Which ball should our club buy to test?

lineup32 wrote: NextLevel wrote: Baal wrote: Wow, they even admit that the balls are not durable.  Nice find. Someone pointed this out earlier in an earlier post - what was still being considered was what the actual durability of the balls was.  But as long as the Nittaku does make a good ball, all will be well - others will either follow Nittaku or just be left on the sidelines. down to the Nittaku as the best hope for the seamed plastic , I read somewhere that they will be out in Oct 2014 in what volume and price is an open question.   It seems everyone views the seamless as the ugly duckling it could be the easier ball to manufacture in volume, has good durability and with volume manufacturing a shot at the cheaper choice long term, the ITTF could say seamless in Jan 2016, thats all folks

Doubt they would want to piss off Nittaku and DHS that much, and those two companies have deeper pockets and can pay much larger bribes.

It doesnt matter as long as it has oval shape and bounces.

Baal wrote: Wow, they even admit that the balls are not durable.  Nice find.

Someone pointed this out earlier in an earlier post - what was still being considered was what the actual durability of the balls was.  But as long as the Nittaku does make a good ball, all will be well - others will either follow Nittaku or just be left on the sidelines.

DreiZ wrote: I would suggest not buying until the price drops and quality/durability increases. Lower demand > price decrease > quality increase ?... maybe.

I see the price is already much lower than that of the first released Palio pre-approved balls. They still cost 8+ RMB each now but the ittf approved Palio ball is like 5 RMB. May be they can still drop a little but may not be much.

NextLevel wrote: Baal, can you weigh it or get someone to so we can check the tolerances?

  Will try, not sure when I will see him next.

@Baal,

Ok thanks. The poly ball I had broke in just about 30 minutes of use. I think the trigger was largely because of me smacking it flat onto the net post once when I tried a swerving curve shot, as a few shots after there was a massive explosion sound when my hitting partner did a drive. To ensure this wasn't an isolated incident, I followed up with various friends whom I gave a poly ball each to, and they too said theirs had broke and did not last long.

Otherwise, awesome ball to play with.

Edited by hithithit - 07/27/2014 at 10:35pm

@Baal,

How long did you play for?

I am assuming the Nittaku Made In Japan ball did not break during play, did Jim tell you how durable they are?

I am just looking for some light in the tunnel, the DHS 3 star poly balls just don't last.

Today I played with made in Japan Nittaku 40+ ball (Jim Butler had one).  It is much much much better than the Joola or the XSF ball.  Bounce is identical to a Nittaku regular ball.  Still slightly slower and less spinny than current celluloid balls, but a big improvement over the 40+ balls I had tried before this during the last week.  That is the brand that I hope becomes the standard.  As things stand now, their product is clearly superior. 

By the way, IMHO, the XSF ball is a joke.  Nobody will want to use that one. 

As for guerrilla marketing (if I can guess what this is supposed to mean) I think I have been as outspoken in opposition to these new balls as anyone on this forum, and nobody pays me for what I write.  Of course nobody gives a crap what I have to say either.  The world continues to change in many ways no matter what I think.

Realistically, we need to move on now. 

NextLevel wrote: By and large, the reviews on the latest balls have been positive

There has been a lot of guerrilla marketing on the forums lately.

NextLevel wrote: The Chinese team has used the balls in practice and is adapting its players to it.

You can use a potato and adapt to it. The point is that where the people can choose the ball free, they choose celluloid. As I said, e.g. Germany.

NextLevel wrote: ...but once the Pros use the balls, there will be nothing left to discuss unless the balls behave so terribly that they cannot be used.  No one has decried the latest set of balls that much

There have been enough reports describing plastic ball as bad, so they are terrible enough, if you wish to use the term terrible.

Note that plastic ball are known for a very long time and failed twice, in 1970s and in 1980s. The Pros can be forced to use them one way or another, right, but the overall failure will lead to the end of the plastic ball swindle. The clever trick to allow "better" plastic balls temporarily will not help, people are not that stupid.


Edited by Mastermind - 07/27/2014 at 2:44pm

skip3119 wrote: When all ITTF sanctioned tournaments switch to plastic balls - beginning in 2015, the rest of the world will gradually follow.

The date is not 2015, it is 2014. Secondly, the example of Germany shows the opposite, as I said.
Thirdly, there is no legal reason for the ITTF sanctioned tournaments to switch to plastic balls, because the ITTF rule states: "3.02.01.02   ...the choice of equipment shall be as laid down by the Association in whose territory the competition is held, selected from brands and types currently approved by the ITTF."

The Association in whose territory the competition is held can, of course, be blackmailed or bribed or whatever to choose a plastic ball despite celluloid ball being legal, but nevertheless plastic balls remain very unpopular, which gives hope that the plastic ball swindle will be gone next year.

NextLevel wrote: Well, whatever the new balls are like, we are going to play with them, no matter how good or bad or ugly they are.

I do not think so. The example of Germany shows that almost 100% will play with celluloid balls.

It is possible that the plastic ball swindle will be gone next year.

Baal wrote: I think that our current experience with these balls will not change that much after Jan 2016.

Well, it will for the simple reason that different specifications mean different balls. Since the specifications after 01.01.2016 will be automatically different, the new new balls will be different as well.

I checked six of the new Joola 40+ balls in my laboratory using calipers and an analytical balance late last week.  5/6 meet the 2016 specs (barely, they were all barely at the high end of that range), and one was heavier even then current amended specs allow.  So, maybe not so much change coming after 2016.  Interestingly, all of the DHS celluloid balls I weighed were under current spec weight for celluloid.  The balance I used is calibrated yearly and we use it for weighing milligram quantities of substances.  The other stuff (roundness, hardness, etc.) I can't measure.  But as much as I really do not like the rule change, I think that our current experience with these balls will not change that much after Jan 2016.  At least I hope not.  Again, I know there is no impending worldwide ban on celluloid, and I suspect the motives behind the change, but now in practical terms I am trying to figure out some practical things going forward, like when to start playing exclusively with the new ones, since I am guessing in the not too distant future newly made celluloid balls will cease to exist.