That's my point. You speak in general terms but have conducted no serious experiments not collected any data. Yet you write with rude certitude rather than make polite proposals based on your conjectures.
I was curious so I actually checked it out with the ITTF. They said that they can't check the sponge, so you can actually add any sponge you like to a top sheet as long as the thickness of the rubber top sheet is max 2,05mm and the combined thickness of the sponge and top sheet is max 4.05mm.
Let's take the traditional view of the world for a second based on free market economics - if your argument is right, there is a huge market out there for asymmetric blades waiting your brilliant exploitation. Go ahead and exploit it, since all the dumb manufacturers are not exploiting it.
People do occasionally try things like that and while there is a point to it, it is important to remember that the blade itself vibrates at one frequency. So what asymmetry can affect has its limits.
Reminds me of a custom blade used by Kong Linghui:
People have been selling asymmetric blades for a long time. But your original post makes it sound like most people are not buying asymmetric blades for reasons that you have not presented a strong factual basis for, including people who just want to copy what good players do and nefarious manufacturers. It is all conjecture, I know many people who have bought asymmetric blades for example and who have gone back to using traditional blades. In fact, I own an asymmetric blade (Nexy Arche), though the assymetry of that blade was nothing spectacular. Like I said, you just wrote a lot of stuff that played on the understanding of general TT wisdom, but which when analyzed in the face of data and economic wisdom, turns out to be much less empirically grounded than you can strongly defend.
You should be able to answer all those questions with quantitative data to make your point and show why they are relevant. My point is any answer to them doesnr support your argument without assumptions that you have refused to be explicit about and when you are explicit about then, they show your argument is much weaker than the certitude with which you proclaim it.
check out Xiom Ice Cream AZX on TT11. I think some people say the carbons are a bit slower than Butterfly carbons but it is at least a shot at that.
That's why I put Hurricane on the forehand side and ESN rubber on the backhand side. Every single blade right now is in that combo.
All I have repeatedly said is that you need to quantify your claims - they are plausible, like many things are plausible when they are not quantified. Of course you aren't stupid enough to claim that everyone should an asymmetric blade. But you are also being facetious when you argue in the absence of empirical data that there is a market for them that players are ignoring just to imitate their favorite players. Quantify your claims a little, do the work to collect the data.
I have admitted that many players swing with stronger forehands than backhands in racket sport. What that means for racket sport depends on many things about the racket sport. What does that mean for symmetry or asymmetry? Just about any conclusion can follow from this. Should the backhand side be faster to compensate for less power, or should it be slower to enable more touch and control? Or should the person just train whatever side more? Or get slower rubber? The options are infinite - asymmetric blades are just one option, and not one without drawbacks like any other option.
It is like saying that shoe manufacturers should make the left shoe slightly bigger than the right shoe if someone has slightly different sized feet, like most human beings actually do. In practice, the problem is small enough to ignore and most people compensate by just finding a size both feet can wear and then either using more comfortable socks etc. Hopefully, the analogy helps, though like all analogies, it is easy to interpret them with stupidity.
www.feetbypody.com
Since the post references asymmetric blades as one option amongst many, I am not sure why you think it tries to prove what it clearly contradicts.
Of course you never did, you argued from a property that is likely universal to a conclusion that is empirically dubious. I sometimes have a better backhand than forehand on one day and then a better forehand than backhand the next day. Should I get asymmetric blades for each circumstance or turn my blade over to suit my mood? Or should I twiddle to the side I just feel like using when I can?
No, I am saying that problems need to be quantified to understand their relative impact/seriousness. If there is a significant market for asymmetric blades, major manufacturers will get into making them. The market is largely covered by custom blade makers and given the ability to customize rubber choices and the fact that most players have to fairly advanced to be able to know when they can take advantage of asymmetric blades (and this would imply a relatively small market relative to the overall TT market), the problem you are describing, if it exists, is likely a small problem.
Rubber/sponge combinations create sufficient asymmetry for most players and that is the standard. In the case that a more custom solution is required, that can be sought from a specific blade maker. But given the sensitivity of equipment to training and the fact that all equipment has tradeoffs, an asymmetric blade would be an advanced and rare solution to a specific problem, not a default solution that has no drawbacks. One would have to know and commit to a style to find that such a blade is required beyond what is traditional.
Well, Carl has decided not to ban you, so you are a tool for amusement.
Claims are not explanations. And again, when I have said repeatedly that asymmetric blades are one solution for a small niche of players, and that your claims are empirically dubious, it shows an inability to comprehend the rules of logical implication when you continue to argue that just because one person could benefit from an asymmetric blade, that major manufacturers should make more, since you are not even willing to discuss the limitations of such blades in developing various playing styles, including the one you like to advocate.
I didn't say that, I said that in the absence of empirical evidence, they might be making an appropriate amount. How many more asymmetric blades should they be making? I have said that the market is not that large, you have claimed it is larger than zero %, which I agree with, but how much larger than zero, you have given arguments completely compatible with the preferred use of symmetric blades. You have very little if any hard evidence that asymmetric blades are a required solution in the face of all the other potential solutions.
