The ITTF is continuing to conduct research on the bounce test as originally proposed by the JTTA. In order to establish an appropriate limit for rebound, you are invited to nominate one blade and 2 racket coverings for the team to use as reference samples.
These should be the blade and rubbers with the highest rebound; if the fastest possible combination of blade and racket coverings are not nominated, and therefore not used as test samples, then there is the possible danger that such a racket will fail the test in a competition environment. You may nominate any blade and racket coverings, even if it is equipment that you are not associated with.
The ITTF will use this survey to identify and purchase the equipment from the market for further testing. We would appreciate if we can have your replies by Friday 7 February 2014. All suppliers of table tennis equipment are strongly encouraged to participate in this survey
Mr. Lineros is 100% correct.
For me it’s “mind boggling” and a total shock to learn that FIT is against the manufacturers telling the ITTF which is their fastest racket cover and which is their fastest blade. Why not? This information is claimed by retailers and the brands themselves on their websites and the ITTF can easily gather this information directly. But we prefer to get the correct information from the source. This is also to be inclusive and to make sure that any “bounce limit” established includes the existing products, and that a bounce limit is a cap on the future.
As Mr. Lineros correctly explained, once a bounce limit is established then the tuning or boosting becomes irrelevant because we would have established a “level playing field”, which is the responsibility of the international federation to have rules that make the sport fair for its participants. Once all parameters for the racket are established (current ones plus the bounce limitation) then the equipment has to distinguish itself by “quality” and the personal preference (feel) of each player.
The research will go on, FIT has been invited to share its knowledge, the manufacturers have been invited to contribute, so it is impossible for me to understand the refusal to provide the information requested. Through this e-mail, of which a copy will be sent by our staff to ALL manufacturers again, we are asking 3 simple questions that need 3 simple answers:
– Which is the blade that you produce or sell that you consider the fastest?
– Which is the Racket Covering that you produce or sell that you consider the fastest?
– How do you determine in your own advertisement “speed”, “spin” and “control” rating?
Those manufacturers, table tennis brands, and resellers that wish to provide the answers to the above three questions, will be greatly appreciated by the ITTF and will be included in all the following steps. Those that do not wish to take part, it’s their own choice, but please do not expect any cooperation from the ITTF in the future.
A few weeks ago a recommendation came form one of the ball brands requesting a faster and simpler approval method for balls that are produced by a manufacturer but stamped for another brand. This was a reasonable request and implemented as policy immediately. This is the type of cooperation we are hoping to have.
I find it a total shame and disgrace that FIT has recommended to its members not to provide the requested information. And I also find it a a total shame and disgrace for any manufacturer or brand to not cooperate with the ITTF in this very important and crucial stage of its research.
Vicky: Please forward this e-mail to all the TT manufacturers, brands and resellers.
I hope that when all manufacturers and TT brands receive this e-mail, they will reconsider their position and send to our staff the requested information.