Search results

Did anyone tried Telson 100 extensively ? If so, what is your feedback ?

How did it come you replace your Stuor Harimoto by this blade ? Reading your last review, I would have never imagined that you switch your blade.

It has to do that you're not a F3 racer, far from it. Maybe a regional Nascar driver.

Yes, for the high end of the rating, you'll never find accurate correspondance. But it's the most useless ratings for us, since we'll never touch, by any means, those ratings.

2200 is the top 6.5% of US players. This is good but not great. I was at the same point at the age of 18 in France, a way more competitive country when it comes to TT. Felix Lebrun was at this stage at the age of 10. At 11 he was already top 2% and at 12 top 0,5%.

I re-did my chart only with UK senior ratings : Since there are only 1000 adults rated in the UK, the statistical relevance is limited. In France, 50.000 adults are rated.

You did not replied to my question. Does players have different ratings. A -17y has a -17 rating and a senior rating, and a vet rating ? That seems right : So my UK chart is wrong, since I counted several times the same players. I should do it only for adult players. But the way to rate...

You're not.

Your advice is that buying expensive rubbers is more profitable than 6 years of training. Do you realise how unsound it is?

I'm not sure, I just quoted the pyramid from the reddit thread I quoted. 2 different systems in 2 different environment can't have a perfect correspondance, especially near both ends. The +350 can be OK for 98% of the people, but not for you.

So people have different ratings? That seems odd.

I assumed that there was no separation between categories, like in France. Besides, if a - 17 plays a senior, the ranking does not matter? No one benefits the victory rating wise?

https://www.tabletennisengland.co.uk/content/uploads/2024/08/All-Ranking-2024.xlsx

On the official site of UK TT. They provide the full list of players with names, licence numbers and rating.

From a certain level, USATT rating should be told by tenth instead of hundredth (2610, 2620, etc..., with a 2680 player being way stronger than a 2600).

In which country ?

I can't do better than that : USA ranking is better conceived than the UK one, the median rating is near the average rating. You're right, 2000 US is far from national level. I'm regional level and I would be around 2200 USATT. French national level is more 2600 USATT.

Maybe a hint in the thread : And in the UK : Now you can determine approximatively what would be your rating in the USA. 1000 in the UK would be near 2100 in the USA, assuming that the level of the players is equally shared in both countries.

Here is the ranking pyramid in the UK, ranking on the abscissa and number of players on the ordinate. We can see that the ranking system is pretty poorly conceived, because it has as many ranking for the best 97 players as for the 7748 weakest. 100 rating must be very heterogenous and pretty...

I tested a boosted Loki Arthur Asia on the BH of my Fang Bo B2. It was nice but I had too long shots too often. I will test an unboosted Arthur China on my BH next week. I'm trying to find an alternative to my tensor rubbers, because I think I would benefit from not relying on the bounce effect...