", which is pretty obvious, and "faster" is used to compare with "spin". As it's the same rubber, the friction is kept the same, so the only way to get more spin is to have more contact time with the ball, so basically he is comparing the contact time, not the ball velocity. But in order to get here you need to look deeper into the meaning behind the words, i.e. not clear.

He just didn't explicitly say "less spin" when describing stretched properties and he didn't mention "slower" when describing non-stretched.
So:
harder, faster, (less spin)
vs
softer, (slower), more spin

Nothing he said was wrong and he wasn't comparing faster vs spinnier as you imply. I think that's obvious.
In fact logically he was accurate with less words and avoided redundancy:
when describing rubber A as faster it is implied that rubber B is slower and when describing rubber B as spinnier it is implied that rubber A has less spin.

 

[DukeGaGa]

He just didn't explicitly say "less spin" when describing stretched properties and he didn't mention "slower" when describing non-stretched.
So:
harder, faster, (less spin)
vs
softer, (slower), more spin

Nothing he said was wrong and he wasn't comparing faster vs spinnier as you imply. I think that's obvious.
In fact logically he was accurate with less words and avoided redundancy:
when describing rubber A as faster it is implied that rubber B is slower and when describing rubber B as spinnier it is implied that rubber A has less spin.

You see, you just proved my point, the reason we are having this conversation is because what he said is not clear lol

And I didn't say he was wrong, I'm saying he was using imprecise words to describe things, and didn't clarify on them. And the last thing you said there, yes it implies fast/slow, more/less spin, but again no one is defining what "fast" mean here. Like I said before, fast can mean many things, is it saying the ball flies off the rubber faster, as in barely touches the rubber and bounces off? Or is the the ball flying at a faster speed, as in velocity?

Also, when comparing things, I don't usually see people doing the comparison the way you said. If you list out the properties of the thing you're comparing, you list them in the same order, you don't omit one in the middle. For example, when buying a car, you compare specs like power, torque, cargo space, etc. You list them out one by one in order like power 200 kw, torque 300 nm, cargo space 600 liter on car A, then list it out the in the same order for car B. Or maybe a smartphone, you list out things like screen size, battery size, capacity, but you do the same for all options.

And in your example, if slower can be omitted, why not softer as well, isn't that just as obvious if not even more? Just say "stretching makes it faster, without stretching is spinnier", but he didn't, he specifically chose the words "harder and faster" vs "softer and more spin", so if harder is a direct comparison to softer, why isn't faster a direct comparison to more spin?

So you see, this is not clear at all, so many interpretations can be made, which just proves my point.

 

[dajdosta]

You see, you just proved my point, the reason we are having this conversation is because what he said is not clear lol

And I didn't say he was wrong, I'm saying he was using imprecise words to describe things, and didn't clarify on them. And the last thing you said there, yes it implies fast/slow, more/less spin, but again no one is defining what "fast" mean here. Like I said before, fast can mean many things, is it saying the ball flies off the rubber faster, as in barely touches the rubber and bounces off? Or is the the ball flying at a faster speed, as in velocity?

Also, when comparing things, I don't usually see people doing the comparison the way you said. If you list out the properties of the thing you're comparing, you list them in the same order, you don't omit one in the middle. For example, when buying a car, you compare specs like power, torque, cargo space, etc. You list them out one by one in order like power 200 kw, torque 300 nm, cargo space 600 liter on car A, then list it out the in the same order for car B. Or maybe a smartphone, you list out things like screen size, battery size, capacity, but you do the same for all options.

And in your example, if slower can be omitted, why not softer as well, isn't that just as obvious if not even more? Just say "stretching makes it faster, without stretching is spinnier", but he didn't, he specifically chose the words "harder and faster" vs "softer and more spin", so if harder is a direct comparison to softer, why isn't faster a direct comparison to more spin?

So you see, this is not clear at all, so many interpretations can be made, which just proves my point.

By faster he probably means faster on hard shots.

Yes, he could omit mentioning that the non-stretched rubber will be slower but I don't see where is the problem in that. He was very clear and there is no ambiguity to his choice of words.

Your analogy of car specs and phone specs is not applicable here.
We are not comparing two different items, it's about what properties have changed on specific item. Better analogy would be:
If we tune a car it will have more power and more torque.
If we don't tune it it will have less power and have more cargo space.

Logically - if car is tuned cargo space is decreased. (Because if you don't mess with the car cargo space stays the same)

I could omit "less power" in the second sentence but anyway it is perfectly clear what was said and there is no room for misinterpretation.

 

[DukeGaGa]

By faster he probably means faster on hard shots.

Yes, he could omit mentioning that the non-stretched rubber will be slower but I don't see where is the problem in that. He was very clear and there is no ambiguity to his choice of words.

Your analogy of car specs and phone specs is not applicable here.
We are not comparing two different items, it's about what properties have changed on specific item. Better analogy would be:
If we tune a car it will have more power and more torque.
If we don't tune it it will have less power and have more cargo space.

Logically - if car is tuned cargo space is decreased. (Because if you don't mess with the car cargo space stays the same)

I could omit "less power" in the second sentence but anyway it is perfectly clear what was said and there is no room for misinterpretation.

Again, faster of what? Speed or contact? And if it was so clear, why say “probably”?

And your car analogy doesn’t work , car tuning doesn’t imply cargo space change, nor power or torque change, it only implies you changed stuff to the car. I’ve never seen people here say things like that ever, you always say everything you are comparing in the same order. And you why would you say less power if that’s implied just the same as less torque? Why don’t you just say “if we tune the car it has more power and torque, if we don’t tune it then it has more cargo space”? This would be ok because your are just comparing the positive things, though it leaves a lot of ambiguity on the table. But the point is you don’t compare half of the properties one way, then decides to compare the rest of the properties the other way.

I was going to use a CPU overclocking example but figured most people don’t do that kind of stuff so they might not understand what I mean , I see that was a mistake as you still have the wrong idea here. So let’s try this again.

No, he wasn’t clear. You think it’s clear because you already have a set mind, and can’t see other possibilities of the meaning. But the reason you are in this discussion here is proof that it’s not clear, otherwise you won’t be here talking about it. Also, when comparing things after changing some properties of it, you list all aspects you compared in the same order. For example when overclocking a CPU, you raise the frequency , then you compare benchmark results, you list all the results of all the benchmarks you run, you don’t just omit one that stayed the same.

Also, even if you were right about what he meant, which I never said you weren’t, it still just proves that the statement wasn’t clear in the first place. All I’m saying here is, there is a possibility of different interpretations of the words, and people needs to describe it more precisely. Why are you against using precise descriptions? Or is it you just want to be “correct” all the time? And why do pro-players always have to be right, if it’s just by feel then there’s always the placebo effect. Don’t tell me you never heard of the helium filled American football , or the corked baseball bat. Both were supposed to help the ball travel further, and players do the cheat because they believe it and felt it was working as they thought it would. But researchers have done some investigations and found that they are most likely just a placebo.

 

[Attitude]

The only thing i see here is that you are neglecting or ignoring common sense. If a player talks about a faster rubber, the shots you can perform with it are faster.
No one besides yourself will all of a sudden think about dwell time. Besides there is no reason for a pro to think about such thing in a video like this.

So ofc his mind is set, because it is the right thing to do in a certain setting.

Another thing which bugs me quite hard: the video of Xu Xin is garbage. First of all why the heck should he put on just one rubber and second why the heck is this one not boosted. So either this is just a dumb and old tutorial for glueing rubbers or more likely this is not even his playing setup so he doesnt care how he glues it as long as this rubber sticks on the blade. So arguing with this video is completely out of the line.

But either way we should at least be on the same page for now that stretching the rubber definitly changes the playing characteristics. In what way and how much everyone can actually find out themselves.

 

[DukeGaGa]

The only thing i see here is that you are neglecting or ignoring common sense. If a player talks about a faster rubber, the shots you can perform with it are faster.
No one besides yourself will all of a sudden think about dwell time. Besides there is no reason for a pro to think about such thing in a video like this.

So ofc his mind is set, because it is the right thing to do in a certain setting.

Another thing which bugs me quite hard: the video of Xu Xin is garbage. First of all why the heck should he put on just one rubber and second why the heck is this one not boosted. So either this is just a dumb and old tutorial for glueing rubbers or more likely this is not even his playing setup so he doesnt care how he glues it as long as this rubber sticks on the blade. So arguing with this video is completely out of the line.

But either way we should at least be on the same page for now that stretching the rubber definitly changes the playing characteristics. In what way and how much everyone can actually find out themselves.

Where do you see I’m neglecting common sense? I said that faster can mean two things, faster speed or faster contact time. I acknowledge both possibilities, so looks like you’re the one neglecting something here, not me. Also, right is very subjective here, just because you agree with him doesn’t make him or you “right”, it only means you “agree”.

As for the Xu Xin video, that’s your opinion, and just like all opinions those are valid. You can say you don’t like it, and it has problems, but it’s just one aspect. I can also say that since he’s a pro player, and has been glueing rubbers multiple times a week, everything is just like muscle memory, and when things are like that you don’t do it in a different all of a sudden just to save some time , you’ll keep doing what you’ve been doing for years.

And again, more people involved in this discussion just proves my point even more: people have their own understanding of the words, and they want to prove themselves right and the only interpretation. So please, continue.

 

[NDH]

I've heard some people recommend pulling the rubber to stretch it out as you glue it onto the blade. I do this occasionally when the rubber isn't long enough and I try to cover the length of the blade.

Does this stretching make the rubber bouncier/faster?

Well this thread turned into quite the rollercoaster.

To back to the OP.....

Firstly, be consistent. If you stretch, do it every time. If you don't stretch, don't stretch every time.

Whilst it's unlikely that you'll be affected too much by the different playing characteristics at your level, it's good to practice consistency with your set up.

As for the Ovtcharov video, I remember watching it when he first released it, and there are definitely occasions where his use of English is not particularly clear.

However, ignoring my own opinions, I understood what he was saying as:

Stretching = Harder and faster (with slightly less spin, although he didn't say this explicitly).

Non stretching = Softer and spinner (and slightly slower, which was implied, but not said).

Will this make a difference to most people? No, not at all.

I personally don't stretch the rubbers, as I wouldn't be able to do it consistently each time.

But I can lay them down gently and roll them out pretty consistently, so that is what I'll always do.

It's also what I'd recommend to 99.999% of the table tennis playing population.

 

[DukeGaGa]

Well this thread turned into quite the rollercoaster.

To back to the OP.....

Firstly, be consistent. If you stretch, do it every time. If you don't stretch, don't stretch every time.

Whilst it's unlikely that you'll be affected too much by the different playing characteristics at your level, it's good to practice consistency with your set up.

As for the Ovtcharov video, I remember watching it when he first released it, and there are definitely occasions where his use of English is not particularly clear.

However, ignoring my own opinions, I understood what he was saying as:

Stretching = Harder and faster (with slightly less spin, although he didn't say this explicitly).

Non stretching = Softer and spinner (and slightly slower, which was implied, but not said).

Will this make a difference to most people? No, not at all.

Exactly my point. And I also think that's what he's trying to say, but I choose to look deeper where most people don't bother to look.

I personally don't stretch the rubbers, as I wouldn't be able to do it consistently each time.

But I can lay them down gently and roll them out pretty consistently, so that is what I'll always do.

It's also what I'd recommend to 99.999% of the table tennis playing population.

So true, and is what I do as well.

 

[dajdosta]

Again, faster of what? Speed or contact? And if it was so clear, why say “probably”?

Ball flies faster when you hit it hard with the racket.

And your car analogy doesn’t work , car tuning doesn’t imply cargo space change, nor power or torque change, it only implies you changed stuff to the car. I’ve never seen people here say things like that ever, you always say everything you are comparing in the same order. And you why would you say less power if that’s implied just the same as less torque? Why don’t you just say “if we tune the car it has more power and torque, if we don’t tune it then it has more cargo space”? This would be ok because your are just comparing the positive things, though it leaves a lot of ambiguity on the table. But the point is you don’t compare half of the properties one way, then decides to compare the rest of the properties the other way.

I was going to use a CPU overclocking example but figured most people don’t do that kind of stuff so they might not understand what I mean , I see that was a mistake as you still have the wrong idea here. So let’s try this again.

I could write pages about all the wrong stuff you wrote there but let me instead try this:
"If I pour water on the rubber it gets heavier, if I don't pour water it has more spin."
Is that understandable? Can you misinterpret this?

No, he wasn’t clear. You think it’s clear because you already have a set mind, and can’t see other possibilities of the meaning. But the reason you are in this discussion here is proof that it’s not clear, otherwise you won’t be here talking about it. Also, when comparing things after changing some properties of it, you list all aspects you compared in the same order. For example when overclocking a CPU, you raise the frequency , then you compare benchmark results, you list all the results of all the benchmarks you run, you don’t just omit one that stayed the same.

Also, even if you were right about what he meant, which I never said you weren’t, it still just proves that the statement wasn’t clear in the first place. All I’m saying here is, there is a possibility of different interpretations of the words, and people needs to describe it more precisely. Why are you against using precise descriptions? Or is it you just want to be “correct” all the time? And why do pro-players always have to be right, if it’s just by feel then there’s always the placebo effect.

The reason I am in this discussion is because you started it, you are pushing it and want to prove some point but you couldn't be more wrong.
Nothing proves your statement as you say. The only one who is confused is you but that doesn't mean that Dima wasn't clear.
Also, you are implying that:
- I want to be “correct” all the time
- I think that pro-players always have to be right
Where did I say that? Why does this single case make you think that?
You are the one who has his mind set already and is imagining and generalizing things.

And why do pro-players always have to be right, if it’s just by feel then there’s always the placebo effect. Don’t tell me you never heard of the helium filled American football , or the corked baseball bat. Both were supposed to help the ball travel further, and players do the cheat because they believe it and felt it was working they thought it would, but researchers have done some investigations and found that they are most likely just a placebo.

You are introducing placebo now. That means that you believe stretching the rubber does nothing?

 

[DukeGaGa]

Ball flies faster when you hit it hard with the racket.


I could write pages about all the wrong stuff you wrote there but let me instead try this:
"If I pour water on the rubber it gets heavier, if I don't pour water it has more spin."
Is that understandable? Can you misinterpret this?

Please list the stuff I'm wrong, as I don't know what you're talking about. Is it you might not get more power and torque, and less cargo space when tuning the car? You know car tuning isn't just about power and torque, right? There's also suspension, aero, visual, audio, etc. And most of those don't require you to put extra stuff in your cargo space. Or is it the CPU overclocking part? How would you overclock a CPU if you don't adjust the frequency and run benchmarks? Or is it when comparing things you don't list the stuff you check side by side in the same order, as in you compare stuff out of order and selectively before and after the change were made?

And the new example you have here is just what I said before, you either only mention the stuff that's different (which is what you did here), or you mention everything in the same order. You don't however mention part of the list, then omit a few, then mention the things that's changed.

The reason I am in this discussion is because you started it, you are pushing it and want to prove some point but you couldn't be more wrong.
Nothing proves your statement as you say. The only one who is confused is you but that doesn't mean that Dima wasn't clear.
Also, you are implying that:
- I want to be “correct” all the time
- I think that pro-players always have to be right
Where did I say that? Why does this single case make you think that?
You are the one who has his mind set already and is imagining and generalizing things.

I'm not trying to prove anything , it's you that are proving what I'm saying, I just listed the possibilities.

And now you're contradicting yourself, aren't you who said "Nothing he said was wrong", "it is perfectly clear what was said and there is no room for misinterpretation.", and aren't you trying to correct me to your thinking?

You are introducing placebo now. That means that you believe stretching the rubber does nothing?

Aren't you also the one who said "Not every pro player does it and the effect probably depends on the type of rubber", and "Until then it's best to go 'by feel'"? I'm saying that if changes are made but the effects aren't proven, but you claim that you feel the difference, then it is possible it's just a placebo.

 

[dajdosta]

Please list the stuff I'm wrong, as I don't know what you're talking about. Is it you might not get more power and torque, and less cargo space when tuning the car? You know car tuning isn't just about power and torque, right? There's also suspension, aero, visual, audio, etc. And most of those don't require you to put extra stuff in your cargo space. Or is it the CPU overclocking part? How would you overclock a CPU if you don't adjust the frequency and run benchmarks? Or is it when comparing things you don't list the stuff you check side by side in the same order, as in you compare stuff out of order and selectively before and after the change were made?

And the new example you have here is just what I said before, you either only mention the stuff that's different (which is what you did here), or you mention everything in the same order. You don't however mention part of the list, then omit a few, then mention the things that's changed.

I'm not trying to prove anything , it's you that are proving what I'm saying, I just listed the possibilities.

And now you're contradicting yourself, aren't you who said "Nothing he said was wrong", "it is perfectly clear what was said and there is no room for misinterpretation.", and aren't you trying to correct me to your thinking?

Aren't you also the one who said "Not every pro player does it and the effect probably depends on the type of rubber", and "Until then it's best to go 'by feel'"? I'm saying that if changes are made but the effects aren't proven, but you claim that you feel the difference, then it is possible it's just a placebo.

You see you just proved my point about generalizing and imagining things.
And you were trying to compare cars and smartphones with a rubbers which doesn't make sense because rubbers don't have cargo space.
And I didn't say what you said that I implied .
Also overclocking CPU is not the same as stretching the rubber.

Btw if everyone understood what he said except you then who do you think didn't get it right, you or the rest of the world?

 

[DukeGaGa]

You see you just proved my point about generalizing and imagining things.
And you were trying to compare cars and smartphones with a rubbers which doesn't make sense because rubbers don't have cargo space.
And I didn't say what you said that I implied .
Also overclocking CPU is not the same as stretching the rubber.

Btw if everyone understood what he said except you then who do you think didn't get it right, you or the rest of the world?

Now you are just saying gibberish, because you have noticed that your comment has no logic behind it. I gave the example as a way to demonstrate how normal people compare things, it’s you that are claiming they’re the same as stretching rubbers. but let’s not forget you have an example with pouring water, am I to understand that is the same as stretching rubbers since that’s what you’re talking about?

As for your last comment there, who said anything about not understanding. I’m saying the words he chose to use are imprecise, and he could be more careful about what he is saying, and with imprecise descriptions there is always ambiguity. And let’s not forget the history of humans, when most people thought earth was flat, when most people thought earth was the center of the solar system, when people thought heavier objects falls faster, etc. Do I need to give more examples of the one or few man against the whole world?

 

[dajdosta]

Now you are just saying gibberish, because you have noticed that your comment has no logic behind it. I gave the example as a way to demonstrate how normal people compare things, it’s you that are claiming they’re the same as stretching rubbers. but let’s not forget you have an example with pouring water, am I to understand that is the same as stretching rubbers since that’s what you’re talking about?

As for your last comment there, who said anything about not understanding. I’m saying the words he chose to use are imprecise, and he could be more careful about what he is saying, and with imprecise descriptions there is always ambiguity. And let’s not forget the history of humans, when most people thought earth was flat, when most people thought earth was the center of the solar system, when people thought heavier objects falls faster, etc. Do I need to give more examples of the one or few man against the whole world?

Tell me what exactly I said that doesn't make sense?
So you do think stretching is same as overclocking?

Example with pouring water was the simplest one for you to understand first.

As for you last comment if you think that you are the one who is right here against the whole world then that explains a lot.

 

[DukeGaGa]

Tell me what exactly I said that doesn't make sense?
So you do think stretching is same as overclocking?

Example with pouring water was the simplest one for you to understand first.

As for you last comment if you think that you are the one who is right here against the whole world then that explains a lot.

See, you're continuing you gibberish here, I said the examples I gave was to show you how normal people compare things to one another, it's you who said they're the same as stretching. Or if you can find I said they are the same, please do quote me on that, I would love to see.

So yeah, keep pouring your water, as it has no point in your argument whatsoever, but keep doing it if it makes you feel good.

And yes, I am right, because everything I'm commented here is not my personal opinion, it's an objective fact: the words Ovtcharov used to describe the comparison, and the way he compared things were not precise enough. But you are the one who chose not to see there could be other interpretations of those words, and you are trying to make everyone agree with you that there's only one meaning while there can be two.

 

[dajdosta]

See, you're continuing you gibberish here, I said the examples I gave was to show you how normal people compare things to one another, it's you who said they're the same as stretching. Or if you can find I said they are the same, please do quote me on that, I would love to see.

So yeah, keep pouring your water, as it has no point in your argument whatsoever, but keep doing it if it makes you feel good.

And yes, I am right, because everything I'm commented here is not my personal opinion, it's an objective fact: the words Ovtcharov used to describe the comparison, and the way he compared things were not precise enough. But you are the one who chose not to see there could be other interpretations of those words, and you are trying to make everyone agree with you that there's only one meaning while there can be two.

"If I stretch it the rubber will be harder and faster.
If I don't stretch it the rubber will be softer and have more spin."

I am having a hard time understanding how one can interpret this in multiple ways.

Can you please write again those multiple meanings to this that you found?