says
2023 Certified Organ Donor
says
2023 Certified Organ Donor
Well-Known Member
Hi everyone, I am creating this thread to toss out how I feel about Equipment Reviews on TT forums and shoot the first round of discussion on it.
TT Reviews of equipment by us Amature folk are a sacred thing. We all want to see a review by a peer amature player, since he or she is at the world we are (oversimplify - Amature realm). We all want to learn something from the review and if we had some interest in the product, maybe we want some information or observation that will cause us to want or not want to use that product. Sometimes, we just like the story or like someone's enthusiasm.
I have made comments about reviews in some review threads before, but i never made a comprehensive explaination of how I feel about reviews before in a more detailed and organized manner.
Most of the written reviews I have seen by TT forum members accross several TT forums have been basically (for rubbers) this rubber is such and such spinny (represented by a number). This rubber is such and such fast. (with a number) This rubber lasts such and such long (prolly the most objective and useful info if it was from a long term test). This rubber served such and such and looped such and such. That is pretty much what majority of players write about. Many players and especially makers of equipemnt are keen to establish a NUMBER, the silver bullet of concise information that helps players make a decision.
I believe such a number system to be over-general, misleading, and not very representative of what the rubber or pruduct does. There are SO MANY different situations, both offensive, defensive, and connecting shot situations where a rubber or blade will have a different performance. ONE number overall summarizing everything does not do the product true justice (maybe a company or a player would want it that way) and does not convey the performance across the spectrum of dynamic cases a rubber or product will go through in these examples of shot situations that are common to the player during matchplay. For example, a number of spin, conveys ZERO idea of the rubber's ability to handle a short receive back short or how it works on a soft defensive block or spin killing bunt.
I have before publically praised the approach TTD takes when it reviews a rubber or blade for a video review. The underlying concept Dan & Co seems to hold important is to use stroke situations common to most players' match play situations and identify how it performs under those dynamic conditions. Dan uses this guiding principle and I feel it has helped him to identify and isolate MANY such situations and caused him to "stay on track" to what most players of offensive playing style do in a match and how the product works (good or bad) in those situations. I really think that gives the maximum value to the widest ammount of (offensive and allround) players.
I think that should be the idea that guides all of us when we make a product review. That would cause us to actually think through what situations truly apply to our game and how the product performs in those. The information that will come out of a review focused on that is in my opinion MUCH more relevant and useful to a player.
The negative side(s) to that is the the level of the reviewer and the playing style and stroke dynamics of the reviewer may be different from the player reading the review. Reviews of offensive rubbbers rarely convey its ability to chop low and spinny from mid-distance. Dan saying this rubber is great on bananna flips with high percentage might cause a player to buy the rubber, and then the player doesn't make half his bananna flip and might think Dan ws eating California grown mushrooms when he made the review. Der_Echte saying such and such rubber has excellent spin AND pace on a fastloop vs an underspin ball might be different from someone who bought the rubber and couldn't generate that kind of pace and spin using it in that situation, because I might have a faster bat speed at impact. Such differences among players of style, ability, & stroke specific player performamce are always going to be there no matter what and cannot be helped.
While a "template" for a review seems to be a good idea, I think that a reviewer should think for himself or herself of what is applicable and apply it to their review and articulate clearly about it.
Maybe DER_ECHTE is one consuming large ammounts of California grown mushrooms. Forum members... You all tell me and TTD and each other what you think...
TT Reviews of equipment by us Amature folk are a sacred thing. We all want to see a review by a peer amature player, since he or she is at the world we are (oversimplify - Amature realm). We all want to learn something from the review and if we had some interest in the product, maybe we want some information or observation that will cause us to want or not want to use that product. Sometimes, we just like the story or like someone's enthusiasm.
I have made comments about reviews in some review threads before, but i never made a comprehensive explaination of how I feel about reviews before in a more detailed and organized manner.
Most of the written reviews I have seen by TT forum members accross several TT forums have been basically (for rubbers) this rubber is such and such spinny (represented by a number). This rubber is such and such fast. (with a number) This rubber lasts such and such long (prolly the most objective and useful info if it was from a long term test). This rubber served such and such and looped such and such. That is pretty much what majority of players write about. Many players and especially makers of equipemnt are keen to establish a NUMBER, the silver bullet of concise information that helps players make a decision.
I believe such a number system to be over-general, misleading, and not very representative of what the rubber or pruduct does. There are SO MANY different situations, both offensive, defensive, and connecting shot situations where a rubber or blade will have a different performance. ONE number overall summarizing everything does not do the product true justice (maybe a company or a player would want it that way) and does not convey the performance across the spectrum of dynamic cases a rubber or product will go through in these examples of shot situations that are common to the player during matchplay. For example, a number of spin, conveys ZERO idea of the rubber's ability to handle a short receive back short or how it works on a soft defensive block or spin killing bunt.
I have before publically praised the approach TTD takes when it reviews a rubber or blade for a video review. The underlying concept Dan & Co seems to hold important is to use stroke situations common to most players' match play situations and identify how it performs under those dynamic conditions. Dan uses this guiding principle and I feel it has helped him to identify and isolate MANY such situations and caused him to "stay on track" to what most players of offensive playing style do in a match and how the product works (good or bad) in those situations. I really think that gives the maximum value to the widest ammount of (offensive and allround) players.
I think that should be the idea that guides all of us when we make a product review. That would cause us to actually think through what situations truly apply to our game and how the product performs in those. The information that will come out of a review focused on that is in my opinion MUCH more relevant and useful to a player.
The negative side(s) to that is the the level of the reviewer and the playing style and stroke dynamics of the reviewer may be different from the player reading the review. Reviews of offensive rubbbers rarely convey its ability to chop low and spinny from mid-distance. Dan saying this rubber is great on bananna flips with high percentage might cause a player to buy the rubber, and then the player doesn't make half his bananna flip and might think Dan ws eating California grown mushrooms when he made the review. Der_Echte saying such and such rubber has excellent spin AND pace on a fastloop vs an underspin ball might be different from someone who bought the rubber and couldn't generate that kind of pace and spin using it in that situation, because I might have a faster bat speed at impact. Such differences among players of style, ability, & stroke specific player performamce are always going to be there no matter what and cannot be helped.
While a "template" for a review seems to be a good idea, I think that a reviewer should think for himself or herself of what is applicable and apply it to their review and articulate clearly about it.
Maybe DER_ECHTE is one consuming large ammounts of California grown mushrooms. Forum members... You all tell me and TTD and each other what you think...