Should ittf take additional measures to slow the game down?

Originally Posted by DukeGaGa

Funnily enough, in China table tennis is called Ping Pong. lol

The big reason why we don't say, ping pong is that when the ITTF was formed, they could not use the name 'ping pong' due to Parker Bros (USA) owning the rights to the name.
I am not sure who owns the rights to the name, ping pong, these days.

Originally Posted by Lula

I thought speed glue was mainly becuase it was dangerous and celluoid balls for the same reason(airplanes?). From 38 mm to 40 mm i think was beacuse they wanted to slow it down.

Speed glue was definitely an attempt to slow down the game. The stated reason was the health hazard speed glue presented. But if it was actually that danger, why did they also ban boosters that present no health hazards when they banned speed glue. But, it was also money. The new rubbers that the TT companies started making in the run up to the speed glue ban and after, which were, at the time advertised as "with built in speed glue effect"....they cost way more than the rubbers that were being used with speed glue and they wear out faster.

Celluloid was also a fake health reason. ITTF said there was going to be a worldwide ban and shortage of celluloid because of the flammability of celluloid but there has not been a worldwide ban or shortage of the substance. And when they switched from Celluloid to Poly substances, they also made the ball bigger which is why the Poly balls are labeled 40+.

So, what ITTF says and what their true intentions are, these are not always the same thing.

Originally Posted by Dominikk85

Ittf did some measures to slow the game down in the last years, namely the ban of speed glue, bigger ball and ban of celluloid ball. The goal was having longer rallies and a more attractive game for viewers?

Do you think that this was a success and is enough already?

Or has the development of faster rubbers and athleticism of the players outrun those changes so that the game is as fast or faster? Are there stats if rallies are longer in the world class than 15 years ago?

Should ittf do additional stuff like higher net, slower surface tables, even bigger ball or just leave the game alone?

the rubbers are faster now than a few years ago. companies will still find ways to make the rubbers faster. it is an arms race like what i have been telling people the past few years.

The thread title should say "Should the ITTF commit an impossible act upon itself?"

Originally Posted by iammaru

If ITTF’s intention was slowing the game down, the result is not exactly what they might expect:
- the game isn’t slower, anyone thinks it’s slower than 1980s or 1990s table tennis? I just don’t see that. The rubbers become much faster, the players become more physical and play closer to the table and more aggressively. The tempo of the game is even faster than before even if the rallies are longer (no stats but it is my feeling)
- what ITTF actually achieved is reducing the effect of spin. Spin is what make this sport interesting and unique but also make it too hard to understand for normal people (tv viewers). The changes actually make the spin less effective than before, serves are less lethal, less 3rd ball kills… etc. and make rallies longer.

IMO, ITTF is somewhat successful with their changes although table tennis will never be a tv-friendly sport, it’s still too hard to understand compared to other sports. But even with longer rallies, the total domination of China doesn’t help with popularizing table tennis. Even in China, the land of table tennis, they don’t care about it as much as before because they win almost everything easily year after year. Why do people (who are not table tennis lover) want to watch if they know China will win anyway? If there are 3-4 equal forces or even more in table tennis, it will get much more attention.

I could be wrong, but, I feel like, for the most part, the rallies are about the same length or shorter and it seems to me like third ball attacks have been lessened by how easy it is to attack the serve with the bigger slower ball that has less spin. So, second ball attacks have overtaken third ball attacks.

... but I will say this at the amateur level...

YES, it has become easier to attack serves with BH flip... (due to ball and training) ... yet it has also become EASIER to COUNTER TOPSIN those 2nd ball attacks and make rallies where there is immediately two strong offensive shots.

Yes, some of it is evolution of training and strategic growth for me, but with the D40+ generations of ABS balls, it is easier and more satisfying to attack topspin and play more aggressive.

Originally Posted by Dominikk85

Are there stats if rallies are longer in the world class than 15 years ago?

Stats for 40+ and D40+
https://www.tabletennisdaily.com/for...l=1#post284963

Stats for 38mm and 40mm era
https://www.tabletennisdaily.com/for...l=1#post284989

Hopefully you will find my posts constructive.

deleted

Originally Posted by zeio

Stats for 40+ and D40+
https://www.tabletennisdaily.com/for...l=1#post284963

Stats for 38mm and 40mm era
https://www.tabletennisdaily.com/for...l=1#post284989

Hopefully you will find my posts constructive.

Facts and imperical evidence are certainly two ways to present a situation and test if it is right, wrong, or indifferent.

Originally Posted by Stuart Marquis

I'm not saying anything more should be done, but here's some ideas:

1. Ban carbon blades (blades must be 100% wood). You could even take this one step further and stipulate what wood types can be used...with the overall objective that blades become slower
2. Regulate sponge types, rather than just the rubber coverings
3. Reduce size of table slightly to increase likelihood of being able to return a shot (e.g. 5% reduction in size)
4. Another small increase in ball size (42mm maybe?)
5. Increase net height (maybe 7 inches)

1. Only pure steel blades more than 1kg are allowed.
2. Only frictionless top sheets with dishwashing sponges.
3. Table size is 1m by 2m
4. Small increase in ball size( 40 cm maybe?)
5. Increase net height( maybe 7 feet)

Hi guys, long time no see!

For those who remember me, the answer I'll give to the topic's question is probably already obvious, and the word is of course yes (but with little asterisk).

I do confess I like to use spin in my game and todays 40+ balls are very frustrating for me, as they take it away.

Lets say that I was to compare table tennis to "Big" tennis, I would say we live in a "Serve and volley" era. Most of the rallies consist of serve, receive and attack or even serve and attack.

And see how diverse tennis is. Wimbledon and Rolland Garros are basically two different specializations with Rafa dominating clay and Djok basically other surfaces ... ; ) There is no such diversity in table tennis.

So I'm still a proponent of a higher net ... and please guys, once just maybe once try to play ~2+ cm higher net. You'll see how fun it is. Surprisingly you'll be able to play more angles, at least this is my experience.

Should the ITTF incresase the net? Yes and No.

What I would suggest is to introduce more variety into the game. Maybe one or two tournaments could use a higher net (or some other alteration for that matter). This would allow to have some sort of live experiments that would show in what direction the game should go. What kind of set-ups will be more dominant, just like tennis tournaments adjust their surfaces to have maybe a more watchable games ... and this aspect is not necessarily a bad thing.
J.

Originally Posted by PingBirdPong

1. Only pure steel blades more than 1kg are allowed.
2. Only frictionless top sheets with dishwashing sponges.
3. Table size is 1m by 2m
4. Small increase in ball size( 40 cm maybe?)
5. Increase net height( maybe 7 feet)

Originally Posted by Stuart Marquis

Err...that might be taking it a little too far. But please do post a youtube clip of you and a friend playing under these conditions and we can assess it properly. 🤣

Here, this is me vs PingBirdPong:

hahahahaha