(Below article was written some years ago in Korean web community.)
-------------------------------------------
Earlier, I provided answers to two out of the five questions.
Now, let us deal with the remaining three questions.
First, let’s recall which questions have not yet been answered:
- Why is the 5-ply blade considered the standard for all-wood blades?
- Why is the 7-ply blade regarded as a speed-enhanced version of the 5-ply?
- Why are 9-ply, 11-ply, and other higher-ply all-wood blades so rare?
Let’s go through each one step by step.
3. Why is the 5-ply blade considered the standard for all-wood blades?
The 5-ply blade likely became the standard because of Stiga’s
Allround Classic.
That blade has sold over a million units, and it has already been more than ten years since the commemorative edition was released. At this point, there are hardly any table-tennis players worldwide who have not heard of it.
(Even though the Allround Classic is not as popular today, its usefulness remains high. It is actually slightly thicker than the Offensive Classic, which makes it more attractive nowadays for players who want to rally with continuous topspins using the poly ball.)
The Allround Classic played a major role in spreading the perception that a table-tennis blade “should” have 5 plies.
At that time, table-tennis styles were diverse, not dominated only by drive-oriented attackers. Thus, the Allround Classic was not seen as limited to allround players, but rather was broadly chosen by virtually all offensive-minded players.
(The Offensive Classic followed the structure of the Allround Classic but used a dyed outer ply for a harder feel. It emphasized spin over power, making it appealing for players who wanted to win by continuous close-to-the-table topspin rallies rather than single finishing shots. This blade was used by Wang Liqin and gained huge popularity among Chinese players, as well as in Korea alongside the Clipper series.)
In fact, the Allround Classic is thicker than the Offensive Classic. While the Offensive Classic became very popular thanks to Wang Liqin’s fame and was widely used by Chinese players, the Allround Classic is what established Stiga’s reputation in Europe.
Now, let’s examine the underlying reason why 5-ply blades emerged as the standard.
A table-tennis blade can essentially be divided into:
- the core layer, which controls weight, balance, and power
- the outer plies, which control spin and feel
Once you understand this simple distinction, you can make sense of countless blade designs.
Traditionally, soft woods such as limba or hinoki were used for the outer plies. Later, harder woods such as koto, white ash, mahogany, and walnut became popular. These harder plies solved the “soft outer” problem often associated with Stiga blades, and they helped create blades with non-Stiga characteristics. In a sense, Stiga itself had not favored very hard outer plies.
Then came the ban on speed glue. Water-based glues entered the market, which hardened upon drying and could sometimes damage the surface ply when removed. At this point, Stiga began producing blades with harder outer plies. A milestone was the
Ebony series (Ebenholz). These were favored by many Chinese women players such as Guo Yue.
The Ebenholz series was followed by the
Rosewood and
Maplewood series, ushering in the hardwood era. Chinese brands quickly copied these designs. Of course, Stiga’s real strength lay not just in the choice of wood, but in its ability to slice veneers extremely thin and glue them with minimal adhesive. When thicker veneers were glued with lots of adhesive, the resulting blades had entirely different playing properties. That is why Chinese players considered Stiga blades impossible to replicate.
Meanwhile, core construction also evolved. One must remember: the more plies a blade has, the more glue layers it contains. Some brands promote high-ply blades as being faster and stronger, but in reality, additional glue layers make the blade feel harder and may even reduce speed. The blade becomes more like alternating wood and plastic sheets rather than pure wood.
This issue relates to the fifth question, but let me preview it here.
Manufacturers needed the core layers to be dimensionally stable over time. Thus, a
3-ply core became the norm: a thick central ply flanked by two cross-grained plies to prevent warping.
Therefore, the table-tennis blade naturally settled on a structure of a 3-ply core plus two outer plies = 5 plies total. This was so straightforward and effective that it became the standard. The design challenge then became: which wood to use for the outer plies to influence feel and spin.
Not all brands followed Stiga’s approach. Some experimented with different cross-grain arrangements, but these raised issues of warping or required specially selected, stable woods.
A famous example is Tibhar’s
IV-L blade, which used such an alternative construction. It gave a very soft, spinny feel, which at one time I personally favored.
In summary, the 5-ply standard emerged because:
- Blades can be understood as core + outer plies.
- The core must be stable → 3-ply cross-grain solution.
- Adding the outer plies brings the total to 5.
This solved both stability and feel in a balanced way. Adding more plies created structural compromises.
4. Why is the 7-ply blade regarded as a speed-enhanced version of the 5-ply?
Strictly speaking, this question is less relevant today. As the designer of Nexy blades, I have made 5-ply blades that play like 7-plies, and 7-plies that feel like 5-plies. The boundary has blurred.
But before that boundary disappeared, the traditional understanding was:
- 5-ply = the standard all-wood construction
- 7-ply = a reinforced, faster version
The most famous example is Stiga’s
Clipper series.
The Clipper was built with a 3-ply core, plus 2-ply outer construction (five outer plies in total). It used dyed veneers in the core reinforcement layers. This innovative structure created a faster, more powerful blade while retaining Stiga’s traditional philosophy of core + outer plies.
The 7-ply arrangement allowed makers to adjust reinforcement layers and outer plies in various ways. Depending on design, a 7-ply could feel much like a thickened 5-ply, or conversely, a 5-ply could be designed to feel like a lighter 7-ply.
This is why people often regarded 7-plys as “speed-up versions” of 5-plys. But modern design techniques allow great flexibility: the distinction is no longer absolute.
5. Why are 9-ply, 11-ply, and other high-ply all-wood blades so rare?
Essentially, because they are unnecessary.
Adding more plies mainly subdivides the existing structure (core, reinforcement, outer). For example, 7-ply simply means the core and reinforcement layers are further split.
9-ply or 11-ply blades sometimes exist as experimental designs, but generally:
- More plies = more glue layers
- More glue layers = less wood feel, sometimes less speed
In most cases, extra plies make the blade too stiff, too heavy, or too “dead”.
Modern composite blades (with carbon, arylate, etc.) are essentially “multi-ply” by another route. A 5-ply wood blade with inner carbon becomes a 7-layer structure (wood + composite). A 7-ply wood with composites can be 9 layers.
Thus, we don’t need 9- or 11-ply pure-wood blades. Instead, makers insert composite layers to achieve desired speed and stability while maintaining wood feel.
Exceptions exist (e.g., Tibhar Samsonov Quad series), but those require precise engineering and data. By contrast, some Chinese brands advertise “11-ply carbon” which is essentially meaningless—it’s just multiple glue layers with carbon dust, resulting in unplayable weight.
So the practical summary is:
- 5-ply = standard
- 7-ply = traditional reinforced version of 5-ply
- 9- or 11-ply = uncommon, often impractical, unless carefully engineered
Thus concludes the discussion on blade ply structures. Thank you for following this long explanation.
(P.S. In Korea, the most common design historically has been the “Hinoki-carbon” blade: a 3-ply hinoki structure with carbon inserted. In such cases, warping issues are less relevant thanks to the stabilizing effect of the carbon layer. This is a slightly different category, but worth noting.)
