What happened between the USA and KAZ controversial match at the WTTTC Finals 2023?

[jammmail]

And the 4.05 is sponge and rubber both sides? Not the sponges only?
Some pros have spoken about gluing multiply layers without booster - the Dima glueing video for instance. So they could potentially still fail from over glueing without boosting?

If a boosted rubber doesnt dome would that mean it wouldnt increase in thickness?

 

[Tony's Table Tennis]

And the 4.05 is sponge and rubber both sides? Not the sponges only?
Some pros have spoken about gluing multiply layers without booster - the Dima glueing video for instance. So they could potentially still fail from over glueing without boosting?

If a boosted rubber doesnt dome would that mean it wouldnt increase in thickness?

4.05mm is one side, from blade to topsheet surface.
the racket covering as defined by ITTF is the rubber (with or without sponge).

sponges for example are 2.1mm, 2.3mm to match with different size topsheets.
with newer ESN, you will find 2.3mm with thinner topsheets, compared to the ESN 2.1mm with thicker topsheet of previous generations.

and yes, Dima who use 5 to 7 layers on would be adding thickness to this 4.05mm space.

adding anything on, dome or not, will be adding layers
dome will just be expansion, but we will wait for the expansion to "return a bit" before gluing.
it is all about knowing your equipment and know what is where and how to play within the range.

 

[Mytoman]

4.05mm is one side, from blade to topsheet surface.
the racket covering as defined by ITTF is the rubber (with or without sponge).

sponges for example are 2.1mm, 2.3mm to match with different size topsheets.
with newer ESN, you will find 2.3mm with thinner topsheets, compared to the ESN 2.1mm with thicker topsheet of previous generations.

and yes, Dima who use 5 to 7 layers on would be adding thickness to this 4.05mm space.

adding anything on, dome or not, will be adding layers
dome will just be expansion, but we will wait for the expansion to "return a bit" before gluing.
it is all about knowing your equipment and know what is where and how to play within the range.

4,04 in average is a totally normal result when you check thickness. When it's too thick - it is often like 4,12. Typically an extra layer of glue, or didn't check/fix after boosting.. But again: The most important thing is to be in time for the pre match test and don't gamble (even if you want to traing with your racket). If you don't show up, it will be after match. And then you don't get an extra try - you just lose the match. Here the player knew that it was an after match! Racket straight back to the umpire and into the envelope. This is something the nr 3 player NEVER does, unless he knows that he has missed the pre match test and has an after match.

 

[Tony's Table Tennis]

4,04 in average is a totally normal result when you check thickness. When it's too thick - it is often like 4,12. Typically an extra layer of glue, or didn't check/fix after boosting.. But again: The most important thing is to be in time for the pre match test and don't gamble (even if you want to traing with your racket). If you don't show up, it will be after match. And then you don't get an extra try - you just lose the match. Here the player knew that it was an after match! Racket straight back to the umpire and into the envelope. This is something the nr 3 player NEVER does, unless he knows that he has missed the pre match test and has an after match.

Did I get my number wrong

is the limit at 4.04 or 4.05?
I can't remember and now reading your post, I think it is 4.04

btw, Liang failed twice (primary and spare racket) at Chengdu 2022 during pre match test and ended using another players racket.

 

[ben1229]

He fked up again. I wondering who supply him the rubber. DHS? Or some CNT players?

 

[jammmail]

Did I get my number wrong

is the limit at 4.04 or 4.05?
I can't remember and now reading your post, I think it is 4.04

btw, Liang failed twice (primary and spare racket) at Chengdu 2022 during pre match test and ended using another players racket.

Thanks for the explanations.

Well if he has history of failing before - thats very silly.

Is he a Hurricane user?

 

[turbozed]

From the top CNT women dropping matches to pips and now boosted rubbers being disqualified, it's entirely possible that JamesZ has finally succeeded in infiltrating the ITTF.

 

[Tony's Table Tennis]

Thanks for the explanations.

Well if he has history of failing before - thats very silly.

Is he a Hurricane user?

i don't know, but many people in USATT fb group are saying so

 

[Tony's Table Tennis]

He fked up again. I wondering who supply him the rubber. DHS? Or some CNT players?

if I recall, he is BTY USA sponsored

 

[Mytoman]

Did I get my number wrong

is the limit at 4.04 or 4.05?
I can't remember and now reading your post, I think it is 4.04

btw, Liang failed twice (primary and spare racket) at Chengdu 2022 during pre match test and ended using another players racket.

4.04 including flatness if it is convex. (Taking into consideration that you don't add flatness if it's only the blade that is bended. You add if it is the rubber that is convex).

 

[Gtsnake]

If he missed the pre check he has no one to blame except himself. There are plenty of opportunities to qualify your equipment and failing during inspection is on the player. Whether he did it intentionally or not the rules are very clear and should have accommodated for them. It's not like he's unbeatable and has a lot to lose. Is he that desperate to gain a tiny advantage to win?

 

[Tony's Table Tennis]

USATT has spoken:

𝑨𝒃𝒐𝒖𝒕 𝑱𝒊𝒔𝒉𝒂𝒏 𝑳𝒊𝒂𝒏𝒈 @ 2024 𝑰𝑻𝑻𝑭 𝑾𝒐𝒓𝒍𝒅 𝑻𝒆𝒂𝒎 𝑪𝒉𝒂𝒎𝒑𝒊𝒐𝒏𝒔𝒉𝒊𝒑𝒔 𝑩𝒖𝒔𝒂𝒏
____________________________
At the 2024 ITTF World Team Championships, USA’s men’s team was poised to advance to the knock out rounds as long as they won at least 2 matches and 2 more games against Kazakhstan. Jishan Liang played against Aidos Kenzhigulov from Kazakhstan in the 3rd match and won 3-1, giving the US a 2-1 lead. However, he was disqualified because one side of his racket was 0.19mm over the thickness limit.

USATT submitted the following 4 points to the ITTF Jury Committee to contest the decision to disqualify Jishan Liang.

Jishan Liang had competed with the same racket for 3 days of competition prior to the disqualification call on day 5. Prior to the test in question, his racket had passed all visual inspections.

The umpires and referees have no time log indicating Jishan Liang was late to turn in his racket prior to his match. Jishan was not informed his racket would be tested after his match because of the time in which he submitted it.

The announcement of the racket failing came after Nikhil had lost to Kirill, despite the test result occurring earlier. This did not give the US Men’s team an opportunity to adjust their play to account for a disqualification.

Jishan’s racket was tested 4-5 times before it was deemed illegal. The necessity for multiple tests raises significant doubts about the reliability and trustworthiness of the testing process itself. Jishan’s racket, which stayed with the umpires and referees overnight, got tested again today and it was within the standard. They also conducted two separate tests and the readings were different

 

[enoxzr]

If what the USATT says is right I do think its a big fail on the umpires / ITTF Jury Committee.

Passing a racket 4 to 5 times and failing it on the 6th is unexplainable. If the rubber is too thick it should fail on the first attempt, that is under the assumption the player couldn't have tampered with the racket in between the checks of course

 

[backspacer]

What would happen if USA's appeal goes through? We are already past the point where it would change the tournament.

 

[TensorBackhand]

Usatt's points don't make much sense to me. Why didn't they demand a pre-test? I would refuse to play a match unless i knew that my racket was acceptable.

When they say tested 5 times, does that just mean tested 5 locations on the rubber? Different areas might be thicker depending on how even the booster went in.

 

[Dr Evil]

USATT has spoken:

𝑨𝒃𝒐𝒖𝒕 𝑱𝒊𝒔𝒉𝒂𝒏 𝑳𝒊𝒂𝒏𝒈 @ 2024 𝑰𝑻𝑻𝑭 𝑾𝒐𝒓𝒍𝒅 𝑻𝒆𝒂𝒎 𝑪𝒉𝒂𝒎𝒑𝒊𝒐𝒏𝒔𝒉𝒊𝒑𝒔 𝑩𝒖𝒔𝒂𝒏
____________________________
At the 2024 ITTF World Team Championships, USA’s men’s team was poised to advance to the knock out rounds as long as they won at least 2 matches and 2 more games against Kazakhstan. Jishan Liang played against Aidos Kenzhigulov from Kazakhstan in the 3rd match and won 3-1, giving the US a 2-1 lead. However, he was disqualified because one side of his racket was 0.19mm over the thickness limit.

USATT submitted the following 4 points to the ITTF Jury Committee to contest the decision to disqualify Jishan Liang.

Jishan Liang had competed with the same racket for 3 days of competition prior to the disqualification call on day 5. Prior to the test in question, his racket had passed all visual inspections.

The umpires and referees have no time log indicating Jishan Liang was late to turn in his racket prior to his match. Jishan was not informed his racket would be tested after his match because of the time in which he submitted it.

The announcement of the racket failing came after Nikhil had lost to Kirill, despite the test result occurring earlier. This did not give the US Men’s team an opportunity to adjust their play to account for a disqualification.

Jishan’s racket was tested 4-5 times before it was deemed illegal. The necessity for multiple tests raises significant doubts about the reliability and trustworthiness of the testing process itself. Jishan’s racket, which stayed with the umpires and referees overnight, got tested again today and it was within the standard. They also conducted two separate tests and the readings were different

If this account is correct, then Jishan had no reason to think his racket might be illegal, and no reason to think it hadn't been tested before the match. The multiple previous tests which the racket had passed, the delay until after Nikhil's match to announce it had failed, the subsequent tests the next day with different measurements, all clearly imply corruption on the part of ITTF officials. Whether this account is accurate or whether it's misleading (some of the wording does seem a bit fishy) is another question.

 

[dingyibvs]

Usatt's points don't make much sense to me. Why didn't they demand a pre-test? I would refuse to play a match unless i knew that my racket was acceptable.

When they say tested 5 times, does that just mean tested 5 locations on the rubber? Different areas might be thicker depending on how even the booster went in.

Right, and 0.19mm is not a small difference either for the machines.

 

[Matt Hetherington]

If this account is correct, then Jishan had no reason to think his racket might be illegal, and no reason to think it hadn't been tested before the match. The multiple previous tests which the racket had passed, the delay until after Nikhil's match to announce it had failed, the subsequent tests the next day with different measurements, all clearly imply corruption on the part of ITTF officials. Whether this account is accurate or whether it's misleading (some of the wording does seem a bit fishy) is another question.

My interpretation of this, is that the 'visual inspections' that it 'passed' were done by chair umpires, not by racket testing officials. From what I understood from the players there was not a regular schedule of pre-match official racket testing in place.

 

[JJ Ng]

My interpretation of this, is that the 'visual inspections' that it 'passed' were done by chair umpires, not by racket testing officials. From what I understood from the players there was not a regular schedule of pre-match official racket testing in place.

I think USATT's argument is pretty weak.

After all, the said player could have re-boosted the sponge in between matches and inspection.

I don't know why USATT's coaches and/or players don't have their own equipment to measure the thickness before the matches.

The next day, some of the boosting effect could have dissipated, leading to thinner sponge and overall less thickness.

Again the said players having two rackets disqualified in 2022 should put the said player and the USATT coaches on notice.

Finally, I am pretty sure the umpire did not make up 0.19mm. After all, just measure it in front of the players and coaches from both teams if you want to! It is pretty black and white.

If it is just a "visual" inspection, as Matt said, then 4-5 of those inspections were not accurate. Nobody even took out a ruler?

On a side topic, USATT events are notorious where players even have to umpire themselves unless it is a top level event and at the quarter finals or higher. If you look at YouTube videos of table tennis matches taking place in various European countries, you can see someone keeping the score even at pretty low level of events. I think that kind of mentality must have trickled down (or trickle up) to some of the top players who enter international events. I think even they are not sure how their rackets will or will not get tested.

Finally I see many illegal serves not being call at ITTF or rather WTT events. I don't have time to stay up and watch all the matches. But the last game in men's team where Hong Kong got knocked out, the opposing team's player blatantly threw the ball almost horizon into his body before serving EVERY single time. Nothing was called and Hong Kong lost and got knocked out. I would say those illegal serve issues probably have more impact on the game than sponge/top sheet thickness. I don't know.

Anyways, rules need to be re-enforced. ITTF and WTT have done a pretty poor job at that.

 

[Choosikick]

if I recall, he is BTY USA sponsored

In the match you can clearly see that he is using a Long 5 blade and a blue sponge rubber on his forehand, which is very similar to the Hurricane 3.