Life, Existence, and the Meaning of Long Pips - The Opus Maximus of James Z

[lodro]

I am well aware of that. But if ANY inverted rubber (spinny or anti) leaves the factory with top sheet machine glued to the sponge, you are tehnically not allowed to change the sponge after that. But as I said lots of player do & this is rarely enforced especialy at lower levels. Ask a referee. Lots of top sheets & sponge are sold separately in China & Japan. You can glue them to each other yourself & thet is approved. i have done this myself just for testing, such as glue a 0.3 mm sponge to an inverted rubber. But it is tricky and after 100s of attempts it still does not come out even for me & an umpire can reject it. So I usually buy the whole rubber.
Also as I pointed out again, this has nothing to do with discussion of comparison of two factory assembled rubbers for purposes of chart creation. I would assume.

You misunderstood. I am not talking about rubbers that have been manipulated and sponges changed etc/ I am telling you that i can show rubbers coming out of the factory with the same ITTF number but completely different sponges. They are different not only on color but the makeup of the sponge itself is different. This either proves that according to you these rubbers are illegal OR your interpretation of the rubber rule is simply fantasy.
Oh and one more thing, you say : "

Also as I pointed out again, this has nothing to do with discussion of comparison of two factory assembled rubbers for purposes of chart creation.

Well, don't worry about it. Most threads have a life of their own and you are not the central scrutinizer here. 😁

 

[lodro]

Has anybody noticed that it is the kids that do the boosting?

Yes, true, even in my seventies i am still a kid at heart 😁
BB has entered the building 😂
😂😂

 

[lodro]

Yeah, like with a slingshot (or a bow and arrow), a softer elastic band/string will allow even a child to shoot a projectile, but a harder elastic band/string will allow a stronger adult to shoot the same projectile further whereas a child may not be able to stretch it enough to launch the projectile past his feet. I'm simplifying the issue, of course, but that's the gist of it.

Very cleverly put my friend 👍

 

[Ergosquare]

You misunderstood. I am not talking about rubbers that have been manipulated and sponges changed etc/ I am telling you that i can show rubbers coming out of the factory with the same ITTF number but completely different sponges. They are different not only on color but the makeup of the sponge itself is different. This either proves that according to you these rubbers are illegal OR your interpretation of the rubber rule is simply fantasy.
Oh and one more thing, you say : "

Well, don't worry about it. Most threads have a life of their own and you are not the central scrutinizer here. 😁

ITTF-Equipment

equipment.ittf.com

read M4, the whole document is interesting, for example on page 13 it says
"For racket coverings which are sold with multiple versions of sponge, a different country of
origin statement may be used for each version, in order to specify sponges from different
countries."
This tells me, that it is indeed possible for a rubber to have different sponges legally.

 

[brokenball]

Is brokenball sick or maybe busy, should've gathered the huns and raided this thread 20 posts ago.

Sometimes I have better things to do. Huns? What good are huns?. I would get the physics forum to descend on this forum and straighten you all out., I am sure they would shake their heads in wonder at all the garbage posted here. However, many of them a clueless too.

.

@brokenball is probably writing more replies, but he'll be the first (well, I guess this time I am) to tell you that it's not so simple as softer sponge = more spin.

Whether the rubber is softer or harder doesn't make much difference. It is elasticity that matters.
I have been trolling forums for 12+ years now and I keeping asking the same questions that no one can answer.
Show me a formula where how speed or spin after impact is dependent on how hard or soft the rubber is.
No one has yet.

When you hit a ball, the rubber stretches and then rebounds to impart spin (and speed as well, but that's another topic), kind of like a slingshot.

Not quite. A sling shot gets its energy by some one pulling back on the tubing. A trampoline or diving spring board is a closer analogy because then the object is supplying the energy by its impact. Now the question is how much of that energy is returned. Its all about where the energy goes.

A softer sponge would allow the rubber to stretch more, but will it rebound faster? A softer rubber band on a slingshot will allow you to stretch it more, but will it result in a more powerful shot?

This is good. You are asking questions instead of repeating the myths.

A link to the Tieffenbacher pdf has been posted. Good. Read that!.

 

[lodro]

I never ever said or remotely implied that same brand rubbers coming with different sponges from the factory is unapproved. You are just twisting my words & putting words in my mouth. In fact Tenergy 05 & Tenergy 05 FX are indeed rubbers with same top sheet but just with different sponges as far as I know, with top sheet just showing a idiffeent name (unless Butterfly uses entirely different top sheets in addition to different sponges for Tenergy 05 & Tenergy 05 FX, which I highly doubt) .
What I say would apply only to items sold as a full rubbers & not as separate top sheet only or sponge only. I already explained that twice.
If you buy a separate 729 top sheet only but then stick it on to a sponge that you removed from a Tenergy rubber (if you can remove the machine assembled Tenergy top-sheet from the sponge) that is approved.
But oddly if you stick the Tenergy top-sheet to a sponge that you pulled off from another Tenergy, that is technically unapproved (though hardly enforced), because Tenergy is not sold as separate topsheet & sponge like729 or DHS.
These were the directives to ITTF referees & umpires at least a few years ago unless it changed recently when ITTF stopped showing sponge thicknesses for each rubber on LARC . My good friend was a USATT regional umpire level & that is what he told me.

Why do you keep waffling on about rubbers bought without sponge.
I never bought a rubber that was not complete and know nobody who has. This might be a practice exclusive to the pimple brothers.

Summing up : ITTF is ok to let manufacturers sell COMPLETE RUBBERS WITH SPONGE under ONE ITTF Number even thought they are being sold with different sponges.
Not just different thicknesses but also different colors and different sponge-characteristics.
Are you getting it now ?
If you feel that there are some words in your mouth that came from me : " Just spit them out"

 

[lodro]

So please come back with the same nonsense

because you asked so nicely :
James Z said:
The ITTF approval in case spinny inverted rubbers is not for just the top sheet. only

😂

;

 

[lodro]

ITTF-Equipment

equipment.ittf.com

read M4, the whole document is interesting, for example on page 13 it says
"For racket coverings which are sold with multiple versions of sponge, a different country of
origin statement may be used for each version, in order to specify sponges from different
countries."
This tells me, that it is indeed possible for a rubber to have different sponges legally.

thank you kindly for that info.
This whole dispute really only comes from jame's ideas of what constitutes a legal rubber and what does not. For me sometimes it can be a pain in the arse because I loose my notes and then can not easily establish if I now got a standard DHS H3 or indeed a DHS H3 NEO on my blade because both have the same number. So, the sponges are different, the top rubbers are different but they have the same ITTF number ????????

The same happens with the Rxton5 and 3 Rubbers, all under the same numbers but obviously completely different.

 

[Zwill]

Hurricane 3 and Hurricane 3 Neo have different topsheets? The topic title is very misleading, it should just be "if you enter you will be lost".
H3 and H3N have the same topsheet.

I don't understand what James Z is about ITTF numbers and T05 and T05FX either... They have different numbers so they can be totally different rubbers so it is the worst possible example you could bring up. Also the rubber mold of T05 and T05FX is different. This doesn't mean (except for the mold part) they have any other difference but they are in no way the same.

H3, H3N, H3 blue sponge and H3-50 are better examples with identical topsheets and different sponges.

 

[lodro]

Hurricane 3 and Hurricane 3 Neo have different topsheets? The topic title is very misleading, it should just be "if you enter you will be lost".
H3 and H3N have the same topsheet.

This needs to be more specific.
Do H3 and H3 Neo use the same mold to make the top-sheet = absolutely
Do they use the same rubber to make the two top-sheets = absolutely NOT
Anybody who says that the two top sheets are identical has either never owned and played
these rubbers , or at least not at the same time and/or on the same blade.
There is a reason why i prefer H3 over Neo, the Neo topsheet sucks.

 

[Zwill]

This needs to be more specific.
Do H3 and H3 Neo use the same mold to make the top-sheet = absolutely
Do they use the same rubber to make the two top-sheets = absolutely NOT
Anybody who says that the two top sheets are identical has either never owned and played
these rubbers , or at least not at the same time and/or on the same blade.
There is a reason why i prefer H3 over Neo, the Neo topsheet sucks.

Okay, I'm game. What is the absolute difference between H3 and H3 Neo topsheet?

 

[lodro]

Okay, I'm game. What is the absolute difference between H3 and H3 Neo topsheet?

Instead of me waffeling on and on, I suggest you seek out the review that Dan the Man made here in this very forum.

 

[zeio]

H3 and H3 Neo used to have different topsheets. The topsheet base thickness and pips dimension were different. The sponge was different as well, despite having the same model number #20/#22.

The last time I saw the original H3 was around 2012/2013. Other than missing that layer of primer, the H3 that I got in 2013 had the same topsheet and sponge as the H3 Neo.

Same thing for H2/TG2/TG3, their Neo counterparts and Nittaku variants.

The original H3 is commonly referred to in China as 大字狂飚 (Big Character Hurricane). The H3 Neo has the brand name 红双喜 (Red Double Happiness) in the center instead.

Original H3

New H3/H3 Neo

A collector's item now:

⚠️絕版⚠️全新大字狂飆 乒乓球膠

HK$200 | 大字狂飆 藍海綿 絕版多年 𣐿黏 旋轉極強！絕非新版本狂飆可比砂 平放＄200 無論係收藏或者試手都好適合 *始終係多年前嘅產物 暫畤冇脫膠跡象唔敢擔保澎完油會脫膠

www.carousell.com.hk

 

[lodro]

New H3/H3 Neo

the whole argument started with me insisting that if the ittf number is the same, we should have the same rubber 😁 All my H3s and Neos look like this

 

[Zwill]

They look the same since DHS intends to make them the same.

It's another question that they can't manufacture them consistently.

 

[lodro]

They look the same since DHS intends to make them the same.

It's another question that they can't manufacture them consistently.

looking the same and being the same is different.
It is cheapest to use the same mould, moulds are expensive to make.

Even though I use Rxton more these days, I still got many sheets of Neos and H3s and
all neos are different to all the standard H3s, less sticky for a start.

 

[lodro]

 

[Zwill]

When did I ever say that 05 & 05FX as a total rubber were the same ?
All I said was that the sponges are definitely different but topsheet is most likely the same (excpet name printing because the two rubbers as a whole rubber sheet are different)

Maybe I wasn't clear, but I was only talking about the rubber topsheet. T05 (14-001) and T05FX (14-009) can be different since they have different approval codes. They can be the same too, and most likely they are the same, but it wouldn't violate the rules if they were different.

On the contrary H3, H3N, H3 BS, H3-50 need to be the same since they all have 24-108 approval code on them.
Same as in within a margin of tolerance since "same" is a very strict word.

 

[lodro]

On the contrary H3, H3N, H3 BS, H3-50 need to be the same since they all have 24-108 approval code on them.

Exactly the case i have been trying to make, thanking you kindly.
one person insist that the "racket coverings" are allegedly tested and approved and given a ittf number as "a unit" , incl sponge. Therefore anytime the manufacturer wants to change something it would need a new test - a new number A N D wait for it, A big sum of money would have to be handed over to the ITTF for the testing and the new number etc . etc I am quite sure there are a lot of forms to be filled in, likely in triplicate and it will probably take a couple of years. 😂

But it is not a problem, our James Z will be here in a minute telling us all why we still got it wrong and he still has got it right. 😂

 

[Zwill]

Exactly the case i have been trying to make, thanking you kindly.
one person insist that the "racket coverings" are allegedly tested and approved and given a ittf number as "a unit" , incl sponge. Therefore anytime the manufacturer wants to change something it would need a new test - a new number A N D wait for it, A big sum of money would have to be handed over to the ITTF for the testing and the new number etc . etc I am quite sure there are a lot of forms to be filled in, likely in triplicate and it will probably take a couple of years. 😂

But it is not a problem, our James Z will be here in a minute telling us all why we still got it wrong and he still has got it right. 😂

I applaud the Chinese for finding these loopholes so they don't have to pay ITTF more money and of course, they don't burden us losers khm I mean users with said costs.