Back to Forum
Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234
Results 61 to 78 of 78
  1. IB66 is offline
    This user has no status.
     
    Senior TTD Member 469 892
    I
    IB66 is offline
    This user has no status.
     
    Senior TTD Member 892 469
    #61
    Personally, I agree with BB that ‘Control’ is really all to do with the player in question, and how they can adapt and read the incoming balls etc.
    In one of the posts I think Pathfinder was mentioned, where they tested a couple of rubbers with different players, This is Preston Table Tennis Club I believe, they also did some experimental testing with a robot and a static blade with a couple of different rubbers on it. (I was hoping to find some more of their testing of rubbers, but haven’t been able to find any more, they did a good few comparisons of different balls as well).
    Fired balls at rubbers, took SLO motion footage, tracked the balls flight path etc and overlaid the results so you could see one against the other. You could see the slightly higher throw angle / arc of the ball, distance travelled etc.
    So Rubbers, blades etc just have different characteristics, a ball just bounces off them!! H3 with its tacky top sheet and hard(ish) sponge has a ‘dead’ bounce, T05 with its spring sponge grippy top sheet is very bouncy. Is H3 actively controlling the ball? Making it bounce less, not consciously!!!

    As players we have the ‘control’ or in my case lack of control !!! 😀
    Some rubbers / blade combos suit us better, we say this rubber has good control, what we actually mean is rubber ‘X’ allows ME to control the ball better than rubber ‘Y’ does. This could also vary depending on the stroke type being played, X may be better for looping, and Y better for blocking for the individual trying out the equipment.

    Cars and the new technology currently being used and soon to be used. When we are driving we think we are in control of the vehicle, with stuff like collision warning, emergency breaking, ABS etc we are only partially in control, the CPU’s kick in and take over!!

    The Following 2 Users Like IB66's Post:

    lodro and pingpongpaddy


  2. passifid is offline
    This user has no status.
     
    Advanced TTD Member 217 380
    P
    passifid is offline
    This user has no status.
     
    Advanced TTD Member 380 217
    #62
    Brokenball you're once again taking concepts you understand perfectly and failing to apply them to boxing. I'll stop here because this isn't a boxing forum. Foce distribution is about over area not time. And again force isn't power at all. If you want to be overly technical then at least be consistent.

    And my point about pi=3 is a common undergrad thing when it comes to milling.

    It's about how you only need to be as specific and technical as the subject at hand requires.

    Obviously we all know the player has control and not the equipment but for example my friend has t05 on his backhand and hates it because he isn't playing the style or the standard needed for it to perform reliably. As such he prefers my MX-K by a lot. He says it has more control.

    What it does have is a lower cor/tangential cor (less spin) and a more linear rebound effect. (More gears) when added to the fact it still has good spin it allows for s good feeling of ability to control the ball by the player because you can reliably play all attacking shots as you would with t05 but each shot may have less quality.

    How would you define that feeling of confidence that is inspired into you by the rubber in a single word? What worr would you choose. That's really what this whole thread is about.

  3. langel is offline
    This user has no status.
     
    Master TTD Member 1,042 2,182
    L
    langel is offline
    This user has no status.
     
    Master TTD Member 2,182 1,042
    #63
    I've said it many times - every player has own personal thresholds and margins in perception, physical ability and performance.
    What a player needs for confidence, consistency and effectiveness /with one word - control/, is the synergy with the equipment, and the external factors suited in his margins of comfort.

    The Following User Likes langel's Post:

    SamTheMan


  4. langel is offline
    This user has no status.
     
    Master TTD Member 1,042 2,182
    L
    langel is offline
    This user has no status.
     
    Master TTD Member 2,182 1,042
    #64
    About the consistency of robots and equipment - in the club we have players with better consistency than this :

    https://www.facebook.com/CorbyTownTa...25683641964177

  5. brokenball is offline
    This user has no status.
     
    Senior TTD Member 386 837
    B
    brokenball is offline
    This user has no status.
     
    Senior TTD Member 837 386

    User Info Menu

    #65
    Quote Originally Posted by passifid
    Brokenball you're once again taking concepts you understand perfectly and failing to apply them to boxing. I'll stop here because this isn't a boxing forum. Foce distribution is about over area not time. And again force isn't power at all. If you want to be overly technical then at least be consistent.
    I am consistent. I know very well that power is force(t) x velocity(t)

    And my point about pi=3 is a common undergrad thing when it comes to milling.
    Where did you go to school? Your state about engineers think PI=3 is a lie.
    Archimedes calculated PI to 8 digits 2000+ years ago. Excel spread sheet calculate PI to 15 digits.

    Obviously we all know the player has control and not the equipment
    You have redeemed yourself a bit.

    What it does have is a lower cor/tangential cor (less spin) and a more linear rebound effect.
    What part of my statement above didn't you understand? A rubber that is twice as fast as another will causes errors by the player to be magnified by a factor of two.

    (More gears) when added to the fact it still has good spin it allows for s good feeling of ability to control the ball by the player because you can reliably play all attacking shots as you would with t05 but each shot may have less quality.
    Gears is another TT myth. Not even the TT manufacturers mention gears.

    How would you define that feeling of confidence that is inspired into you by the rubber in a single word? What worr would you choose. That's really what this whole thread is about.
    I don't see how a rubber inspires confidence unless you believe the BS of the TT manufacturers. Confidence can be misplaced.

  6. langel is offline
    This user has no status.
     
    Master TTD Member 1,042 2,182
    L
    langel is offline
    This user has no status.
     
    Master TTD Member 2,182 1,042
    #66
    Quote Originally Posted by brokenball
    What part of my statement above didn't you understand? A rubber that is twice as fast as another will causes errors by the player to be magnified by a factor of two.

    I don't see how a rubber inspires confidence unless you believe the BS of the TT manufacturers. Confidence can be misplaced.

    Not exactly.
    An aggressive attacker and counter attacker playing with very fast equipment may feel much more confident in the top speed area with less errors than with slower balls over the table. Many top pro players prefer to escape from the short pushing provoking attacks and counters.
    Confidence comes with the synergy between the player and the set up. Finding the right set up is a complex process and can take long, but having in mind the properties declared by the manufacturers is a good start anyway, at least to tighten the alternatives.


    The Following User Likes langel's Post:

    passifid


  7. passifid is offline
    This user has no status.
     
    Advanced TTD Member 217 380
    P
    passifid is offline
    This user has no status.
     
    Advanced TTD Member 380 217
    #67
    See langel the issue is that he understands perfectly mathematics mechanics. He is admirably trying to weed the hokum from table tennis terminology but isn't very good at applying engineering, biology and table tennis techniques simultaneously.

    ​​​​​​Which would be actually fine if he listened thought and then tried to explain his points or understand why what he is saying isn't panning out in the real world but instead he wants to argue over the semantics of language used and is mostly trying to single handedly change table tennis terminology.

    For years he was arguing and arguing that we shouldn't say spin because humans make the spin and that we should all start saying it has a high or low cor/tangential cor. Which is again sensible from a mechanics point of view but removes the intiuitivity from the language making it less helpful and understandable for most. Which kind of defeated the purpose.

    Anyhow this is my last comment on this thread because it's just an argument thread now as usual every time.

    The Following 2 Users Like passifid's Post:

    matzreenzi and yogi_bear


  8. brokenball is offline
    This user has no status.
     
    Senior TTD Member 386 837
    B
    brokenball is offline
    This user has no status.
     
    Senior TTD Member 837 386

    User Info Menu

    #68
    Quote Originally Posted by langel

    Not exactly.
    An aggressive attacker and counter attacker playing with very fast equipment may feel much more confident in the top speed area with less errors than with slower balls over the table. Many top pro players prefer to escape from the short pushing provoking attacks and counters.
    Confidence comes with the synergy between the player and the set up. Finding the right set up is a complex process and can take long, but having in mind the properties declared by the manufacturers is a good start anyway, at least to tighten the alternatives.

    You are muddying the waters with feelings and confidence and ignoring reality.
    A faster rubber will magnify errors in the stroke. This can't be refuted.

  9. lodro is offline
    says TT-CLOWN, old git
     
    Senior TTD Member 210 585
    L
    lodro is offline
    says TT-CLOWN, old git
     
    Senior TTD Member 585 210
    #69
    Quote Originally Posted by langel
    About the consistency of robots and equipment - in the club we have players with better consistency than this :

    https://www.facebook.com/CorbyTownTa...25683641964177


    This is off topic a bit but who cares 😁
    I wonder if the inconsistency is created by the board, the robot, the air or what else ???
    I am really surprised and expected better precision from such expensive top ranked (and priced) equipment


  10. lodro is offline
    says TT-CLOWN, old git
     
    Senior TTD Member 210 585
    L
    lodro is offline
    says TT-CLOWN, old git
     
    Senior TTD Member 585 210
    #70
    Quote Originally Posted by brokenball
    You are muddying the waters with feelings and confidence and ignoring reality.
    A faster rubber will magnify errors in the stroke. This can't be refuted.


    agreed, but not just the fast rubber will do that, the fast rubbers glued on to a fast blade will make it worse.


  11. brokenball is offline
    This user has no status.
     
    Senior TTD Member 386 837
    B
    brokenball is offline
    This user has no status.
     
    Senior TTD Member 837 386

    User Info Menu

    #71
    Quote Originally Posted by passifid
    See langel the issue is that he understands perfectly mathematics mechanics. He is admirably trying to weed the hokum from table tennis terminology but isn't very good at applying engineering, biology and table tennis techniques simultaneously.
    Statements like that are vague. How am I not very good? The problem with the forum is they have been suckered into the TT manufacturer's BS so long they don't know the truth.

    ​​​​​​Which would be actually fine if he listened thought and then tried to explain his points or understand why what he is saying isn't panning out in the real world but instead he wants to argue over the semantics of language used and is mostly trying to single handedly change table tennis terminology.
    I have been reading BS on TT forums for 13 years now.

    For years he was arguing and arguing that we shouldn't say spin because humans make the spin and that we should all start saying it has a high or low cor/tangential cor.
    The part about the COR is true. The other part is false. Find the quote.
    Spin is a function of the stroke and tangential COR.


    Which is again sensible from a mechanics point of view but removes the intiuitivity from the language making it less helpful and understandable for most. Which kind of defeated the purpose.
    So why is it that after all these years people still believe the rubber has control?


    Anyhow this is my last comment on this thread because it's just an argument thread now as usual every time.
    No one has answered my 2 questions above and yet they seem to think they know something about control.

    When someone shoots a rifle, does the rifle have control? The rifle has no control over which way it is pointed. Is a rifle inconsistent? Yes, but it is more consistent than a musket.
    What part of this is too hard to understand?

    Sometimes I think TT players are as thick as a brick.

    People have control but are inconsistent. Better players are more consistent. Faster rubbers will increase the effect of the players inconsistency.

    If I were to pull a "controlability/forgiveness" number out of my a$$ I would use 1/sqrt(tangential_COR^2+normal_COR^2) basically the faster and spinier the rubber the harder it is to control. However, a good player can do things with spinner rubber that can't be done with less spinner rubber but the stroke must be precise.

  12. langel is offline
    This user has no status.
     
    Master TTD Member 1,042 2,182
    L
    langel is offline
    This user has no status.
     
    Master TTD Member 2,182 1,042
    #72
    Quote Originally Posted by lodro


    This is off topic a bit but who cares 😁
    I wonder if the inconsistency is created by the board, the robot, the air or what else ???
    I am really surprised and expected better precision from such expensive top ranked (and priced) equipment

    Both the robot and the board are inconsistent, and this inconsistency is multiplied by the inconsistency of the balls.

    The Following 2 Users Like langel's Post:

    brokenball and lodro


  13. langel is offline
    This user has no status.
     
    Master TTD Member 1,042 2,182
    L
    langel is offline
    This user has no status.
     
    Master TTD Member 2,182 1,042
    #73
    There are very fast rubbers that due to their design, mainly of the top sheet, are easier to be controlled by less experienced players, especially in passive play, and at the same time the same rubbers can be very effective and precise in the hands of pro players. For example the Xiom Omega V Tour.
    Omega V Asia has the same sponge hardness and speed /a bit slower with slow balls over the table/, but due to its bit harder top sheet is more difficult for the less experienced players, especially with slower balls over the table.
    Forget about the "general assumptions".




  14. langel is offline
    This user has no status.
     
    Master TTD Member 1,042 2,182
    L
    langel is offline
    This user has no status.
     
    Master TTD Member 2,182 1,042
    #74
    Can you make assumptions about COR and speed of T05, T80 and T64?

  15. langel is offline
    This user has no status.
     
    Master TTD Member 1,042 2,182
    L
    langel is offline
    This user has no status.
     
    Master TTD Member 2,182 1,042
    #75
    Do you know that the COR difference between a ball, contacting the rubber with the seam and aside from the seam, can be greater than between a sponge only and a sponge + top sheet?
    That's why R&D of some TT companies, in order to avoid the inconsistency of the results neglect the stamps over the ball seam during COR measurement tests.
    If you look on the COR of Tenergy rubbers you may make wrong conclusions about their "speed".
    In real play the speed depends on the delta t between the hit and the moment of landing, and the lower arc is "faster".
    Now think about the COR, hardness and arc differences between T05, T80 and T64.
    But that's about Tenergy.
    With other brands its not the same, at least not always.
    So stop speaking that COR tells everything and leave it to the R&D engineers.
    A player, even if an engineer, would not get enough information from COR only.

  16. brokenball is offline
    This user has no status.
     
    Senior TTD Member 386 837
    B
    brokenball is offline
    This user has no status.
     
    Senior TTD Member 837 386

    User Info Menu

    #76
    Quote Originally Posted by langel
    There are very fast rubbers that due to their design, mainly of the top sheet, are easier to be controlled by less experienced players, especially in passive play,
    That is an opinion without facts. The faster and spinier the paddle, the more it will magnify any errors the player makes. Why is this so hard to understand?

  17. brokenball is offline
    This user has no status.
     
    Senior TTD Member 386 837
    B
    brokenball is offline
    This user has no status.
     
    Senior TTD Member 837 386

    User Info Menu

    #77
    Quote Originally Posted by langel
    Can you make assumptions about COR and speed of T05, T80 and T64?
    Why make assumptions when the COR can be measured.
    Read this. It is old but the general ideas still apply. I have posted this so many times and no one seems to read it. It was on the ITTF website.
    https://deltamotion.com/peter/TableT...-%20Impact.pdf

  18. brokenball is offline
    This user has no status.
     
    Senior TTD Member 386 837
    B
    brokenball is offline
    This user has no status.
     
    Senior TTD Member 837 386

    User Info Menu

    #78
    Quote Originally Posted by langel
    In real play the speed depends on the delta t between the hit and the moment of landing, and the lower arc is "faster".
    Yes! The arc should be just enough to get over the net. High arcs are not good because the ball will bounce up high and take longer to get to the destination.

    So stop speaking that COR tells everything and leave it to the R&D engineers.
    And what do you think they are going to do to improve the rubber or blades? What would they change?!

    A player, even if an engineer, would not get enough information from COR only.
    Be specific. Any one can make claims without justification or proof. What information do you want?
    The TT manufacturers provide a speed, spin and bogus control rating. That seems to be good enough for the forums.
    Notice, they don't provide a "dwell time" rating.
    The COR explains how the equipment will perform . Read the .pdf I posted above. The player is the most important part.
    No one has answered my 2 questions above.
    No one seems to understand my rifle analogy.
    For modeling I would like to know the mass of the rubber. There is a data base online that tells the mass per square centimeter which is good because that is about how much area a ball has contact with the rubber. It is also good to know the spring constant of the rubber. that is how much force is required to compress the rubber 0.1mm.
    I am an R&D engineer! I just don't make TT rubbers.


Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Create a new Topic:
Title is required.