Hello from ITTF President

[Mighty]

Zitat von adham

...The friction level is checked at the Racket Control room at ITTF events. For other events you have to rely on the Authorization list.

Adham

Hi Adham

could you give us some details, how the friction level is checked at the Racket Control room at ITTF events?

I mean, what kind of device and so on.

You know, as an umpire I can't measure anything just with the Authorization list.

[RedStar]

Authorization list testing guide:

1. attach the Authorization list with pins on the table
2. lay down the racket on the Authorization list, pimples down
3. move the racket back and forth several times

• If the Authorization list paper breaks, this pimples are good pimples. Please print off a new Authorization list for more slippery-tests.
• If the pimples slide on the Authorization list, this pimples are to slippery. Please scowl at the pimples owner and be prepared to lose the game.

[Tonne]

Zitat von ksg9-sebastian

After all, I can truely say that the new rules blame the players who hadn't been "really good players" in past. Much of them were only good cause the rubbers do the work for them.

kind regards,
sebastian

Hello ksg9-sebastian,

do you realy believe, that players who practiced playing TT very effective for 20 years or longer with ordinary "friction pimples in rubbers" like sriver or others are suddenly "really bad players" because they lose a lot of matches after a ban of all ordinary friction pimples in rubbers?

I know that's a really fictive question, because there is no such ban at the moment. But please be careful with your argumentation like " i can truely say...". The problem with the ban of a complete sort of rubber catgory is very difficult. I think your perspective is not really fair.

Regards

Tonne

[Zwetschg'nmanschgerl]

Zitat von adham

I have one question for you (Ich habe eine Frage) -
- do you think in Germany, if you take ALL levels, the majority of the players are in favour of the low-friction long-pimples ban, or are against the low-friction long-pimples ban?

Now that you've answered so many of our questions it's only fair to answer yours:
I'd say that the vast majority of players in our club and region are in favour of the low-friction long-pimples ban. Especially for younger players it's extremely frustrating to lose against players depending on their material more than on their skills. Even some players who used to play such rubbers concede that it's a step in the right direction.

Still, I understand that many of the players concerned by the ban had to look for an alternative and this must have been very expensive and exhausting. Would you agree that the ban has not been implemented quite perfectly by the federations responsible (not only ITTF, also national organizations)? Other solutions being a longer transitional period or better coordination with producers...

Speaking of general opinion:

(1) I'd also assume that many players concur with the ban of speed glue - only the lack of examination methods at regional levels have lead to a dissatisfactory situation: players can openly admit to use speed glue at team matches or smaller tournaments (and do so!). But umpires cannot punish them and their honest opponents miss out...

(2) In our team and club we've also talked about the other changes in table tennis over the past years and the ones may be still to come. Some players don't like the shorter sets because the character of the game has changed: it's not possible any more to try out different tactics and risky shots - you have to adapt very quickly now. Also being fit (physically) isn't so important any more. But opinions are divided on that subject.

In my perception, almost everyone is against higher nets. And clearly, this is be a change you could not restrict to the international level, isn't it? I think that heightening the nets would really turn table tennis into a different game not to mention the costs for this major purchase - I can imagine the manufacturers having an obvious interest in this reglementation though. How's your position on that subject? How much higher are we talking about?

[adham]

@Zwetschg'nmanschgerl:

Thank you. From the lack of response to my question I assumed I am not allowed to ask questions but that I should just answer them.

Yes, I agree with you that the new rules were noy implemented in the best possible way. But we are doing our best now to correct that. However, I would like to remind everyone that the VOC-glue ban is not new. We already banned 4 solvents (Tueolene, Hexane, etc.) in 1994 (14 years ago), and already then the ITTF announced that this was just a first step and that when it would be possible to test and detect ALL solvents a total ban would be introduced. In 2004 Japan proposed the total ban with the implementation date of 2006. This was postponed twice to 2007 and 2008. So in fact everyone had a 4-year advance notice. But you are right, perhaps a better way to implement the rule could have been possible.

(1) The lack of examination (testing) at the local and regional level is no different than any previous ITTF rule. You could be using illegal glue (containing Hexane, etc.) before and no one would know. Racket testing from 1994 to 2008 was done mainly at National and International levels. If your racket covering was or is too thick who is checking? The 4mm rule is in existence for more than 20 years. At the local and regional level you have to use the "honour" system the best you can, just like in all other sports. In tennis you do not have a "line electronic machine" to decide if the ball is in or out, players just use the honour system (and many times fight about it, I know).

(2) Regarding 11-points, yes you are right its a matter of opinion and some may not like it. But now that we have it for several years I hear mainly positive reactions, especially from TV networks, the media (journalists) and spectators, and "most" players. Now I know that you don't like it.

The higher net idea is not my own. We have been told that perhaps the Swiss TT Association will propose a higher net. Also the Chairman of the Athletes Commission of the ITTF, Zoran Primorac, much favours the higher net. In his opinion we should keep the boosters and tuners to provide as close as possible the feeling of the so-called speed-glue, and make the net higher instead. But as always, I never react positively or negatively to any idea. After all the idea of playing Tennis on a dining room table with cigar boxes and champagne corks must have seemed crazy at the time, but today it's our sport. So, I prefer to listen to all ideas and then follow a process: make some experiments, many trials, many aalysis and then judge if it is good for TT or not. And at the end the decision is made by the national associations member of the ITTF, we have 205. So if they think an idea is good for TT and they vote for it, then OK, why not. But usually this process can take many years (40mm ball - 5 years, 11 points - 3 years, Service rule - many many years). So don't change your net yet.

## Unnecessary full quote removed, TSC ##

[Zwetschg'nmanschgerl]

Zitat von adham

Yes, I agree with you that the new rules were noy implemented in the best possible way. But we are doing our best now to correct that. However, I would like to remind everyone that the VOC-glue ban is not new. We already banned 4 solvents (Tueolene, Hexane, etc.) in 1994 (14 years ago), and already then the ITTF announced that this was just a first step and that when it would be possible to test and detect ALL solvents a total ban would be introduced. In 2004 Japan proposed the total ban with the implementation date of 2006. This was postponed twice to 2007 and 2008. So in fact everyone had a 4-year advance notice. But you are right, perhaps a better way to implement the rule could have been possible.
...
(2) Regarding 11-points, yes you are right its a matter of opinion and some may not like it. But now that we have it for several years I hear mainly positive reactions, especially from TV networks, the media (journalists) and spectators, and "most" players. Now I know that you don't like it.

Hi Adham,

thanks again for your elaborate answer! The information about the steps that preceded the total ban of VOC-glue were new to me - so probably there has been some kind of miscommunication on the national level.

Me, I have never used speed glue and actually I'm in favour of the 11-points-system - just wanted to give you a broader picture on the opinions in my team/club. Of course, we don't know what the media and spectators say; so this is very interesting, too.

Micha

[Torsten von Bayern]

Adham,

you are right that you deserve more feedback on YOUR questions, in view of your numerous answers and comments.

Therefore I'd like to provide some experience (and one question ...) regarding testing against speed glue on the regional levels of the DTTB. My example comes from the Bavarian Tabletennis Association, where we (Board and URC) are trying to enforce rules on a regional level as follows.

Here, the use of the ENEZ device has by now been implemented in the six highest leagues down from the Bundesliga. We have worked out a testing concept based on sampling, where initially the matches subject to testing were drawn by lot and, with the season proceeding, more weight will be given to the "bad guys" detected and to defining matches. We are six racket controllers, all being International and National Umpires, constantly exchanging test results and players' feedbacks. On all regional levels, our joint result up to now is:
- The vast majority of all ENEZ results is "green".
- Almost all players appreciate the procedure as a contribution to fairness.
- No time delays or other interruptions of play are recognized.
- On the other hand, players are definitely hoping for even stronger procedures covering tuners and boosters. It is the players' firm belief that, whereas most players have refrained from speed gluing, many of them just replaced it by tuning.
- My feeling as an umpire and racket controller is that no issue, not even the ever-discussed enforcement of the service laws, has ever drawn more attention than the "new" banning rules.

Backed by this experience, the concept is about to be extended down to county level, including tournaments. Using above selection methods, this should be possible. Moreover, teams at any level have always been given the possibility to order a referee (if none by default) for a match they feel uncomfortable with - and so are they now, regarding an ENEZ test.

The booster/tuner matter of course is still unresolved, but this is already being discussed widely enough, so I don't have to add something.

I just would find a short comment valuable, if our efforts for deep-dive testing are in the sense of ITTF's overall concept, or if there is a certain stage from which on you'd think a control procedure may be exaggerated. Thank you very much in advance.

[TSC]

I'll add another topic, too.

It seems that the number of newly added high-profile tournaments (such as the tournament of champions, the european supercup, the Asia-Europe All Star Series, etc.) rises constantly. This is fairly understandable as these are the ones that attract (?) the highest number of viewers (worldwide). At the same time, the participating players are seeking for contracts that let them focus onto the worldwide tournaments while they're still playing a few matches for their clubs.

I'd like to know wether there are plans from the ittf to foster this development even further and I'd also like to hear your own opinion about it.

For me, the big, important tournaments are the icing on the cake but I've mixed feelings as I'd love to be able to attend matches between professional players live in the future, which wouldn't be possible if we'd have a situation such as the one in Tennis with a truckload of tournaments and practically unimportant national leagues

And one more thing, Adham: Please have a look onto the part in the guidelines about citations in this Link.

[adham]

Zitat von Torsten von Bayern

Adham,

you are right that you deserve more feedback on YOUR questions, in view of your numerous answers and comments.

Therefore I'd like to provide some experience (and one question ...) regarding testing against speed glue on the regional levels of the DTTB. My example comes from the Bavarian Tabletennis Association, where we (Board and URC) are trying to enforce rules on a regional level as follows.

Here, the use of the ENEZ device has by now been implemented in the six highest leagues down from the Bundesliga. We have worked out a testing concept based on sampling, where initially the matches subject to testing were drawn by lot and, with the season proceeding, more weight will be given to the "bad guys" detected and to defining matches. We are six racket controllers, all being International and National Umpires, constantly exchanging test results and players' feedbacks. On all regional levels, our joint result up to now is:
- The vast majority of all ENEZ results is "green".
- Almost all players appreciate the procedure as a contribution to fairness.
- No time delays or other interruptions of play are recognized.
- On the other hand, players are definitely hoping for even stronger procedures covering tuners and boosters. It is the players' firm belief that, whereas most players have refrained from speed gluing, many of them just replaced it by tuning.
- My feeling as an umpire and racket controller is that no issue, not even the ever-discussed enforcement of the service laws, has ever drawn more attention than the "new" banning rules.

Backed by this experience, the concept is about to be extended down to county level, including tournaments. Using above selection methods, this should be possible. Moreover, teams at any level have always been given the possibility to order a referee (if none by default) for a match they feel uncomfortable with - and so are they now, regarding an ENEZ test.

The booster/tuner matter of course is still unresolved, but this is already being discussed widely enough, so I don't have to add something.

I just would find a short comment valuable, if our efforts for deep-dive testing are in the sense of ITTF's overall concept, or if there is a certain stage from which on you'd think a control procedure may be exaggerated. Thank you very much in advance.

Oh my! A breath of fresh air. I was reading your post and wondering if it was a dream. BRAVO! BRAVO! BRAVO! I know that the Forum administrator is going to be upset with me for using capital letters and for not reducing your post. But really I want to keep you post with my answer because I am really impressed.

First, it's up to each national association (and its affiliates) to decide how and if they wish to implement ITF rules. I never expected in my wildest dreams that you would be implementing the Enez and racket controls to this extent. Again, BRAVO!

To answer your question: what you are doing is great and I wish more national, regional (land), provincial, etc., associations would do the same. I never expected such a good programme at this level.

As you may know, the ITTF is very short of Racket Controllers. We are taxing in time and travel our few trained racket controlers. We are now putting in place a remedial education and training programme to train many more racket controlers as we wish to have 2 per ITTF event. Please send me an e-mail to ittf@ittf.com addressed to me with your name and contact information as well as the name of the other 5 racket controllers. It would be our pleasure to use you in our testing programme. Thanks.

Adham

[Tony_Iommi]

Adham,

I know, it's off topic, lame and not productive:

...[Snip]...

## A truckload of off-topic, lame and not productive garbage from your post removed, TSC ##