Why are there restrictions for pips out rubbers?

Originally Posted by lasta

What limits?

IMO the ball has been around for half a decade now. If anything, I find it easier to get "bite" on the new ball to spin it when I want to. Topspin balls also bounce higher higher so I get so smash more often.

I also don't find the "new generation" tensor pips any superior to their predecessors. Ie: the newer Moristo SPAx and Victas 102 are just minor variations of the good old Blowfish. Material science hasn't changed at all.

Isn't he talking about rules that define Aspect Ratio of pips?

Search for this: "Table Tennis Pips Aspect Ratio." There are rules that confine what the length, width and taper that are allowed for pips.

The 1998 Aspect Ratio rule change had a lot to do with why Liu Gouliang retired not too long after the rule went into effect. That particular aspect ratio rule made the pips LGL used no longer legal.

I believe the aspect ratio was put into place to help deal with the types of pips that would generate random spins based on the bunching of the longer pips. Unfortunately, some excellent chopping pips were casualties of the change as well.

As a pips player myself, I may be a bit biased, but I would *love* it if they took another look at the rules regarding the manufacturing of pips. Inverted rubber technology has progressed at a rate that has far outpaced long pips. And the new ball is too easy to smack, making chopping tough.

Originally Posted by Joo Se Kev

I believe the aspect ratio was put into place to help deal with the types of pips that would generate random spins based on the bunching of the longer pips. Unfortunately, some excellent chopping pips were casualties of the change as well.

As a pips player myself, I may be a bit biased, but I would *love* it if they took another look at the rules regarding the manufacturing of pips. Inverted rubber technology has progressed at a rate that has far outpaced long pips. And the new ball is too easy to smack, making chopping tough.

I also think that when they asked top players about how they felt about the proposed ban on pips before it happened, none of the top players cared. They did not think the pips needed to be banned. I believe they were banned so as not to discourage up and coming two winged loopers who had not yet learned how to handle those pips. But the top players had no real problems with the pips in question.

This video is a joke. But the information is pretty accurate anyway. At about 4:45 it starts talking about the 2006 rule change to pips which is another aspect ratio change that related to what were commonly called frictionless pips. But I think the whole video is worth watching.

By that logic, inverted rubber is still bound by the racket standardization first implemented in 1959. 4mm sandwich rubbers actually came before the loop stroke was invented!

First Session votes:
a. Standards? For: 64 Against 25 (incl. Japan, Sweden, Yugoslavia, Korea ...)
b .Pimpled Rubber only standard: For: 50 Against: 35

Therefore the Advisory Committee prepared a compromise proposal, one submitted by China: Pimpled rubber only, or sandwich, 4mm maximum thickness, pips in or out, sponge as underlying material; another by Deputy President Ake Eldh (SWE): pimpled rubber, + sandwich, pips out only, no maximum thickness, no definition of underlying material.

Japan continued their opposition to standardization, but if necessary, would support proposal 1 but with 6 or 8mm maximum thickness, to allow room for experiment.

A sub-committee was then formed to consult the delegates, concluding that the Eldh proposal had no chance of ¾ majority, so the Chinese proposal was submitted to the Second Session of the Congress. Doubtless there was a strong lobbying effort to finally put an end to one of the most difficult problems ever to face the ITTF.

Second Session vote:
With a vote of 72 –19 (against: Japan, Korea, Sweden Egypt Iran Yugoslavia ...) the compromise was finally achieved.

Law 4 was revised to state:

The racket may be of any size, shape or weight. Its surface shall be dark coloured, and non reflecting. The blade shall be of wood, continuous, of even thickness, flat and rigid. If the blade is covered on either side, this covering may be either (a) of plain, ordinary pimpled rubber, with pimples outward, of a total thickness of not more than 2mm; or (b) of 'sandwich', consisting of a layer of cellular rubber surfaced by plain ordinary pimpled rubber – turned outwards or inwards – in which case the total thickness of covering of either side shall not be more than 4mm.

A while ago ITTF issued a friendly reminder to all manufacturers, as follows:

Publishing LARC list twice a year is primarily intended to provide all our players with a useful guidance on the products currently allowed for the use at any official events, but we cannot guarantee that all of the products listed will continue to be authorised. From time to time we may find out that a sample has been changed in its manufacture. If, despite our best efforts, we are unable to persuade the involved manufacturer to make necessary adjustments to the imperfect products, we have no alternative but to withdraw the authorisation. When we do so, an announcement will appear in the Equipment section of the http://www.ittf.com/equipment and the current LARC list will be updated accordingly.

Sorry to say, not all manufacturers are looking to maintain ITTF technical standards on their products all the time.

The most recent mishap we discovered on market is TIBHAR Grass D.Tecs, OX version. A gross imperfection of the pimples geometry was detected, using instruments with measuring precision of 0.01mm. We tested two rubber samples from two official retailers. Both samples failed to comply T4 standards.
Sorry, sorry again. But we must abide by ITTF rules, we bound to report any troubling issue to an EqC staff.

"Table Tennis Rubber: Tribological Characterization" by M. Varenberg and A. Varenberg

Why are their restrictions for pips out rubbers?

Why does a dog lick its lower body? (Because it can)

Originally Posted by Der_Echte

Why does a dog lick its lower body? (Because it can)

I think I read that on a fortune cookie once...

If the forum couldn't figure out my view on the pips situation by my smart-aleck comment, I will say it plainly.

ITTF made restictions on aspect ratio and banned frictionless pips, because THEY COULD... and DID.

HOW did they achieve this by vote, when EVERY STRONG TT NATION could give a flying fluff if wierd acting pips existed?

HOW you ask? The same way a certain side of the political spectrum stacks the deck.

Find people, make them eligble to vote when they otherwise would not be qualified, promise and deliver free stuff paid for by the other ones qualified to vote, and greatly increase your position to where you now dominate any vote.

ITTF prez back in the day did a huge recruitment of nations to join ITTF as voting members with promises and actual giving of freebies to win over the delagates... who voted for the things the freebie giver wanted. It made zero difference what the major TT power nations delagates said or wanted...

Of course nearly every TT nation changed their national rules to be a literal cut and paste with very minor mods to become the ITTF rules... and hence, what ITTF boss did, controlled who lived and died in TT.

This really pissed me off back in the day, because it really pissed off the geezer crowd. Why worry about a bunch of GEEZERS?

WHY? ... because this geezer crowd contributed to TT for DECADES and got little out of it, then ITTF and the natl assns want to wipe out participation of the geezer crowd... which was a very large chunk of the TT population who CONTRIBUTED to the sport MANY TIMES more than other segments for WAY LONGER... and now we want to force that crowd to re-learn a new sport just to enjoy their lives?

That was pretty much tantamount to banning them from driving cars and learn how to operate some other piece of transportation that takes to long to master. It was morally WRONG and still is... but it is in the past. Almost no one spoke up for that crowd, but the reality is, ITTF and natl assns disenfranchized their most valuable contributors financially to the sport.

Why would a geezer crowd be so valuable financially? Who volunteers to stuff for free in a club? 90%+ of the time it is an older dude (A California word for either gender). Who is always chipping in with extra money to make a tournament have more prizes? Older dudes. Who cleans up at the clubs? Usually the older crowd. Who in large numbers shows up to a club and pays for membership and often coaching? Older dudes.

USA clubs were already a mm close to not meeting many expenses, and when the geezer crowd go away, the club cannot generate enough income to survive...

... so when you piss off the geezer crowd who was a contributor in many ways, many clubs are now under much more pressure to stay afloat... and hte quality of the club deminishes.

That is why I said what I said and I pretty much say this 1-2 times a year when the topic appears on forums.

Funnily, ITTF rules have no effect on amateur player in China, especially the older ones. Almost all elderly players I know use some kind of pips, and 9 out of 10 LP rubbers are either illegal by design or microwaved(hardened).
When we were still allowed to go to school, I brought an old 38mm ball I got through trading, and compared it with the 40+ against a chopper in my school team. I found it easier to topspin the 40+ back, and I could even just smash the shorter, higher shots.

Originally Posted by PingBirdPong

Funnily, ITTF rules have no effect on amateur player in China, especially the older ones. Almost all elderly players I know use some kind of pips, and 9 out of 10 LP rubbers are either illegal by design or microwaved(hardened).
When we were still allowed to go to school, I brought an old 38mm ball I got through trading, and compared it with the 40+ against a chopper in my school team. I found it easier to topspin the 40+ back, and I could even just smash the shorter, higher shots.

The amount of spin in that 38mm ball and together with speed glue, and with 21 point game, it is a 1 sided victory many times.
38 to 40mm ended careers
banning speed glue ended careers
21 point game ended careers

banning pips also ended careers - LGL said it himself that it was difficult for him to relearn new pips on a take show when he was still only mens head coach.

I can't find what other sport impose rules every couple of years to end careers.
Its been many years since the last rule change, so the bet is on for more changes now (and rubber color is not a rule change, it is just a poor researched idea that didn't work)

Originally Posted by Tony's Table Tennis

The amount of spin in that 38mm ball and together with speed glue, and with 21 point game, it is a 1 sided victory many times.
38 to 40mm ended careers
banning speed glue ended careers
21 point game ended careers

banning pips also ended careers - LGL said it himself that it was difficult for him to relearn new pips on a take show when he was still only mens head coach.

I can't find what other sport impose rules every couple of years to end careers.
Its been many years since the last rule change, so the bet is on for more changes now (and rubber color is not a rule change, it is just a poor researched idea that didn't work)

Rule change: no more spin on serves😱