Zitat:
Zitat von Mark Neef
On September 15th I wrote a letter to the ITTF-President to protest against the plans to define a standard of a minimum friction level for long-pimpled rubbers. It refers to a letter from Marc Melzer http://www.ittf.com/stories/Forum_de...?ID_Forumn=89&
....
Now some questions:
How should the table-tennis-manufacturers for defence rubbers produce better tools, when they get more and more restrictions ?
- the aspect ratio
- lower spin because of the 40mm ball
- the plans for a minimum friction level Do we really need more disadvantages for defence players ?
I think that slippery long pimples are completely calculable, since the rotation of the arriving ball is only returned: topspin becomes backspin and the opposite. For an experienced, trained player they are no bigger problem and in Germany there are several coaches which precisely adjust there players to play against slippery long pimples. And if slippery long pimples are so effective, why there's no player with this material in the top-500 of the world ?
What do YOU (player, trainer, responsible person, functionary) think about that ? |
There are several points regarding slippery long pimples to be considered:
a) Players, who are
- not well trained
- do not have "the feeling" or
- simply have no player with slippery long pimples in their clubs
do not have a good chance to win, when playing against these players.
b) It causes frustration, especially, if a player for example has a better technics in general and sees that it is possible for many GLP-players to beat -simply using on 70-80 percent of the table their back hand + slippery long pimples- a technically perhaps better trained player.
c) The majority of the players hating the gloss-pimple-players (or slippery-pimple-players) can be surely found in the area of lower class players, as especially these players have big problems against GLP (glossy long pimples).
d) Only GLP-players -of course knowing well their own material and its effect- can state "GLPs are completely calculable".
For these players themselves they are calculable, of course. But please be realistic: it is similar -but not even the same- as if a left hander says "left handers are completely calculable". THE TRAINING AGAINST THESE PLAYERS is missing, which will result in possible loosing of games.
e) Theoretical knowledge does not necessarily mean a practical knowledge. See point d).
f) Resulting from the above it is clear that both players used to play against GLP and well-trained players with the respective "feeling" have no/not too big problems against GLP.
So I can really understand why several players prefer no to play against this sort of players.
A minimum friction level is therefore preferred by many players.
Especially in order to solve the problem of "self glossing" players, who always treat and manipulate the GLP-rubber against the ITTF rules, which of course is not at all sportsmen like.
With a "friction rate" measuring equipment the GLP players will have no problems anymore, -even if glossing the rubber afterwards- as the minimum friction is then well-defined and no longer subject to any discussion.
An other problem, however, is the final decision about the exact friction rate !!!! Here the GLP-players should keep an eye on the respective ITTF-commitee and try to make it "as less as possible".
Ciao
Norbert