30 years of playing & experimenting & testing long pips at a level you never were & never will be
Broken ball made a comment on my statement "Longer pips can produce more spin, mostly back spin & side spin via spin amplification only (long pips cannot generate lot of spin on its own). Interestingly, the longer the pips, lesser the top spin produced."
You changed it to just "
Longer pips can produce more spin" : leaving out the rest of the sentence
The LPs don't know if the incoming ball has back spin, side spin or top spin. You do .... maybe.
Assuming this true , are you saying other types rubbers can ?
The problem is that LPs cannot change an incoming top spin to an outgoing top spin because there isn't enough friction or grip.
Where & when I ever said or remotely suggestedt that that the priimary resaon for the invention of long pips is to change incoming top spin into top spin ?
The problem is that LPs cannot change an incoming top spin to an outgoing top spin because there isn't enough friction or grip. However, LPs can roll an incoming back spin and return an out going top spin easily. It is easier to attack back spin serves because you use their back spin as your top spin.
Normally I just punch incoming back spin to return a top spin. I punch through the ball trying not to bend the pips because that will reduce the out going back spin and make the rubber react to the incoming spin more. Likewise, trying to put back spin on an incoming back spin usually results in a dead ball that is easily attacked if not low.
What does all this have to do with my describing pip design parameters. I can write a book about playing using & against pips , most of which you won't be able to comprehend mostly because you don't even know why long pips were invented for & for whom (hint :- it is not for blockers like you originally)
I agree that LPs don't generate a lot of spin on their own nor can they change the rotational direction of spin easily if at all.
Again you have no clue as to why long pips were invented in the first place & for whom
Sure .
Feel free to continue to display your ignorance of how pips work.
This thread is total bogus.
It is just a collection of postings by various posters who responded to James Z's postings but with James Z's postings removed. both as OP (Original poster) or as responding to other posters
I play with LPs but most say I play best with double inverted.
39 years means nothing if you don't learn from it.
I try to mimic the PushBlocker AKA Olvier Mader 2010 FL state champ except I have a better FH.
I can loop but I usually don't with my blocking paddle. My blocking paddle is used to block low and short and at angles. My FH is used to "swat' high returns.
My opponent has problems adjusting to push block LP OX.
I am playing with one of my two DR Neubaurer Firewall+ with GD Talon 0X on the BH. I don't remember what I had on the FH. It was probably a H3 Neo or similar.
It should be obvious that no rubbers KNOW anything about the impact. They just react. To suggest otherwise shows your ignorance.
You didn't but you implied that LPs can't hit top spin balls. They can if the incoming ball has back spin.. This usually occurs against serves from player that aren't familiar playing against LP 0X push blockers.
Go write a book. See if anyone will buy it. I have been asked buy a real publisher to write a book about control theory and servo hydraulic control. We estimated the book would cost about $200 and it wouldn't sell enough to be worth the effort.
Who cares about who invented LPs and for whom. We know what types of people use LP Ox.
There is nothing magical or mystical about LPs. They are just different.
Again, I have been internationally recognized as a master of control theory, servo hydraulic control, testing etc.
AND YOU?
I was interviewed by the IEEE.org. I was on a sci.engr.control news group at the time where I stuck a finger in the eye of many of the forum members. As it turned out the VP of IEEE.org challenged my calculations which I provided and they were determined to be correct and all the other forum members were just using trial and error. The VP of IEEE.org at that time was Jerry Avins. He died a few years back but this can be verified.
Avins, puzzle, servo, Forth
users.rcn.com
We both had interests in the Forth programming language but at that time Forth was becoming obsolete.
You see I am not a self proclaimed person.
NOW WTF is Jamesz? Who cares about what you write? Have you written 20 years of engineering articles like I have? I have written articles of NASA Techbriefs. I have done work for the FAA and the US department of energy. Now WTFRU?
I know, yet another TT nobody that thinks they know how their small little world of TT works.
<Yawn>
I thought this was table tennis forum.
Not an IEEE symposium on motion control
Can you explain the difference between high aspect ratio super long pips and the type of long pips that are currently allowed by the governing bodies of table tennis?
I am changing the name of high aspect ratio super long pips to just super pips because Aspect Ratio is only one of four pip design parameters that defines these types of pips
The type of long pips you are referring as allowed by the ITTF are the long pips listed on ITTF LARC & these are the dysfunctional & totally useless rubbers TOTALLY useless in the current 40+ plastic ball ONLY era.
To start with I will be very brief & only talk in terms the 4 most important pip design parameters . These 4 are the parameter that are important but here are like 18 pip design parameters You can read about them at TTD webpage below
https://www.tabletennisdaily.com/forum/topics/pip-design-parameters.31567/ .
Pip Length
Any pips in ITTF LARC cannot exceed 2.0 mm.
Always been 2.0 mm despite arrival of 40 mm ball
Most high aspect ratio super long pips are around 3 mm which is about the correct height for a fair & level playing field
Keeping all other pip design parameters the same, lower the pip length lower the back spin produced especially for a larger 40- celluloid ball & then the even worse 40+ plastic ball
Pip Aspect Ratio
The maximum allowed limit for ITTF LARC long pips was 1.3 before 1999 . Was reduced to 1.1 after 1998 with the
1998 Durban Aspect Ratio Reduction Massacre
Some high aspect ratio super long pips ARs are around 1.5 Again this is the correct value for a fair & level playing field in the
40+ plastic ball ONLY era
BTW AR is defined as pip height (aka length) divided by pip diameter (aka width)
Keeping all other pip design parameters the same, lower the AR, lower the backspin
Pip Distribution Density (PDD)
The maximum allowed limit for ITTF LARC long pips was
50 pips per sq.cm before 2004 and was reduced to 30 pips per sq.cm after 2003 $0% drop)
Lower the PDD lower the backspin (mostly back spin but also lowered top spin but ITTF used Liu Guoliang as alleged scapegoat to spread disinformation. Liu Guoliang's career was all over by then already, in fact since lower the PDD higher the speed one would tend to think LGL would have wanted a faster less spinny pips for his forehand since he twiddled at strategic junctures of a match to loop on his forehand using spinny inverted)
High Aspect ratio super long pips with high PDD needed by away from the table choppers are still not available. Most seem to focus on low PDD to increase deception as most close to the table blockers seem to ask for
Pip Friction
The minimum allowed limit for ITTF LARC long pips was increased in 2008 with the Frictionless Pips Ban Regulation
Pip friction refers to the friction of the pips at the top of the pips as well on the sides.
The pip top & side can be very rough with tiny pips on top of a pip or can be smooth & glassy & slick
When the pips are smooth , they are called frictionless pips
When the pips are rough they (should be) called) frictionful pips
The biggest myth in tabletennis is that frictionless pips provide lots of (back) spin.
The truth is exact opposite
Only firctionful pips give more (back) spin . For example Feint Long (Classic or 2 or 3) all have rough pip tops & they give the most back spin.
Somehow most players believ that Tibhar Dtec gives lots of backspin. This is only partially true because the pip top of Dtec is not as rough as Feint Long. But Dtec while being quite deceptive can also give more backspin spin because one o rmany of the many many other pips design parameters have been modified to achieve this backspin but not due to friction of the pip tops.
For instance TSP Curl P1 , Victas P1v & Tibhar Dtec all can produce significant backspin but it lot more due to pip flexibility and not pip friction a is the case with Feint Long
For instance ITTF used the lame excuse for passing the 1998 Durban Aspect Ratio Reduction Regulation Massacre. They said that TSP P1 Curl had sudden "kink" (I am using the exact word they used) when pips collapsed randomly & this was enhanced by billions of players worldwide also microwaving their TSP P1 Curl ( Fact was that there were only a handful in Europe but all the pro & top choppers were using Feint Long Classic NOT because it was deceptive but because it was the the most controllable (opposite of deception) and was also gave most back spin because of rough pip tops ............the pip tops of P1 Curl & Dtec are not as rough as Feint Long. Also P1 Curl & Dtec are more felible than Feint Long)
Lower the friction, more the deception & lower the backspin as in frictionless long pips like Tibhar Dtec OX
Keep in mind that the GOAT of all of table tennis Joo Sae Hyuk used Feint Long 2 first but then he got desperate and kept trying TSP P1 Curl & Tinhar Dtec
Joo Sae Hyuk is still the GOAT despite this because he still got tons of back spin using P1 Curl & Dtec but that does not mean Dtec & Feint Long can create more back spin than Feint long (Of course deception is totally unimportant at pro levels let along at the top 10 level)
Higher the friction lesser the deception & higher the backspin but the myth is that frictionless pips give more backspin , which is totally ridiculous & false . Just compare Butterfly Feint Long 3 & Tibhar Dtec to understand this.
Almost all Dr.Neubauer long pips were banned due to this 2008 regulation
BTW both the top of pips and side of a pips can be made frictionless or only the side or only the pip top
Though most high aspect ratio super long pips are more frictionless than allowed by ITTF, no really glassy (frictionless) high aspect ratio super long pips are still available as before 1999 preferred by close to the table blockers .
High friction high aspect ratio super long pips that are needed by away from the table choppers are not currently available.
============================
In summary almost all low length low PDD low Aspect ratio so called long pips are just social rubbers and are functionally piece of garbage in the 40+ plastic ball ONLY era
Exceptions are few medium pips rubbers on ITTF LARC that are good for all round play or for those getting started with long pips to transition.
Rubbers like Tibhar Dtec Grass or Butterfly Feint Long 3, Victas Curl P1R etc are pure garbage in the 40+ plastic ball ONLY era. In all fairness Fient Long Classic was one of the best rubbers in history as preferred by almost all choppers before ITTF infinite wisdom banned it with the 1998 Durban Aspect Ratio Reduction Massacre Regulation
Table Tennis promoter Susan Sarandon is the co-founder of Spin Clubs that originated in New York City
She is involved in a catfight with Debra Messing, another famous actress
The fight is about who hates Trump more.
I would suggest a 7 game match in tabletennis in Las Vegas (like a boxing match) to decide the winner, just before the November 2024 election
