Timo Boll posts new photos of his rubbers and blades

Tommy16 · Feb 10, 2019

Ok, I might missed your point here and I do mind about rules.

I think I remember the topic you are tallking about and I might be wrong here but I think the discussion was about factoryboosted sponges of DHS rubbers. Some people said that they are illegal becouse they are not approved by ittf and some people said that it’s ok to boost becouse iitf approves only topsheets.... and it went on and on...

Suga D said:
No question about that, when even Timo himself admits trying out something unavailable.
But that's missing the point. My question was if that isn't against the rules.

I know many don't take the rules too seriously, if you think about hiding serves or using microwaved LP or boosted rubbers, but i'd just like to know what the rules exactly say.

langel · Feb 10, 2019

Tommy16 said:
Ok, I might missed your point here and I do mind about rules.

I think I remember the topic you are tallking about and I might be wrong here but I think the discussion was about factoryboosted sponges of DHS rubbers. Some people said that they are illegal becouse they are not approved by ittf and some people said that it’s ok to boost becouse iitf approves only topsheets.... and it went on and on...

ITTF approves not only the topsheet but all sponge variations under it.
Here is the Technical leaflet T4 explaining rules, requirements and authorization procedure.
No market availability is required, on the contrary - its not allowed a rubber to be sold before the authorization is granted -of course its only for rubbers pending ITTF authorization, brands may sell anything without the ITTF logo. And no one can force the brand to produce and sell the authorized rubber and it will be in LARC provided the fees are payed.

https://tabletennis523.files.wordpress.com/2017/06/t4_racket_coverings.pdf

langel · Feb 10, 2019

Suga D said:
No question about that, when even Timo himself admits trying out something unavailable.
But that's missing the point. My question was if that isn't against the rules.

I know many don't take the rules too seriously, if you think about hiding serves or using microwaved LP or boosted rubbers, but i'd just like to know what the rules exactly say.

I found that Dignics is LARC sertified at least since October 2016, so not only its testing is legit, but use in competitions too.
Market availability is not required at all.
ITTF can not controll and is not responcible in any way for market availability.
ITTF is not reponcible and can not control in any way the market availability of rubbers withdrawn from LARC, ITTF can only ban such rubbers on competition entry.

Can we agree that case is closed?

Suga D · Feb 11, 2019

Tommy16 said:
Ok, I might missed your point here and I do mind about rules.

I think I remember the topic you are tallking about and I might be wrong here but I think the discussion was about factoryboosted sponges of DHS rubbers. Some people said that they are illegal becouse they are not approved by ittf and some people said that it’s ok to boost becouse iitf approves only topsheets.... and it went on and on...

Only partially correct. That´s how it started, but then the discussion came to the part where Timo was complaining that National H3N´s weren´t buyable in official DHS stores or importing sellers to that time unlike to him who was able to play with shopquality T05´s. If you read carefully you´ll find out.
[Emoji6]

Nevertheless i´ve sent ITTF a mail regarding my question. So let´s just wait and see....

langel said:
I found that Dignics is LARC sertified at least since October 2016, so not only its testing is legit, but use in competitions too.
Market availability is not required at all.
ITTF can not controll and is not responcible in any way for market availability.
ITTF is not reponcible and can not control in any way the market availability of rubbers withdrawn from LARC, ITTF can only ban such rubbers on competition entry.

Can we agree that case is closed?

Nah, sorry man, but that doesn´t prove anything IMHO.
Let´s see how quick ITTF responds.

Suga D · Feb 11, 2019

langel said:
Can we agree that case is closed?

Ok guys, i will have to apologize to you.

In fact I was completely wrong.

I didn't receive the answer from the ITTF yet, but a friend who I trust and who really knows the rules has pointed out that the ITTF doesn't require any rubber they approve to be commercially available.

So until the ITTF themselves don't tell me the complete opposite I will leave that topic alone.

Ok, langel. Yogi, Tommy16
Thanks for your patience.
You win.....This time.
[Emoji6]

Case closed.
[Emoji2]

Suga D · Feb 27, 2019

langel said:
Can we agree that case is closed?

One last comment on this topic, since i don't want to hide how wrong one sometimes can be:

As i wrote above, i have to admit that the jokes on me and that I've been completely wrong.

You probably wouldn't believe it, but a couple of days ago, i received a very polite official answer by the ITTF.

The lady who responded explained to me very patiently the mistake in my thinking, even if i was morally right, and said pretty much the same as langel wrote before.

I asked her, if it was ok, if would post her answer here, and to my surprise she told me: No question. We rather have the truth spread than some rumours or assumptions.

So here goes:

Re: New submission from Contact us
C

Hello Cars10,

we reveiced your question whether ITTF APPROVED products must be offered by the brands to final customers.

No, there is no rule like this. One reason is that it´s the right of the brand to decide which product shall be sold in which market. This is not in our hands.
Apart of this, sometimes a brand announces a new product to us, we test the samples and the product will get the approval. So the product is approved, but
this will not say something about the ability of a manufacturer to be ready to produce this product in mass production. Sometimes there are unexpected problems,
so we could never prescribe a brand that all products on our lists must be available in the market.

One more reason is that the brands sometimes sell a product only in some countries, but not worldwide.

So a brands could announce a product to us, get the approval and they only provide this product to their contracted players. This would be their right, but from the
Sales and marketing aspect not very clever, because normally they want to make profit out of it.

I hope this is an answer to your question.

Best regards

Equipment Manager

-

INTERNATIONAL TABLE TENNIS FEDERATION
TABLE TENNIS. FOR ALL. FOR LIFE.

Man, was I wrong.
[Emoji15]
Must have been mad. I can't even tell what has driven me.

As i said, you guys win..... this time.
[Emoji6]

Hope it at least has been entertaining to a degree.

FruitLoop · Feb 27, 2019

This is why we can't trust that they haven't been using T05H for literally years and probably Dignics as well. It would be totally within the rules. The topsheet needs to be on the LARC. Which they have been for literally years. That's all. Who knows what sponge.

Tony's Table Tennis · Feb 28, 2019

FruitLoop said:
This is why we can't trust that they haven't been using T05H for literally years and probably Dignics as well. It would be totally within the rules. The topsheet needs to be on the LARC. Which they have been for literally years. That's all. Who knows what sponge.

and i'm sure we also can't trust the timo boll only uses regular commericial rubbers too

langel · Feb 28, 2019

Some other aspects:
It is in the authority of ITTF to check if market rubbers fit with what they have authirized.
It is in the referee authority, if any doubts, to compare the players rubbers with refference ones if available. If the rubber is available on the market, it can be orginized by ITTF. If its not available on the market, ITTF can insist a refference rubber from the supplier to compare it with the rubber on the bat and later to check if it is in correspondance with what they have authorized, or to inist it in advance, to compare it with what they have authorized and later to use it as a refference. But do they ever do it?
For me its absolutely sure that some BTY players have used Dignics in competitions since 2012 when it appeared in LARC.
Dignics without a number is still in LARC and I'm pretty sure that it will never appear on the market, but some players may use it and if ITTF do not execute strict control it may be the way BTY want it to be.
Can we find somewhere an official list of what rubbers players have used in a competition?
I don't think so, as such a list may hurt the brands advertising strategy.
So, regarding the top players at least, I never take it for granted and "who plays with what" is just a face.

dariuszj · Mar 2, 2019

As for the seemingly unreasonable number of setups, I have listened to the video you linked. Timo Boll said, that he was preparing 4 setups for the competition and they were of different hardness each. He said, he used softer ones in big halls and harder in small ones (the weight could go from 94 to 104 g per rubber). So your theory of Timo being sensitive to various conditions seems true. So 4 setups out of six are justified now.

Sedis · Mar 3, 2019

dariuszj said:
As for the seemingly unreasonable number of setups, I have listened to the video you linked. Timo Boll said, that he was preparing 4 setups for the competition and they were of different hardness each. He said, he used softer ones in big halls and harder in small ones (the weight could go from 94 to 104 g per rubber). So your theory of Timo being sensitive to various conditions seems true. So 4 setups out of six are justified now.

The weight given for rubbers seem to include the packaging. I don't see the logic of weighing rubber in the packaging, when a slight variance in the size of the rubber or the packaging itself could be responsible for the weight difference.

Suga D · Mar 3, 2019

Sedis said:
The weight given for rubbers seem to include the packaging. I don't see the logic of weighing rubber in the packaging, when a slight variance in the size of the rubber or the packaging itself could be responsible for the weight difference.

I have a feeling that Timo probably has more experience with Tenergy rubbaz than anyone on this forum and knows very well what he's doing.

But that's just a feeling.
[Emoji6]

Tony's Table Tennis · Mar 3, 2019

Suga D said:
I have a feeling that Timo probably has more experience with Tenergy rubbaz than anyone on this forum and knows very well what he's doing.

But that's just a feeling.
[Emoji6]

no, I don't think that is correct

Timo Boll is following Butterfly's instruction in educating the masses that we all need 4 setups (of the same) in our bag, one of each hardness

That's my feeling

yogi_bear · Mar 4, 2019

Would it be possible that there are changes or improvement on the topsheet or sponge were made and the ones being used right now are originally not as good as the one were first being used???

Tony's Table Tennis · Mar 4, 2019

yogi_bear said:
Would it be possible that there are changes or improvement on the topsheet or sponge were made and the ones being used right now are originally not as good as the one were first being used???

I would say from a production part, that is very possible

Suga D · Mar 4, 2019

Tony's Table Tennis said:
no, I don't think that is correct

Timo Boll is following Butterfly's instruction in educating the masses that we all need 4 setups (of the same) in our bag, one of each hardness

That's my feeling

Sure.
[Emoji23]
It ain't nuttin' but a biiiiig conspiracy.
Where did I leave my tinfoil suit again?

Ah.... Got it.

[Emoji23]

Suga D · Mar 4, 2019

yogi_bear said:
Would it be possible that there are changes or improvement on the topsheet or sponge were made and the ones being used right now are originally not as good as the one were first being used???

Actually that's technically possible but nevertheless against the rules. Certainly one could tweak every rubber but needs a new name for it (or at least a variation to the original)
The rubbers properties aren't allowed to be changed once it's registered. If that happens it has to get a new name and reg. number.

When things get hysterical.

Tony's Table Tennis · Mar 4, 2019

Suga D said:
Actually that's technically possible but nevertheless against the rules. Certainly one could tweak every rubber but needs a new name for it (or at least a variation to the original)
The rubbers properties aren't allowed to be changed once it's registered. If that happens it has to get a new name and reg. number.

When things get hysterical.

but then, who does the checking?
umpires don't check beyond the surface of the rubber
racket control don't check on how the pips structure or rubber material is made/specs etc

I know of "upgrade" to equipment that will lead to better topsheet rubber sheet
then the same theory can go by "older equipment" will lead to worse topsheet rubber sheet.

over the years, I heard durability of the top sheet is linked to this

I wounder how this is policed.. or maybe it isn't...

langel · Mar 4, 2019

Tony's Table Tennis said:
but then, who does the checking?
umpires don't check beyond the surface of the rubber
racket control don't check on how the pips structure or rubber material is made/specs etc

I know of "upgrade" to equipment that will lead to better topsheet rubber sheet
then the same theory can go by "older equipment" will lead to worse topsheet rubber sheet.

over the years, I heard durability of the top sheet is linked to this

I wounder how this is policed.. or maybe it isn't...

=======================================

langel said:
Some other aspects:
It is in the authority of ITTF to check if market rubbers fit with what they have authirized.
It is in the referee authority, if any doubts, to compare the players rubbers with refference ones if available. If the rubber is available on the market, it can be orginized by ITTF. If its not available on the market, ITTF can insist a refference rubber from the supplier to compare it with the rubber on the bat and later to check if it is in correspondance with what they have authorized, or to inist it in advance, to compare it with what they have authorized and later to use it as a refference. But do they ever do it?
For me its absolutely sure that some BTY players have used Dignics in competitions since 2012 when it appeared in LARC.
Dignics without a number is still in LARC and I'm pretty sure that it will never appear on the market, but some players may use it and if ITTF do not execute strict control it may be the way BTY want it to be.
Can we find somewhere an official list of what rubbers players have used in a competition?
I don't think so, as such a list may hurt the brands advertising strategy.
So, regarding the top players at least, I never take it for granted and "who plays with what" is just a face.

Tony's Table Tennis · Mar 4, 2019

langel said:
=======================================

That didn't really answer my question.

the Referee uses the LARC list of rubbers and will match
how in the world would an referee even know no "tweeks are done"
at the tournament, there is a racket control room, there is no equipment in there to check the rubber matches the specification registered.

I only know a few referees, they are likely the worse equipment knowledge people I know in the sport.
They are great with Law of TT, not great as a player, and maybe won't even know how to glue a bat.
And i'm sure your best equipment knowledge referee can't just use a naked eye to decided the rubber is not what it supposed to be.

Its common knowledge that DHS makes customized H3 for CNT members
either have different sponges, the hardness, the tack on the topsheet is all customized per player
so there you have one LARC number, but maybe 10 varieties.
From my limited knowledge of LARC, I don't think they even police it....otherwise you will need 10 versions of H3

Timo Boll posts new photos of his rubbers and blades

Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Similar threads