Does Equipment Matter: Pro vs. Pro

berndtjgmann · Apr 21, 2018

Lightzy said:
Well I for one enjoyed the joke very much. I don't think a mod should ban a member because of not enjoying the joke.

BTW who do you think would win?

1) Dima Vs Ma Long, Dima uses a vaccum cleaner inverted to blow, Ma Long uses an electric toothbrush

2) Koki Niwa Vs. Harimoto, Koki Niwa uses a 1968 Fender Stratocaster, Harimoto uses a 9600 baud modem

3) Bernardette Szocs VS Liu Shiwen, Bernardette uses a pillow case full of live snakes, Liu Shiwen uses the flayed skin of her mortal enemy

I don't know, Lightzy, but from one pianist (presently club level) and ponger to another, how about this:

Chopin vs. Lizst

Chopin: 7'4" Steinway Concert Grand piano fh and bh

Lizst: 9'6" Bosendorfer Concert Grand piano fh and bh

As for UpSideDownCarl, other than as a SuperModerator (wow!) to this forum I wouldn't know him from The Man in the Moon. He does seem to be a bit of a humorless bloke though.

talbon · Apr 21, 2018

Berndtjgmann is a ****ing commie! I'm picturing someone who wants to write a verse with 7 feet, but berndtjgmann really, really wants them to use their hands instead. O-kay. I thought you rid the home soil of commies in the name of freedom long ago, but apparently he survived. May I kindly suggest that you rip off his kintama before he reproduces?

Berndtjgmann, few people care about boosting because all of this stuff matters in a different world than the one in which we live. I don't boost. I am quite happy that some amateurs boost. If anything this whole 'boosting' thing has given me a few good laughs. If it is a problem for the pros, they can figure it out among themselves.

I do care about illegal serves and more generally lack of sportsmanship. I don't quite see how lack of sportsmanship in one form or another is an attribute of modern table tennis.

As you know, table tennis wouldn't look like anything you've got the nostalgia of even if everybody went back to hardbat. Hardbat at the very best level might in fact be incredibly robotic.

I like what sponges have done to table tennis. They allow for more creativity, and more variety in styles. Ping pong is a bit boring, beyond admiring the technique of the very best for a few minutes, in comparison to some of what table tennis has produced over the years.

UpSideDownCarl · Apr 21, 2018

Here is the thing:

1) Someone who points out some of the problems in the pro level game is fine. But how you do it, bjgmann, is really vitriolic and off-putting. DTopSpirit has made posts about things like cheating and illegal boosting that made me smile and laugh. And they got the point across just fine. So points about things like that would be fine. But the way you seem to go at those issues at every chance you get and don’t really present much else can really be pretty darn toxic.

It would be fine to have another member of the Old Codger Squad or TTDaily’s very own Curmudgeon. But often, how you express things is just downright antisocial.

2) History: if what you were presenting was simply the history of the sport, I am confident it would be fine and even worthwhile. But your not. Your basically expressing the opinion that back then real men played the game because everyone used the same basic equipment. Your bilious attacks on modern equipment and the players who use it and your predictable statements about back when the differences in equipment were hardly noticeable, become quite tiresome given how frequently you make statements like that.

If it was simply you educating people about the history of TT I am 100% sure it would be totally fine. But that is not what you are doing. And it is a thing I have seen from many hardbat enthusiasts and it is learned from the bitter upset that Marty felt when he was not simply beaten but utterly embarrassed at the 1952 WTTC.

3) Different viewpoints: it is great to have different viewpoints. Nothing wrong with that. In fact, the viewpoints are not the problem with bjgmann. If we had someone who was able to explain why boosting—while it is against the rules—is problematic it would be totally fine. If we had someone who educated us on some of the history, like what events lead to the adopting of the expedite rule, it would be kind of fun.

But so much of what comes out of bjgmann’s comments is mean and vindictive and about putting other people down rather than propping up the aspects of the sport he says he wants to promote.

Sorry. That is just how it seems to me.

There are times I find him funny or entertaining. But it is never in the way he intends to present his message.

Sent from The Subterranean Workshop by Telepathy

berndtjgmann · Apr 21, 2018

(talbon). Berndtjgmann is a ****ing commie!

Well no, sport. FYI, my parents were democratic socialists, who voted for Norman Thomas during the Roosevelt, Truman and Eisenhower administrations. My father wanted to join the Abraham Lincoln Brigade to go over to fight against both fascists and communists in Spain but was dissuaded by my mother, for which I am grateful, for among other things that gave me a chance to exist and post stuff to tt forums that some people like and gets others pissed off.

Regarding communism and table tennis: here, pasted from wikipedia is some interesting and true stuff about the founder of the International Table Tennis Federation.

Ivor Goldsmid Samuel Montagu (23 April 1904, Kensington, London – 5 November 1984, Watford) was an English filmmaker, screenwriter, producer, film critic, writer, table tennis player, and Communist activist in the 1930s. He helped to develop a lively intellectual film culture in Britain during the interwar years, and was also the founder of the International Table Tennis Federation.

Contents [hide]
1 Life and career
2 Table tennis
3 The Family Who Came In From The Cold
4 Writing
5 See also
6 References
7 Further reading
8 External links
Life and career[edit]
Montagu was born into enormous wealth, as the third son of Gladys Helen Rachel Goldsmid and Louis Montagu, 2nd Baron Swaythling, a Jewish banking dynasty with a mansion in Kensington. He attended Westminster School and King's College, Cambridge, where he contributed to Granta. He became involved in zoological research.

With Sidney Bernstein he established the London Film Society in 1925, the first British film association devoted to showing art films and independent films. Montagu became the first film critic of The Observer and the New Statesman. He did the post-production work on Alfred Hitchcock's The Lodger in 1926 and was hired by Gaumont-British in the 1930s, working as a producer on a number of the Hitchcock thrillers. His 1928 silent slapstick movie 'Bluebottles' (slang for police) is included in the British Film Institute's History of the Avant-Garde – Britain in the Twenties.[1] The story was by H. G. Wells, and the stars of the film were Charles Laughton and Elsa Lanchester, while the remaining cast were his friends including Norman Haire (also Montagu's doctor), Sergei Nolbandov and Joe Beckett.

Montagu joined the Fabian Society in his youth, then the British Socialist Party, and then the Communist Party of Great Britain. This brought him into contact with the brilliant Russian film makers who were transforming the language of editing.and montage in the 1920s. In 1930 he accompanied his friend Sergei Eisenstein to New York and Hollywood; later in the decade Montagu made a number of compilation films, including Defence of Madrid (1936) and Peace and Plenty (1939)[2] about the Spanish Civil War. He directed the documentary Wings Over Everest (1934) with Geoffrey Barkas. As a political figure and for a time a communist, much of his work at the time was on low budget, independent political films. By World War II, however, he made a film for the Ministry of Information. After the war Montagu worked as a film critic and reviewer.

In 1933, Montagu was a founder member of the Association of Cinematograph and Television Technicians, holding various positions in the union until the 1960s. He also held post on the World Council of Peace. In 1934 he was founder of the Progressive Film Institute.[3]

Montagu had a keen interest in wildlife conservation, and was a council member of the Fauna Preservation Society for several years. He was friends with the eminent Soviet conservationist and zoologist Prof. A. Bannikov. He had contacts in Mongolia, and was a champion for the conservation of the endangered Przewalski's horse.

On the 10th of January 1927 he married Eileen Hellstern (1904-1984) the daughter of Francis Anton Hellstern, a boot maker from Camberwell. Although the couple did not have any children together, Ivor adopted Eileen's young daughter, Rowna Barnett née Hellstern (1922-1996).

Table tennis[edit]
Montagu was a champion table tennis player, representing Britain in matches all over the world. He also helped to establish and finance the first world championships in London in 1926.

Montagu founded the International Table Tennis Federation that same year, and was president of the group for more than forty years, not retiring until 1967. He also founded the English Table Tennis Association (ETTA), and served several terms as chairman and president.[4]

Montagu was inducted into the International Table Tennis Foundation Hall of Fame in 1995.[5]

The Family Who Came In From The Cold[edit]
His eldest brother Ewen Montagu, a strait-laced barrister in civilian life, became a Naval Intelligence Officer RNVR in MI6, during the Second World War, privy to the secrets of top-secret Ultra and the mastermind of the successful deception that launched the invasion of Sicily, Operation Mincemeat. He later wrote a best-selling account of that adventure, The Man Who Never Was. Ivor Montagu himself turned out to be working, albeit briefly, for the other side. A 25 July 1940 cable from Simon Davidovitch Kremer, Secretary to the Soviet Military Attaché in London, identified him as the somewhat reluctant new recruit who was supposed to create an "X Group" of like-minded friends.[6][7] By the following year, Hitler had invaded Russia and the Soviet Union became an ally of Britain's, so that by June, 1941, both brothers were technically working for the same side.

Ivor knew of his elder brother's spy work, but it seems doubtful his brother knew of his. Counter-espionage agents at MI5, however, even Ewen's boss John C. Masterman, seem to have suspected Ivor in general because of his outspoken Communist politics, his hanging around with scruffy Russians and housing a Jewish refugee in his house in the country. By far the greatest suspicions were aroused by Ivor's passionate support of international ping-pong, which seemed so eccentric to MI5 that they assumed it had to be a cover for something else. They even tapped his phone and opened his mail, creating three volumes on him by early 1942, but found nothing specific, much to Ewen's relief, since he was always worried that his own career in MI6 would be adversely affected by the activities of his left-wing brother.[8]

Only after the decryption in the 1960s of Venona telegraphs from March 1940 through April 1942 was he purportedly identified as "Ivor Montagu, the well known local communist, journalist and lecturer," code name "Intelligentsia", in communications from the Soviet GRU. It should, however, be noted that the Verona decrypts, which were finally declassified in 1995, are a highly contested and confusing archive of information, with a welter of code-names, which were frequently changed and not explicitly identified with their real names; hence these decrypts were never used in any U.S. or British trials for treason, despite their availability to prosecutors from the late 1940s.[9]

If "Intelligentsia" was, indeed, Ivor Montagu, his rather haphazard informing had little of the impact of those much more famous Cambridge-educated spies, recruited as idealistic anti-Fascists in the 1930s, who continued to work at the height of the Cold War - Kim Philby, Guy Burgess and Donald MacLean. In 1952, MI5 intercepted a telegram from Ivor Montagu telling Charlie Chaplin how sorry he was to miss him in London when the star visited England that year; the British agency had agreed to spy on Charlie Chaplin for the FBI, who were looking for ways to keep him out of America at the height of the McCarthy Blacklist.[10] Apart from that, they left Montagu and his ping pong tournaments alone.

Montagu was awarded the prestigious Lenin Peace Prize in 1959, given by the Soviet government to a number of recipients whose work furthers the cause of Socialism, primarily outside of the USSR.

Writing[edit]
Montagu wrote many pamphlets and books, such as Film World (1964), With Eisenstein in Hollywood (1968), and The Youngest Son (1970). He wrote two books about table tennis: Table Tennis Today (1924) and Table Tennis (1936)

Edit: Montaagu's code name as a spy for the Soviets was Nobility, not Intelligentsia.

UpSideDownCarl · Apr 21, 2018

But, here: Lets have a look at some fun and entertaining versions of the message bjgmann says he is presenting:

Nobody has complained about the messages DTop has presented in these videos. And he is presenting pretty real and good info. But he makes it fun and funny.

berndtjgmann · Apr 21, 2018

https://www.thoughtco.com/hardbat-vs-sponge-in-table-tennis-3173594

by Greg Letts
Updated March 18, 2017

When About.com Table Tennis forum member dadsky posted some scathing claims about modern table tennis made by an acquaintance that favors hardbat, fellow forum member and hardbat advocate Scott Gordon posted an insightful and balanced reply, which I have reproduced below.

Claims About Modern Table Tennis vs Hardbat from dadsky's Acquaintance
Rubber and blade manufacturers promise high-speed table tennis resulting from their "research" when hardbat table tennis (or classical table tennis) with crappy equipment offers a faster pace of play, more control, and cheaper equipment.

Table tennis play as seen on TV, using those commercial rubbers, is dull - similar to Formula 1 races where the most powerful engine wins. Skill is not the absolute factor in winning.

Play with rubbers and so-called ITTF Rubbers is boring - play rarely goes beyond five exchanges - while hardbatters enjoy up to a dozen or more exchanges with every point.

Commercial table tennis is just that - commercial. And there are suckers born every minute who actually believe that table tennis using ITTF equipment actually makes table tennis more exciting. and it's both sad and funny that so many people actually purchase this ITTF equipment and give away their hard-earned bucks to these money-making table tennis equipment manufacturers. He describes equipment manufacturers as "vampires" for selling equipment at such ridiculous prices - $40 for a "piece of rubber", when condoms cost much less!

Table tennis 50 years ago enjoyed a larger audience than table tennis does today.

Scott Gordon's Reply - Hardbat vs Sponge Table Tennis Rackets

There are so many facets to this discussion that it is difficult to list them all in one post. I myself use a hardbat exclusively, but primarily in sponge events. I also was partly responsible for getting hardbat events expanded at the Open and the Nationals, and was chairman of the USATT hardbat committee for several years before needing a break and backing out of that role.
Despite my obvious love of hardbat, I was raised on sponge, used inverted for 20 years before switching to hardbat, and the vast majority of my play is against sponge players.

I think I am able to fully appreciate both styles and eras for their strengths. Maybe someday I'll write an essay (or even a book) about it, because table tennis is truly unique in having these two versions of itself that are SO different and so affect its history, development, and character. It is likely also a debate that can never truly end. Rather than try and list everything, I'll just make a few random comments.

Disdain for the Minority
It is true that when sponge first appeared, certain players who weren't at the top suddenly were champions, and vice-versa. Sponge assisted some players more than others. In the early days it was seen as a crutch just like long pips is viewed today by some people. Over time, it is interesting to note that the attitude is reversed, with some people calling hardbat a crutch for people who can't learn sponge. Whichever is the minority, is viewed with disdain.

Modern vs Past Ping-Pong Players
There is no comparing the athletes of the 40s with the athletes of today. With the possible exception of Bergmann, training today is much more rigorous. In the 30s and 40s there was also war in Europe, where most of the players were centered. They had more pressing concerns than just table tennis, and you didn't have nations funding professional players. That doesn't mean they weren't incredible athletes who would be surprisingly competitive if dropped into the tournament scene today.

Hardbat vs Sponge - Which is More Exciting?

Nearly every player who was alive in the hardbat era, even those who benefited from sponge, claims that matches were more dramatic without sponge. While it is not true in every case, after 10 years of organizing hardbat, I think that overall I agree.

Interestingly, if you place two tables side-by-side, with a sponge match on one and a hardbat match on the other, the hardbat match will appear uninteresting. However, that would be the same as having a "battle of the bands" between Chopin and Led Zeppelin. One is too distracting. Even so, that hasn't stopped hardbat matches from often drawing huge spontaneous crowds at major tournaments... a good matchup can make for high drama, whereas more often the drama in a sponge match is due to a close score.

Having said that, it would be unfair of me to not admit that the most exciting matches I've personally seen were mostly sponge matches (but of course, 99% of the matches I've seen were sponge matches, so it's even hard for me to compare).

Influence of Table Tennis Manufacturers

It is true that, to some degree, equipment manufacturers have held an increasing stranglehold over decisions made in the rules of the game. With respect to hardbat, it is for example often difficult for clubs in England to hold hardbat events because some that have tried have been threatened with loss of ETTA affiliation, under a leadership that arguably had a conflict of interest with profits from equipment sales. And it's not just hardbat... we saw the American company Asti get driven out of business by the collusion of rival mega-companies. This is nothing new or surprising in the world of sport. But it isn't really fair to say that if hardbat were better, it would grow on its own. There really ARE forces out there that would (and have) fought it, not in America but in countries where table tennis is more popular and thus more money is at stake.

Hardbat Misinformation

In fact, there is an incredible amount of misinformation being fed to beginners about table tennis before the advent of sponge. It is not uncommon to read in books that, before sponge, table tennis was just boring pushes, and it is sponge that makes the game exciting. Much of it is promulgated by people just parroting what they were told. The fact is that throughout its history, the game was always dominated by forehand attack and spin. Sponge simply gives one a further advantage in those areas.
Continued on next page...

Table Tennis Audience Sizes

You can't compare audiences then and now. There are too many variables: the times were different, Asia wasn't involved then, it wasn't in the Olympics, there weren't video games (or even television!), etc.

Ordinary Players Must Use Sponge to be Competitive?

For most of us "mortal" players, using sponge is not a requirement to be competitive. I don't think whether I use hardbat or sponge has any bearing on my rating. If you're 2300 or higher, than yes it starts making a difference and you would need every advantage you can get. But below that (and we're talking 98% of players), other factors are more important. Just look at the list of full time hardbat players on hardbat.com - the average rating of hardbat players in sponge events is actually higher than the national average for sponge players. The belief that you must use inverted, or that you must even use sponge, is in my opinion a laughable myth that we have quite literally bought into. That said, I would never suggest that a promising junior player eschew inverted... a kid might be the next Olympic hopeful and so it wouldn't be wise.

Respect for the Table Tennis Legacy and Past Champions

The saddest thing about this "debate" between sponge and hardbat, is that it has separated the sport from its legacy. You don't hear baseball fans talking about how lame Lou Gehrig was... they talk about him with reverence. The world series is a big thing because it puts the winner in the company of the past greats.

Table tennis, by contrast, has worked hard to distance itself from its own past, and rejected its legends as irrelevant. Whenever someone says ping pong is not a sport, we're fast to jump in with "oh no, that was back then... NOW we're really good, look at our fast paddles", and they just laugh harder.

That, in my opinion, is a sure-fire recipe for guaranteeing our own obscurity. We should put all of the great champions in our glorious 80+ year history on the pedestal they deserve, and preserve, promote and enjoy the thrilling times they gave us. Unfortunately, I don't see that happening anytime soon.

Scott Gordon is a Professor of Computer Science at California State University Sacramento and a four-time National and three-time U.S. Open Hardbat Doubles Champion. His USATT rating is 1960 and his hardbat rating based on matches is 1938 plus or minus 107 based on 432 hardbat/hardbat matches played.

UpSideDownCarl · Apr 21, 2018

And so, since you want people to respect hardbat, you spend so much time denigrating sponge? It makes no sense.

Think about it and think about if you can figure out a way to post and present yourself where you are not starting out to pick a fight. I am sorry. But I am tired of the way you consistently try to pick fights and look for opportunities to rant and rail about equipment and boosters. Most of the time when you bring that stuff up, it is totally beside the point of the current discussion.

There is plenty of space for the values and virtues of hardbat. I have seen plenty of hardbat matches where I thought about how much harder it is to simply win the point and therefore the rallies become longer, and more about side to side movement. I am not saying better or worse. The rallies are longer and about different versions of tactics. And in TT with sponge, a lot of what rallies are about is tactics to get the upper hand and take the shot that ends the point earlier in the rally. But when you do end up with a long rally or there is a match with a player whose style is about lengthening the rallies like Joo Se Hyuk or Jun Mizutani, the long rallies in modern TT are spectacular in different ways than the spectacular rallies of hardbat.

It doesn't have to be one or the other. But the way you present, you seem to create this idea that it can only be one or the other. I don't have to put down hardbat to say that many people on this forum may not be as interested in it as you are. And I don't have to put down hardbat to say that the way that you present will not make too many people think they want to check out hardbat.

So be better. See if you can figure out ways of presenting yourself that might make more people interested in parts of the sport that make you happy. Rather than insulting people for the parts of the sport that make them happy.

I have posted video of Marty. The guy was pretty graceful. He was always pretty nice to me. Even though I know I saw him be pretty mean about the hardbat/sponge issue. He wasn't only that. Why not try and get people to see the good sides of hardbat rather than trying to throw in everyone's faces the bad side of sponge?

yoass · Apr 21, 2018

Lightzy said:
Well I for one enjoyed the joke very much. I don't think a mod should ban a member because of not enjoying the joke.

BTW who do you think would win?

1) Dima Vs Ma Long, Dima uses a vaccum cleaner inverted to blow, Ma Long uses an electric toothbrush

2) Koki Niwa Vs. Harimoto, Koki Niwa uses a 1968 Fender Stratocaster, Harimoto uses a 9600 baud modem

3) Bernardette Szocs VS Liu Shiwen, Bernardette uses a pillow case full of live snakes, Liu Shiwen uses the flayed skin of her mortal enemy

1. Ma Long, 2. Harimoto, 3. Liu Shiwen. What do I win?

langel · Apr 21, 2018

To berndtjgmann:
Sir, I think I undestand very well your point of view.
Let me give my black penny:

1. About socialism - I was born and raised in a socialist country and I know very well the real face of socialism. Please don't mess idealism with reality. Democracy is an obligatory characteristic of socialism by definition, but in reality democracy never happened in any socialist country, anywhere. So - there is no such thing as "democratic socialism", its just a populistic idealism.

2. About hardbats/sponged ones - when I was a child, back in the 70's, I and my boy-squad spent a summer collecting trash paper, metals and bottles for recycling to make money for a tennis table, and we made it. We bought a 80$ table, but we had just to look at it for a couple of weeks more, because it came that we have to do some more trash digging for the net. Till the beginning of the 80's we were playing with hardbats only and we were happy. We saw sponged bats for the first time in beginning of the 80's and we gave them a try. We called them "sandwiches" and found them fantastic. Back in those days there was no internet, no forums and no one has ever told us anything about which is better or proper. It was our decision to go with the "sandwiches" because we liked them more and we liked them more, because they made us more happy. We were just children and we gave damn nuts to brand policy and marketing.

3. About price - back in the 70's the price of the hardbats we used to play was 1.5$, in the 80's our "sandwiches" were 3$. But the price of an entry level training bat was 10$. Coaches refused to train you if you don't have a 10$ bat. Well, multiply all these by 10 and you'll get the recent prices - now you can get a hardbat for 15 bucks, ordinary premade bat for 30, and an entry level "pro" for 100. All the same.

4. My decision - I will never go back with a hardbat. In the club we have some sets of hardbats and sandpapers, some casual visitors use them just in a while, but no one play sponge against sand just for the show. And no one of the club members, even the veterans, 75 years of age, have ever looked to the hard and sand.

5. Hard&sands are ok - if you like them, use them. There is a World Ping Pong Championship, so nobody is mestreated.

perham · Apr 21, 2018

I understand if someone has a strong opinion on Hardbat vs. Sponge issue. I also understand if one wants to promote their point of view. What I don’t understand is how posting on Internet forums are going to help. If you like hardbat, organize a hardbat tournament. That’s way more effective than just ranting online. Change comes through community building, not random online rants.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Jimbob MacInbred · Apr 21, 2018

yoass said:
1. Ma Long, 2. Harimoto, 3. Liu Shiwen. What do I win?

...A "Meet & Greet" with Berndt. Enjoy! Take some valium with you, just in case...

Lightzy · Apr 21, 2018

Damn that's actually the right answers.

Like, even without the weird equipment.

berndtjgmann · Apr 21, 2018

Hmm. Getting shelled at from all directions here, incoming from UPSDC really fierce, no rain for weeks in southeast Arizona, ground too hard to dig decent foxhole, what to do?

What every self respecting troll would do in a situation like this of course; lay down a barrage of CYA covering fire.

Lock and load. Your father's mustache. Your mother wears army shoes. Your sister swims after troopships. And you play table tennis with a sponge bat (man! that was cold).

There. That oughta do it; for a little while at least. Bought me a little time. Back to bed.

berndtjgmann · Apr 21, 2018

perham said:
I understand if someone has a strong opinion on Hardbat vs. Sponge issue. I also understand if one wants to promote their point of view. What I don’t understand is how posting on Internet forums are going to help. If you like hardbat, organize a hardbat tournament. That’s way more effective than just ranting online. Change comes through community building, not random online rants.

I've done both, perham. I was among the Founding Fathers of the American renaissance of Classic Table Tennis, a small but determined band of hardbat stalwarts and enthusiasts who met in a conference room in 1998 at the Braeswood Motel in Houston, Texas to establish the American Classic Table Tennis Association and lay down rules and guidelines for how hardbat table tennis should be played. I was a member of the Rules and Equipment Committee for determining which rubbers should be permitted for hard rubber play in the United States.

I also contributed prize money for hard rubber events in the late 1990s until due to injuries I had to leave the sport in 2005 for the American National Championships, the U.S. Open, the Ohio Closed State Championships, the Buckeye Open, the South Bend, Indiana St. Joesph's Open, and the Cleveland, Ohio Open.

Thanks especially to the work of Scott Gordon, Jim McQueen, Larry Hodges, and the inspiration of Marty Reisman's winning the Hardbat Singles Championship in 1998 at age 67, hard rubber table tennis has become a fixture at both the National Championships and the U. S. Open. Were it not for our efforts, this and other hard rubber events throughout the United States might not have come about.

Ranger-man · Apr 21, 2018

berndtjgmann said:
https://www.thoughtco.com/hardbat-vs-sponge-in-table-tennis-3173594

by Greg Letts
Updated March 18, 2017

When About.com Table Tennis forum member dadsky posted some scathing claims about modern table tennis made by an acquaintance that favors hardbat, fellow forum member and hardbat advocate Scott Gordon posted an insightful and balanced reply, which I have reproduced below.

Claims About Modern Table Tennis vs Hardbat from dadsky's Acquaintance
Rubber and blade manufacturers promise high-speed table tennis resulting from their "research" when hardbat table tennis (or classical table tennis) with crappy equipment offers a faster pace of play, more control, and cheaper equipment.

Table tennis play as seen on TV, using those commercial rubbers, is dull - similar to Formula 1 races where the most powerful engine wins. Skill is not the absolute factor in winning.

Play with rubbers and so-called ITTF Rubbers is boring - play rarely goes beyond five exchanges - while hardbatters enjoy up to a dozen or more exchanges with every point.

Commercial table tennis is just that - commercial. And there are suckers born every minute who actually believe that table tennis using ITTF equipment actually makes table tennis more exciting. and it's both sad and funny that so many people actually purchase this ITTF equipment and give away their hard-earned bucks to these money-making table tennis equipment manufacturers. He describes equipment manufacturers as "vampires" for selling equipment at such ridiculous prices - $40 for a "piece of rubber", when condoms cost much less!

Table tennis 50 years ago enjoyed a larger audience than table tennis does today.

Scott Gordon's Reply - Hardbat vs Sponge Table Tennis Rackets

There are so many facets to this discussion that it is difficult to list them all in one post. I myself use a hardbat exclusively, but primarily in sponge events. I also was partly responsible for getting hardbat events expanded at the Open and the Nationals, and was chairman of the USATT hardbat committee for several years before needing a break and backing out of that role.
Despite my obvious love of hardbat, I was raised on sponge, used inverted for 20 years before switching to hardbat, and the vast majority of my play is against sponge players.

I think I am able to fully appreciate both styles and eras for their strengths. Maybe someday I'll write an essay (or even a book) about it, because table tennis is truly unique in having these two versions of itself that are SO different and so affect its history, development, and character. It is likely also a debate that can never truly end. Rather than try and list everything, I'll just make a few random comments.

Disdain for the Minority
It is true that when sponge first appeared, certain players who weren't at the top suddenly were champions, and vice-versa. Sponge assisted some players more than others. In the early days it was seen as a crutch just like long pips is viewed today by some people. Over time, it is interesting to note that the attitude is reversed, with some people calling hardbat a crutch for people who can't learn sponge. Whichever is the minority, is viewed with disdain.

Modern vs Past Ping-Pong Players
There is no comparing the athletes of the 40s with the athletes of today. With the possible exception of Bergmann, training today is much more rigorous. In the 30s and 40s there was also war in Europe, where most of the players were centered. They had more pressing concerns than just table tennis, and you didn't have nations funding professional players. That doesn't mean they weren't incredible athletes who would be surprisingly competitive if dropped into the tournament scene today.

Hardbat vs Sponge - Which is More Exciting?

Nearly every player who was alive in the hardbat era, even those who benefited from sponge, claims that matches were more dramatic without sponge. While it is not true in every case, after 10 years of organizing hardbat, I think that overall I agree.

Interestingly, if you place two tables side-by-side, with a sponge match on one and a hardbat match on the other, the hardbat match will appear uninteresting. However, that would be the same as having a "battle of the bands" between Chopin and Led Zeppelin. One is too distracting. Even so, that hasn't stopped hardbat matches from often drawing huge spontaneous crowds at major tournaments... a good matchup can make for high drama, whereas more often the drama in a sponge match is due to a close score.

Having said that, it would be unfair of me to not admit that the most exciting matches I've personally seen were mostly sponge matches (but of course, 99% of the matches I've seen were sponge matches, so it's even hard for me to compare).

Influence of Table Tennis Manufacturers

It is true that, to some degree, equipment manufacturers have held an increasing stranglehold over decisions made in the rules of the game. With respect to hardbat, it is for example often difficult for clubs in England to hold hardbat events because some that have tried have been threatened with loss of ETTA affiliation, under a leadership that arguably had a conflict of interest with profits from equipment sales. And it's not just hardbat... we saw the American company Asti get driven out of business by the collusion of rival mega-companies. This is nothing new or surprising in the world of sport. But it isn't really fair to say that if hardbat were better, it would grow on its own. There really ARE forces out there that would (and have) fought it, not in America but in countries where table tennis is more popular and thus more money is at stake.

Hardbat Misinformation

In fact, there is an incredible amount of misinformation being fed to beginners about table tennis before the advent of sponge. It is not uncommon to read in books that, before sponge, table tennis was just boring pushes, and it is sponge that makes the game exciting. Much of it is promulgated by people just parroting what they were told. The fact is that throughout its history, the game was always dominated by forehand attack and spin. Sponge simply gives one a further advantage in those areas.
Continued on next page...

Table Tennis Audience Sizes

You can't compare audiences then and now. There are too many variables: the times were different, Asia wasn't involved then, it wasn't in the Olympics, there weren't video games (or even television!), etc.

Ordinary Players Must Use Sponge to be Competitive?

For most of us "mortal" players, using sponge is not a requirement to be competitive. I don't think whether I use hardbat or sponge has any bearing on my rating. If you're 2300 or higher, than yes it starts making a difference and you would need every advantage you can get. But below that (and we're talking 98% of players), other factors are more important. Just look at the list of full time hardbat players on hardbat.com - the average rating of hardbat players in sponge events is actually higher than the national average for sponge players. The belief that you must use inverted, or that you must even use sponge, is in my opinion a laughable myth that we have quite literally bought into. That said, I would never suggest that a promising junior player eschew inverted... a kid might be the next Olympic hopeful and so it wouldn't be wise.

Respect for the Table Tennis Legacy and Past Champions

The saddest thing about this "debate" between sponge and hardbat, is that it has separated the sport from its legacy. You don't hear baseball fans talking about how lame Lou Gehrig was... they talk about him with reverence. The world series is a big thing because it puts the winner in the company of the past greats.

Table tennis, by contrast, has worked hard to distance itself from its own past, and rejected its legends as irrelevant. Whenever someone says ping pong is not a sport, we're fast to jump in with "oh no, that was back then... NOW we're really good, look at our fast paddles", and they just laugh harder.

That, in my opinion, is a sure-fire recipe for guaranteeing our own obscurity. We should put all of the great champions in our glorious 80+ year history on the pedestal they deserve, and preserve, promote and enjoy the thrilling times they gave us. Unfortunately, I don't see that happening anytime soon.

Scott Gordon is a Professor of Computer Science at California State University Sacramento and a four-time National and three-time U.S. Open Hardbat Doubles Champion. His USATT rating is 1960 and his hardbat rating based on matches is 1938 plus or minus 107 based on 432 hardbat/hardbat matches played.

Much as I disagreed with the general premise that hardbat game was/is better I was willing to read on and take the article on its merits. I was wiling to do that because I started with hardbat back in the day untila friend intriduced me to newer blades and rubbers. The science and physics involved was an instant draw for me. The impact of the sponge, the rubber, the types of wod plies, the number of plies and then the arm mechanics all had me hooked. THAT is my biggest attraction to this game. Hardbat does not offer me that. I would not revert for anything. So, I was willing to read on, until I got to this part:

Table tennis play as seen on TV, using those commercial rubbers, is dull - similar to Formula 1 races where the most powerful engine wins. Skill is not the absolute factor in winning.

Now, I have been a keen formula one fan since the days of Senna, keenly following the teams, the engineering, the mechanics, the rule changes, everything. The reason I stopped here is because this is where I realized I was reading a post written by a potentially biased person. All Formula 1 cars use the same engine. Either he is misinformed or has put this line in on purpose, using a lie to add weight to his argument. Only people with a bias do that.

The fact is that is that it is actually the other things that matter. The design of the car, the software, the engine mapping, and I assure you, the driver. Very few drivers were as skilled in wet conditions as Senna, or Schumacher, for example. Now Hamilton has that art. Now I agree money plays a huge roll in this. The bigger teams can spend more on these things than the smaller teams, at times four to five times as much. The teams that make the engines are at an advantage. The smaller teams that buy the engines have to do more work. But just because money plays a huge part does NOT mean that skill does not. The newer footballs allow players to do so much more. But I dare you to bend it like Beckham - sorry for the cliche. I bet his skill mattered. I dare you to launch a cannon like Balotelli. Or take the ball from the half-line, dodge past half the team and score like Messi.

Watch the Monaco grand prix and tell me that only engine power matters. The cars don't even go full tilt on 80% of that course. It is overtaking skill that matters. A well-times DRS matters.

Now to explain why my reply is so harsh. Because I am a journalist by profession - have been one for 26 years - and as an editor it is my job to catch angling. Angling is what we refer to as the writer trying get his bias into a story disguised as fact. I

Now as for your conclusion, that this has distanced the sport from its legacy. Maybe it has or maybe it has not. But that is easily explained. I find less disdain among sponge players for the traditionalists. I however find that traditionalists have a significant amount of disdain for the sponge players. They started this distancing. They started the tirade of how the sponge players won simply because of the equipment, etc.

Why blame the sponge players for this? Or the equipment. I would blame people like Marty Reisman.

perham · Apr 21, 2018

berndtjgmann said:
I've done both, perham. I was among the Founding Fathers of the American renaissance of Classic Table Tennis, a small but determined band of hardbat stalwarts and enthusiasts who met in a conference room in 1998 at the Braeswood Motel in Houston, Texas to establish the American Classic Table Tennis Association and lay down rules and guidelines for how hardbat table tennis should be played. I was a member of the Rules and Equipment Committee for determining which rubbers should be permitted for hard rubber play in the United States.

I also contributed prize money for hard rubber events in the late 1990s until due to injuries I had to leave the sport in 2005 for the American National Championships, the U.S. Open, the Ohio Closed State Championships, the Buckeye Open, the South Bend, Indiana St. Joesph's Open, and the Cleveland, Ohio Open.

Thanks especially to the work of Scott Gordon, Jim McQueen, Larry Hodges, and the inspiration of Marty Reisman's winning the Hardbat Singles Championship in 1998 at age 67, hard rubber table tennis has become a fixture at both the National Championships and the U. S. Open. Were it not for our efforts, this and other hard rubber events throughout the United States might not have come about.

That's great! Now don't you think you can inspire new players (which mostly don't even know how to play with hardbats, etc.) to join such tournaments and get familiar with the classical type of the sport? I think having a positive attitude and trying to explain your side of things would work way better than being negative towards people who might not even know what the argument is in the first place. I, for one, have never played with a hard bat, yet, if there's a tournament in my town, I would gladly join just to give it a try. Most of the people I know in the sport play it for fun, and they are the source of the greatest income for the sport in general. Don't you think that if there's enough community interest in the classical table tennis, ITTF and national federations would have to change their policies just for the sake of adjusting to the new market?

NextLevel · Apr 21, 2018

The funny thing is that even hard batters will never claim that everyone used the same hardbat equipment. People likely messed around with things to the same degree that they do now, only that in an earlier time with less choice for all the reasons tied to modern wealth and technology, they couldn't do so.

berndtjgmann · Apr 21, 2018

NextLevel said:
The funny thing is that even hard batters will never claim that everyone used the same hardbat equipment. People likely messed around with things to the same degree that they do now, only that in an earlier time with less choice for all the reasons tied to modern wealth and technology, they couldn't do so.

They didn't, NextLevel.

There were a number of manufacturers of blades for competitive players that I can recollect, among them Hock, MacCrossen, Slazenger, Backer, Stiga, S.W. Hancock, Jaques, Dunlop, to name but a few.

I rather doubt that competitive hard rubber players doctored from the 1930s to the mid-1950s doctored their rackets to any great degree. Sanding or shaving the tips of the pimples of one's racket could change the way the racket played, but most likely not in any way that would benefit a player or that would make the rubber better for predominantly attacking or defensive play. I cannot say that no players of the 1930s and 1940s doctored their rackets or rubbers; I wasn't around in the '30s and was a kid knowing nothing about tt ib the '4os, but I'm pretty sure with almost complete certitude that no player of international stature doctored his or her racket or rubber.

Dick Miles, who used the Hock 3-ply birch/basswood blade with Leyland rubber, however, specified to Bernard Hock that he did not want his handles glued to the handle piece of his blades, as he wanted to feel the vibration of ball contact through his hand. The Hock racket's handles had two small distinctive brads (nails) to hold them in place as well as the glue Hock used.

In the early 1960s, I can attest that those of us who played with hard rubber rackets (preassembled, even my mentor Danny Vegh's) did not doctor our blades or our rubbers. If we broke a blade or lost too many pips on its rubber, we simply bought a new one. I played with a Hock or Dunlop Barna, and I could order a preassembled Hock or Barna from Hock or from Jimmy McClure's Pla-Good Shop in Indianapolis for around $3.50.

NextLevel · Apr 21, 2018

berndtjgmann said:
They didn't, NextLevel.

There were a number of manufacturers of blades for competitive players that I can recollect, among them Hock, MacCrossen, Slazenger, Backer, Stiga, S.W. Hancock, Jaques, Dunlop, to name but a few.

I rather doubt that competitive hard rubber players doctored from the 1930s to the mid-1950s doctored their rackets to any great degree. Sanding or shaving the tips of the pimples of one's racket could change the way the racket played, but most likely not in any way that would benefit a player or that would make the rubber better for predominantly attacking or defensive play. I cannot say that no players of the 1930s and 1940s doctored their rackets or rubbers; I wasn't around in the '30s and was a kid knowing nothing about tt ib the '4os, but I'm pretty sure with almost complete certitude that no player of international stature doctored his or her racket or rubber

In the early 1960s, I can attest that those of us who played with hard rubber rackets (preassembled, even my mentor Danny Vegh's) did not doctor our blades or our rubbers. If we broke a blade or lost too many pips on its rubber, we simply bought a new one. I played with a Hock or Dunlop Barna, and I could order a preassembled Hock or Barna from Hock or from Jimmy McClure's Pal-Good Shop in Indianapolis for around $3.00.

The choice of language and your level of play misses the point. You mean that people would just pick up and use the first blade they ever tried? They never tested different equipment to see what the pros and cons were?

That's not doctoring, that's stupid. Unless there was an established strong theory on how best to play the game and it's hard to believe that existed at a time when it was possible to use different equipment like smooth rubber and turn the game upside down.

The Dick Miles story speaks for itself.

berndtjgmann · Apr 21, 2018

NextLevel said:
The choice of language and your level of play misses the point. You mean that people would just pick up and use the first blade they ever tried? They never tested different equipment to see what the pros and cons were?

That's not doctoring, that's stupid. Unless there was an established strong theory on how best to play the game and it's hard to believe that existed at a time when it was possible to use different equipment like smooth rubber and turn the game upside down

The Dick Miles story speaks for itself.

Wa???!!! What are you trying to say, NextLevel? I presume that competitive players of yore, as competitive players of today, did not necessarily stick with the first racket available to them. There weren't of course the bewildering variety of rackets and rubbers to choose from, and almost all players from club or league level to international used preassembled rackets with rubber in horizontal for the most part or occasionally vertical pip configuration and pip size ranging from small and closely spaced (preferred by hitters) to somewhat larger (all-rounders) to still a little bit larger (all-rounders, topspinners and defenders). The MacCrossen brothers and Bernard Hock sold, if a player wished, a blade and a choice of rubber with pip configuration, spacing and size as mentioned above which a player could affix him- or herself, as players do today.

There was no established theory that I am aware of from the early 1930s to the beginning of the sponge era in the mid-1950s as to how table tennis should be played. Most of the instruction books that I have either at one time owned or read (Schaad, Montagu, Coleman Clark, Leach, Barna, Jack Carrington, Peggy McLean, Emily Fuller, others) discouraged the use of the penhold grip as it was felt that a player could neither drive nor chop effectively on the backhand side with such a grip.

Okay, NextLevel: "The Dick Miles story speaks for itself". What does it say to you?

In the late 1940s, Dick Miles and Marty Reisman were world class players. At the age of 34, Miles, presumably playing with his trusty Hock No. 74, reached the semifinals in the singles event of the 1959 World Championships, losing to the eventual world Champion Rong Guo-Tuan. No one playing with a hard rubber racket has since gone farther in a World Championship.

Does Equipment Matter: Pro vs. Pro

This user has been banned.

Member

Well-Known Member

This user has been banned.

Well-Known Member

This user has been banned.

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Member

Member

Active Member

This user has been banned.

This user has been banned.

Member

Member

Well-Known Member

This user has been banned.

Well-Known Member

This user has been banned.

Similar threads