I have watched in silence as the posts on this site go endlessly over

technological and other extraneous issues which the posters seem to believe have

some relevance to the game we played in the Classic Era ... the game that we

tried to resurrect under the banner of "hardbat".  But it is past time that I

spoke up … and so, in this and subsequent postings I intend to address some of

these controversies.



At the outset, let me say unequivocally that the motivating impulse behind the

resurrection of "hardbat" was not to give a home to sponge players to play a

modified sponge-light, 3-Ball, serve-intensive variation of the modern game sans

sponge.  Who in his right mind would SEEK to do that?



Rather, the intent was to restore the classic game of table tennis to USATT

tournaments so its beauty, dialogue, and spectator appeal would not be lost, and

also to provide to players of the modern era, a peek into their rich heritage –

a heritage few modern players know about – to a world of table tennis when

spectator interest was at its peak and American table tennis players were truly

world-competitive.   The world where technique, not technology, was the focus of

the game.



Contrary to what anyone may believe, the constant barrage of opinions,

observations, suggestions and insights in reference to the current hardbat game

that appear regularly on this forum bears little relationship to classic table

tennis as was played during The Golden Era, because at the elemental equipment

base-level, the current hardbat game incorporates elements of deceit, fraud and

deception made possible by the very nature of the modern hardbat rubbers, not

one of which existed prior to 1952.



Most hardbat players of today, in reality, are playing and discussing a mutant

variation of the sport, being neither Classical nor Sponge. Just because the

modern rubber does not have an underlying sponge layer does not automatically

qualify it to parade under the banner of the classic game -- the game that was

played by Barna, Bergmann, Leach, Vana, Andreadis, Sido as well as everyone else

prior to the advent of sponge.  Have no illusions, today's hardbat game is not

the classic game by a longshot, yet that was its reason for being.



A more apt description of the game as currently played should be Junk Hardbat. 

It's certainly not Classic table tennis because the purity of that game was

based on utilization of spin for control, not befuddlement of the opponent.  Yet

this is a key element of Junk Hardbat -- and the selection of such rubber to

produce such havoc is indisputably a prime consideration of most of today's

hardbat players.



Present-day hardbat rubbers, most particularly Dr Evil, Butterfly Ox, Hallmark

Magic Pips, Yasaka, Cobalt even the Reisman Classic, etc, despite what anyone

thinks, are capable of producing disturbing springiness and aberrational spins,

elements which have contaminated and undermined what we sought to resurrect,

bastardizing it in a manner having no relationship whatsoever to the classic

game as it was played with Leyland, Dunlop, and Slazenger coverings, and the

like.



Regrettably, the table tennis game that was played during the Golden Era has

been so bent out of shape by the spin-oriented mentality of the longtime

spongers gravitating between sponge and hardbat that the art of the classic game

relating to strokes, technique, footwork and strategy is never even discussed as

it once was when its artistry and stroke-analysis were the topics of discussion

among neophytes and experts alike.



As an unrepentant purist and foremost expert on the subject of Leyland, and

based upon my ability to assess the precise effect that respective junk rubbers

have on the ball, as well as my knowledge of having played the game for almost

70 years, I find these discussions by most posters on this forum to be totally

without merit – on a fool's errand really – as they attempt to analyze, compare

and decide on the best junk coverings that are currently being paraded as

classic rubbers but that are actually more closely related to a peanut butter

sandwich than to rubbers used in the Classic Era.



The fact that we cannot any longer obtain Leyland rubber is no reason for

despair or a throwing up of hands.  With a revival of interest in table tennis

that seeks to level the playing field, a decent paddle with rubber conforming to

the playing characteristics of the Classic Era can be manufactured and

successfully marketed.  Had Killerspin sought classic expertise instead of

choosing to follow its own lights, such a paddle could already be in existence.



In all my years as a player during the Classic Era, the effect of the rubber was

never a topic of discussion because none of the extreme outcome-influencing

products even existed.  The absurdity by some players, apparently bereft of

talent, to experimentally tamper with the modern rubbers to further increase

efficiency by sandpapering the pips or adding linen-backing to rubber sheeting

indicates a growing desire and a never-ending quest to bring even a greater 

degree of sponge insanity – and elements of chaos – into what is already only an

extremely poor remnant of the classic game.



To those of you who are not tuned into the purity and the art of the genuine

game of the Classic Era – which, I suspect, is most of you (for reading books

and seeing a few newsreel clips is not the same as experiencing years of such

play) – who are hell-bent on finding and using the most effective rubbers

possible, all I can say is that it is just such a sponge-driven mentality that

has contributed to transforming my intent into a watered-down version of

pimples-out sponge, a far cry from my half-century-long ambition to resurrect

Classic table tennis with all its integrity.



The inescapable fact is that most everyone here is playing, promoting,

discussing and analyzing a considerably butchered and bastardized version of the

game of the Golden Era, so let's not try to palm it off to the world, to each

other, to me and especially to generations to come, that this is Classic table

tennis, because it's not. When you see it played you'll know it.  So will

everyone on the planet.



Reisman

> The inescapable fact is that most everyone here is playing, promoting,

> discussing and analyzing a considerably butchered and bastardized version of

> the game of the Golden Era, so let's not try to palm it off to the world, to

> each other, to me and especially to generations to come, that this is

> Classic table tennis, because it's not. When you see it played you'll know

> it. So will everyone on the planet.



It's not only a matter of equipment Marty, even if I set up a

tournament with ONLY Leyland the game will not be like that in the

TRUE Classic Era. You know that! Only a few people in the World can

play like in the Classic Era, all the others have learned and are used

to play in the "sponge style" and when they take a Leyland in their

hand they try to adapt those habits to the equipment. I think there's

nothing to do with that. Only true Classic training can resurrect the

true Classic Era play, but unfortunately I can not see the way it can

be possible. Can you?



Do you think that if no sponge come up in the '52 the play of

'30s/'40s would be to much different from the actual no sponge play?

I'm not sure of this. (...and I don't know if I wrote it in the right

way :D)



Do you think that the final of the 100'000$ Hardbat Classic is more

near the Classic Era than all the other hardbat tournaments? (don't

think only at the BEST Classic Era champion but at the game it self)



Thank you Marty, I think is important to know what a true Classic Era

Champion think about this things.



Ciao from Italy!



--

Lorenzo aka Giorno

giorno @ gmail dot com

Tennis-Tavolo.com

Grand observations, sir.  Many thanks for sharing them all.



Meanwhile... and I think you might find this quite interesting...  I'm in

receipt of a number of rubber samples that I have been COF testing.



The Reisman samples... have the LOWEST Coefficient Of Friction of ALL of them. 

Presuming the "Design Intent" was to emulate or create a rubber that harkens

back to materials of the Golden Age then absolutely.... minimizing the imparting

of spin on the ball would certainly be the result.



Mind you, COF is only one variable for one component of an hardbat... but... for

argument sake, I attempted to test a bat with smooth Yasaka MKV. 2.0mm sponge on

it... and the test FAILED ABYSMALLY as the COF was SO high the test sled

literally lifted off the material.



As to "experimenting" with materials... well, that's how we find out what

might... or more than likely might NOT resemble the rubbers of olde.  I would

presume that no small amount of thought, expermimenting and testing went into

the development of the Reisman Classic Rubbers.



Unfortunately.... not having been there and done that... not owning any of the

original equipment of the day... and even if one did, by now it's possibly aged

and / or deteriorated in some manner... it can be difficult to establish the

precise goal to attain.



I will be posting a PDF file graphing the results of the testing to the files

section soon.  I think many of us will find the resulst interesting.



Meanwhile.... personally, I find myself gravitating more and more to... OK...

I'll refer to it as this...  "SPONGELESS" play.  For all the reasons we're all

familiar with and for a few of mine own.



First and foremost... I can devote more energy towards form... stroke,

precision, strategy, footwork... all the things you mention... when I'm not

having to expend massive quantities of energy so intensely studying what my

opponent is or is not doing to impart some dubious spin on the ball.



It's one HELL of a lot more enjoyable!!!!



Is it "Classic Hardbat" in the manner you so eloquently put forth?  In all

liklihood.... NO.  But I daresay... it's one hell of a lot closer to it than it

is to the modern sponge game.



Again, absolutely thrilling to read your insights and will be following this

thread with great interest!



Cheers!



Larry "Boneman" Bone

Dingmans Ferry, PA

I agree witn Marty's observations and analysis of the hardbat dilemma.  It will

be impossible to recreate classic hardbat table tennis unless a new rubber with

the qualities of Leyland is available. And even then there would be problems.

Sponge players who have been entering hardbat events might stop entering them if

a fast and spinny rubber was not allowed.  It might be impossible to have

hardbat events at many tournaments, and the entry at the nationals might be

pretty small.  And now that players have learned spinny serves and the serve and

smash strategy, they would continue to play that way even with a low spin

rubber.  I played a match with Courtney Roberts at the last nationals, and he

was using a Hock bat with Leyland rubber.  His serves were legal and extremely

difficult to return...it was all technique.  You can't ask someone to stop doing

something he has taken the trouble to learn.  But I think it is worthwhile to

try to preserve classic hardbat, and the first problem is to find a Leyland like

rubber.  Then we could try holding hardbat events that only allowed the low spin

rubber, and see if there are enough entries, and if the classic style of play

proved to be more successful than the serve and smash style.





--- In hardbat@yahoogroups.com, "martyreisman" <martyreisman@...> wrote:

>

> I have watched in silence as the posts on this site go endlessly over

technological and other extraneous issues which the posters seem to believe have

some relevance to the game we played in the Classic Era ... the game that we

tried to resurrect under the banner of "hardbat".  But it is past time that I

spoke up … and so, in this and subsequent postings I intend to address some of

these controversies.

>

> At the outset, let me say unequivocally that the motivating impulse behind the

resurrection of "hardbat" was not to give a home to sponge players to play a

modified sponge-light, 3-Ball, serve-intensive variation of the modern game sans

sponge.  Who in his right mind would SEEK to do that?

>

> Rather, the intent was to restore the classic game of table tennis to USATT

tournaments so its beauty, dialogue, and spectator appeal would not be lost, and

also to provide to players of the modern era, a peek into their rich heritage –

a heritage few modern players know about – to a world of table tennis when

spectator interest was at its peak and American table tennis players were truly

world-competitive.   The world where technique, not technology, was the focus of

the game.

>

> Contrary to what anyone may believe, the constant barrage of opinions,

observations, suggestions and insights in reference to the current hardbat game

that appear regularly on this forum bears little relationship to classic table

tennis as was played during The Golden Era, because at the elemental equipment

base-level, the current hardbat game incorporates elements of deceit, fraud and

deception made possible by the very nature of the modern hardbat rubbers, not

one of which existed prior to 1952.

>

> Most hardbat players of today, in reality, are playing and discussing a mutant

variation of the sport, being neither Classical nor Sponge. Just because the

modern rubber does not have an underlying sponge layer does not automatically

qualify it to parade under the banner of the classic game -- the game that was

played by Barna, Bergmann, Leach, Vana, Andreadis, Sido as well as everyone else

prior to the advent of sponge.  Have no illusions, today's hardbat game is not

the classic game by a longshot, yet that was its reason for being.

>

> A more apt description of the game as currently played should be Junk Hardbat.

It's certainly not Classic table tennis because the purity of that game was

based on utilization of spin for control, not befuddlement of the opponent.  Yet

this is a key element of Junk Hardbat -- and the selection of such rubber to

produce such havoc is indisputably a prime consideration of most of today's

hardbat players.

>

> Present-day hardbat rubbers, most particularly Dr Evil, Butterfly Ox, Hallmark

Magic Pips, Yasaka, Cobalt even the Reisman Classic, etc, despite what anyone

thinks, are capable of producing disturbing springiness and aberrational spins,

elements which have contaminated and undermined what we sought to resurrect,

bastardizing it in a manner having no relationship whatsoever to the classic

game as it was played with Leyland, Dunlop, and Slazenger coverings, and the

like.

>

> Regrettably, the table tennis game that was played during the Golden Era has

been so bent out of shape by the spin-oriented mentality of the longtime

spongers gravitating between sponge and hardbat that the art of the classic game

relating to strokes, technique, footwork and strategy is never even discussed as

it once was when its artistry and stroke-analysis were the topics of discussion

among neophytes and experts alike.

>

> As an unrepentant purist and foremost expert on the subject of Leyland, and

based upon my ability to assess the precise effect that respective junk rubbers

have on the ball, as well as my knowledge of having played the game for almost

70 years, I find these discussions by most posters on this forum to be totally

without merit – on a fool's errand really – as they attempt to analyze, compare

and decide on the best junk coverings that are currently being paraded as

classic rubbers but that are actually more closely related to a peanut butter

sandwich than to rubbers used in the Classic Era.

>

> The fact that we cannot any longer obtain Leyland rubber is no reason for

despair or a throwing up of hands.  With a revival of interest in table tennis

that seeks to level the playing field, a decent paddle with rubber conforming to

the playing characteristics of the Classic Era can be manufactured and

successfully marketed.  Had Killerspin sought classic expertise instead of

choosing to follow its own lights, such a paddle could already be in existence.

>

> In all my years as a player during the Classic Era, the effect of the rubber

was never a topic of discussion because none of the extreme outcome-influencing

products even existed.  The absurdity by some players, apparently bereft of

talent, to experimentally tamper with the modern rubbers to further increase

efficiency by sandpapering the pips or adding linen-backing to rubber sheeting

indicates a growing desire and a never-ending quest to bring even a greater 

degree of sponge insanity – and elements of chaos – into what is already only an

extremely poor remnant of the classic game.

>

> To those of you who are not tuned into the purity and the art of the genuine

game of the Classic Era – which, I suspect, is most of you (for reading books

and seeing a few newsreel clips is not the same as experiencing years of such

play) – who are hell-bent on finding and using the most effective rubbers

possible, all I can say is that it is just such a sponge-driven mentality that

has contributed to transforming my intent into a watered-down version of

pimples-out sponge, a far cry from my half-century-long ambition to resurrect

Classic table tennis with all its integrity.

>

> The inescapable fact is that most everyone here is playing, promoting,

discussing and analyzing a considerably butchered and bastardized version of the

game of the Golden Era, so let's not try to palm it off to the world, to each

other, to me and especially to generations to come, that this is Classic table

tennis, because it's not. When you see it played you'll know it.  So will

everyone on the planet.

>

> Reisman

>

Let's be realistic: classic table tennis, like it was played in the "Golden Era", is now dead and buried, and even if the ITTF had immediately banned the first sponge bats in the 50's, and that all players would still use hard rubbers nowadays, table tennis would have evolved in terms of material and technique, and become different compared to the 40's. That's the case of most (all?) sports during the passed 60 years, and table tennis wouldn't have escaped to that rule. So now, the reflexion that we must have is not how to get back to the real classic table tennis, but how to develop hardbat (junk or not) in the "Sponge Era".

USA chose to create a short list of authorised rubbers, to avoid the spiniest ones, and be as close as possible to the classic rubbers, but according to Marty, even these rubbers are very different from the Leyland or Barna, and no new rubber has been added to this list for a long time, even if a lot of other references would deserve to be. And anyway, even with that kind of material, most players use adapted "sponge skills" to play hardbat, rather than a classic style, because it's the way they learn to play.

Germany chose to play hardbat with the current table tennis rules (except the one concerning the rubbers of course), and authorises all short pips rubbers without sponge, even the spiniest ones. Matches are generally played in 11 points sets, and with 40 mm balls. In 2006, there were 554 players in the German hardbat ranking, and in 2008 and 2009, there were a few tournaments with more than 100 entries (140 this year in Sandershausen).

In France, we have no real rules for the moment, but what I notice is that, generally, matches are played in 21 points sets, and even if all short pips without sponge are authorised for the moment, people generally use the less spiny rubbers, like Dr Evil, BTY Orthodox, Reisman, Andro Classic… With our association, "Hardbat France", we have the project to propose to the clubs, who want to organize hardbat events, 5 different "tournament classes", going from the "US rules events" to the "everything is authorised" (well, not the sponge or long pips rubbers of course, but hard rubber, cork, sandpaper and even no covering at all  ), and even "everyone plays with the same model of bat". We'll see what people prefer.
In August 2008, when we created our French hardbat ranking, we were 300 players ranked, compiling the results of several tournaments I kept from 2004. In the next one, we'll be more than 700, and we hope to reach 1000 in August 2010.

In Belgium, it's the same as in France for the moment, and there will be for the first time a hardbat serie in an international table tennis tournament, in Ostend on next August 14.

So, considering all of that, I don't think that one of our countries holds the absolute truth, but maybe it would be time to start a general reflexion about the future of hardbat, instead of creating our own rules, everyone on its side.

(I hope that my English is clear enough for everybody  ).

--- In hardbat@yahoogroups.com, "Francis LEIBENGUTH" <francisdef54@...>

wrote:

>

>

> Let's be realistic: classic table tennis, like it was played in the

> "Golden Era", is now dead and buried, and even if the ITTF had

> immediately banned the first sponge bats in the 50's, and that all

> players would still use hard rubbers nowadays, table tennis would have

> evolved in terms of material and technique, and become different

> compared to the 40's. That's the case of most (all?) sports during the

> passed 60 years, and table tennis wouldn't have escaped to that

> rule. So now, the reflexion that we must have is not how to get back

to

> the real classic table tennis, but how to develop hardbat (junk or

not)

> in the "Sponge Era".

>

> USA chose to create a short list of authorised rubbers, to avoid the

> spiniest ones, and be as close as possible to the classic rubbers, but

> according to Marty, even these rubbers are very different from the

> Leyland or Barna, and no new rubber has been added to this list for a

> long time, even if a lot of other references would deserve to be. And

> anyway, even with that kind of material, most players use adapted

> "sponge skills" to play hardbat, rather than a classic style,

> because it's the way they learn to play.

>

> Germany chose to play hardbat with the current table tennis rules

> (except the one concerning the rubbers of course), and authorises all

> short pips rubbers without sponge, even the spiniest ones. Matches are

> generally played in 11 points sets, and with 40 mm balls. In 2006,

there

> were 554 players in the German hardbat ranking, and in 2008 and 2009,

> there were a few tournaments with more than 100 entries (140 this year

> in Sandershausen).

>

> In France, we have no real rules for the moment, but what I notice is

> that, generally, matches are played in 21 points sets, and even if all

> short pips without sponge are authorised for the moment, people

> generally use the less spiny rubbers, like Dr Evil, BTY Orthodox,

> Reisman, Andro Classic… With our association, "Hardbat

> France", we have the project to propose to the clubs, who want to

> organize hardbat events, 5 different "tournament classes", going

> from the "US rules events" to the "everything is

> authorised" (well, not the sponge or long pips rubbers of course,

> but hard rubber, cork, sandpaper and even no covering at all [:)] ),

> and even "everyone plays with the same model of bat". We'll

> see what people prefer.

> In August 2008, when we created our French hardbat ranking, we were

300

> players ranked, compiling the results of several tournaments I kept

from

> 2004. In the next one, we'll be more than 700, and we hope to reach

> 1000 in August 2010.

>

> In Belgium, it's the same as in France for the moment, and there

> will be for the first time a hardbat serie in an international table

> tennis tournament, in Ostend on next August 14.

>

> So, considering all of that, I don't think that one of our countries

> holds the absolute truth, but maybe it would be time to start a

general

> reflexion about the future of hardbat, instead of creating our own

> rules, everyone on its side.

>

> (I hope that my English is clear enough for everybody [;)] ).

>

now

All history is distorted.  Heck, we can't even keep the recent past straight.  A

case in point is Marty's characterization of my recent experiments with linen

backing on Dr Evil as an attempt to "increase efficiency" when the twice stated

purpose was to see if adding such a backing would make the rubber more like

Leyland.  His assessment of my lack of talent may be correct, but his assessment

of the intent of the experiment was quite wrong.



I don't know if the classic game is hopelessly lost or not.  My best estimate,

however, is that it won't arise naturally just because someone manages to

perfectly copy Leyland, Barna or Slazenger rubber and then standardize a game

based on that.  As others have said, there have been other influences and it

seems unlikely that players will naturally gravitate to a style of play that is

largely the same as the classic game. It would probably move in that direction,

but I doubt seriously that it would make it all the way.  There have been too

many other influences since 1959.



I think the only way you get back to the classic game as it was played in the

day is if the players purposefully make it a point to eschew those tactics,

serves and strokes that have been developed since.  You might be able to make

some rule changes about serves that would help, but implementing rules that

limit tactics and strokes is going to be more of a problem.



Getting back to copying Leyland or the other classic rubbers, I'm not at all

optimistic.  I've read that a lot of money was spent trying to develop the

Reisman rubbers, and Marty seems to think that attempt failed.  Perhaps an

attempt to do this again unfettered by the need to get ITTF approval would make

success more likely.



And success would be further enhanced if somebody has good technical information

on the formulation of the original Leyland or other rubbers.  The Leyland

company has reorganized and is now operational.  I wonder if information about

Leyland table tennis rubbers survived the reorganization and if they would be

willing to part with it.  I doubt they would be willing to produce a niche

product like table tennis rubber, but they might not mind getting a licensing

fee from some other company that wanted to produce it.



Events like the Hardbat Classic might make resurrecting a classic rubber more

viable also. But I don't think companies like Killerspin are likely to help

much.  Killerspin seemed to put a higher priority on getting three plastic

medallions built into the HBC-501B than in providing a decent blade to play

with.  I wonder if Marty has had a chance to play with a Killerspin HBC-1 or

HBC-501B?  Heck, a number of the HBC-501Bs warped - something that I understand

just doesn't happen with Bernie Hock's blades.



The name Killerspin should be a clue as to what to expect.  The fact that they

don't sell one OX rubber or even one "pips-out" rubber with sponge is another

clue.



I think Marty is quite right that the current hardbat play is not the same as

the play in the classic era.  Though at times I think we can catch a glimpse of

a shadow of that style of play in some matches.  If people want that classic

game revived, then I think a different approach than what has been employed to

date is quite obviously needed.  And that is not intended as a put-down of the

previous efforts.  I'm glad the efforts were made and applaud them.  That they

were made has enhanced my enjoyment in playing table tennis - even if my play is

a sadly mutated style executed in the absence of any talent.



Jay Turberville

www.jayandwanda.com



BTW, when I play at John's house, we have quite often discussed strokes and

tactics.  And even on this forum there was a recent discussion about books that

would properly teach classic table tennis strokes.  In fact, we were just

discussing the Miles forehand this afternoon - referencing the sketches in his

book, "The Game of Table Tennis". Go figure.

Has anyone taken a look at sandpaper? Never played with the stuff myself, but I

can't imagine one could load up too much spin with it.

Dan



Quoting Jay Turberville <jay@...>:



> All history is distorted.  Heck, we can't even keep the recent past straight.

>  A case in point is Marty's characterization of my recent experiments with

> linen backing on Dr Evil as an attempt to "increase efficiency" when the

> twice stated purpose was to see if adding such a backing would make the

> rubber more like Leyland.  His assessment of my lack of talent may be

> correct, but his assessment of the intent of the experiment was quite wrong.

>

> I don't know if the classic game is hopelessly lost or not.  My best

> estimate, however, is that it won't arise naturally just because someone

> manages to perfectly copy Leyland, Barna or Slazenger rubber and then

> standardize a game based on that.  As others have said, there have been other

> influences and it seems unlikely that players will naturally gravitate to a

> style of play that is largely the same as the classic game. It would probably

> move in that direction, but I doubt seriously that it would make it all the

> way.  There have been too many other influences since 1959.

>

> I think the only way you get back to the classic game as it was played in the

> day is if the players purposefully make it a point to eschew those tactics,

> serves and strokes that have been developed since.  You might be able to make

> some rule changes about serves that would help, but implementing rules that

> limit tactics and strokes is going to be more of a problem.

>

> Getting back to copying Leyland or the other classic rubbers, I'm not at all

> optimistic.  I've read that a lot of money was spent trying to develop the

> Reisman rubbers, and Marty seems to think that attempt failed.  Perhaps an

> attempt to do this again unfettered by the need to get ITTF approval would

> make success more likely.

>

> And success would be further enhanced if somebody has good technical

> information on the formulation of the original Leyland or other rubbers.  The

> Leyland company has reorganized and is now operational.  I wonder if

> information about Leyland table tennis rubbers survived the reorganization

> and if they would be willing to part with it.  I doubt they would be willing

> to produce a niche product like table tennis rubber, but they might not mind

> getting a licensing fee from some other company that wanted to produce it.

>

> Events like the Hardbat Classic might make resurrecting a classic rubber more

> viable also. But I don't think companies like Killerspin are likely to help

> much.  Killerspin seemed to put a higher priority on getting three plastic

> medallions built into the HBC-501B than in providing a decent blade to play

> with.  I wonder if Marty has had a chance to play with a Killerspin HBC-1 or

> HBC-501B?  Heck, a number of the HBC-501Bs warped - something that I

> understand just doesn't happen with Bernie Hock's blades.

>

> The name Killerspin should be a clue as to what to expect.  The fact that

> they don't sell one OX rubber or even one "pips-out" rubber with sponge is

> another clue.

>

> I think Marty is quite right that the current hardbat play is not the same as

> the play in the classic era.  Though at times I think we can catch a glimpse

> of a shadow of that style of play in some matches.  If people want that

> classic game revived, then I think a different approach than what has been

> employed to date is quite obviously needed.  And that is not intended as a

> put-down of the previous efforts.  I'm glad the efforts were made and applaud

> them.  That they were made has enhanced my enjoyment in playing table tennis

> - even if my play is a sadly mutated style executed in the absence of any

> talent.

>

> Jay Turberville

> www.jayandwanda.com

>

> BTW, when I play at John's house, we have quite often discussed strokes and

> tactics.  And even on this forum there was a recent discussion about books

> that would properly teach classic table tennis strokes.  In fact, we were

> just discussing the Miles forehand this afternoon - referencing the sketches

> in his book, "The Game of Table Tennis". Go figure.

>

>

>

> Has anyone taken a look at sandpaper?



It was banned from play a while back.  I've heard that some would like to see it

"legalized".



> Never played with the stuff myself, but I

> can't imagine one could load up too much spin with it.



I have.  You'd be surprised.... you can impart spin with it.  It does wreak

havoc on the ball from a physical standpoint.  Roughs up the surface

considrably... which of course, makes the aerodynamic properties of the ball

considerably different.



Actually... now that you mention it.. I recall playing with a bat that was

completely cast resin... with sanpaper faces and I'll be darned if I didn't see

them on Ebay just the other day....



Here's a couple listings (Ebay Item Numbers) it you're interested in a little

"comparison" shopping.



170344139271  (7 lots of 5 available!!!)



370225949236  @ 5.99.... a bargain!



300289774967  STIGA!!!!



And HERE THEY ARE!  UNISTRUCTURE and BUY 'em by the DOZEN gang!!



350218427629



Precisely as I remember the units from the 1970s.



So yeah... you can get them!  Seeing as they're not legal for official play, I'm

sure there are all shapes and manners of them.... and of course, one could

certainly ponder the different materials... not only for blade construction....

but for coverings.  80, 120, 220... grip paper.  Garnet paper?  Silicon Carbide?

Good olde fashioned SAND paper?



Could make for some interesting experimentation I'm sure.



BTW.. .the resin units... being resin.... not legal for hardbat play either. 

;-)



It is... and interesting topic, I assure you!



Cheers!



Larry "Boneman" Bone

Dingmans Ferry, PA

I don't know if any good sandpaper tt bats are currently being manufactured.  A

friend bought one on ebay that is offered there often, called a "Thunder".  It

is awful.  So light if feels like you have nothing in your hand, and so dead

that when you hit the ball it feels like the ball will just drop onto the floor.

I bought some vintage Parker Bros. sandpaper bats on ebay, and we had a lot of

fun with them at the last two nationals.  Jones Baldanado played with several of

us, and coached us on the liha rules...easy serve, easy return...and the 5 point

playoff if the score is 19 all.  He thought the Parker Bros. bats were too fast.

This July I gave him a vintage 3-ply Harvard bat with 400 grit wet/dry black

paper I put on it.  He liked it a lot.  When I asked him what kind of sandpapers

were used in liha table tennis, he said "anything".  So room to experiment here.

I think most of the modern bats are too light for sandpaper because they are

made to accomodate some heavy sponge coverings. A friend put 180 grit paper on a

heavy old 5 ply bat (unknown manufacturer) and loves it.  We play great games. 

Probably the best would be to find a large oval vintage bat that has "touch",

you can feel the impact of the ball easily and adjust to it, such as a Hock. Or

perhaps a Valor American Chopper, or a Yasaka sweeper, and try different papers.

Jones thought the 3-ply Harvard had a good touch, and he played very well with

the 400 grit black wet/dry paper.  I plan to make another one like it.



--- In hardbat@yahoogroups.com, "Larry Bone" <bonemanrides@...> wrote:

>

> > Has anyone taken a look at sandpaper?

>

> It was banned from play a while back.  I've heard that some would like to see

it "legalized".

>

> > Never played with the stuff myself, but I

> > can't imagine one could load up too much spin with it.

>

> I have.  You'd be surprised.... you can impart spin with it.  It does wreak

havoc on the ball from a physical standpoint.  Roughs up the surface

considrably... which of course, makes the aerodynamic properties of the ball

considerably different.

>

> Actually... now that you mention it.. I recall playing with a bat that was

completely cast resin... with sanpaper faces and I'll be darned if I didn't see

them on Ebay just the other day....

>

> Here's a couple listings (Ebay Item Numbers) it you're interested in a little

"comparison" shopping.

>

> 170344139271  (7 lots of 5 available!!!)

>

> 370225949236  @ 5.99.... a bargain!

>

> 300289774967  STIGA!!!!

>

> And HERE THEY ARE!  UNISTRUCTURE and BUY 'em by the DOZEN gang!!

>

> 350218427629

>

> Precisely as I remember the units from the 1970s.

>

> So yeah... you can get them!  Seeing as they're not legal for official play,

I'm sure there are all shapes and manners of them.... and of course, one could

certainly ponder the different materials... not only for blade construction....

but for coverings.  80, 120, 220... grip paper.  Garnet paper?  Silicon Carbide?

Good olde fashioned SAND paper?

>

> Could make for some interesting experimentation I'm sure.

>

> BTW.. .the resin units... being resin.... not legal for hardbat play either. 

;-)

>

> It is... and interesting topic, I assure you!

>

> Cheers!

>

> Larry "Boneman" Bone

> Dingmans Ferry, PA

>

Go back and search this board for the term "liha".

There is a big interest in sandpaper.  Here is a video

of a sandpaper championship in the Philippines:



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WXV8E4NzVrw



Rev.



--- In hardbat@yahoogroups.com, Dan Bullard-Sisken <dan@...> wrote:

>

> Has anyone taken a look at sandpaper? Never played with the stuff myself, but

I

> can't imagine one could load up too much spin with it.

> Dan

>

> Quoting Jay Turberville <jay@...>:

>

> > All history is distorted.  Heck, we can't even keep the recent past

straight.

> >  A case in point is Marty's characterization of my recent experiments with

> > linen backing on Dr Evil as an attempt to "increase efficiency" when the

> > twice stated purpose was to see if adding such a backing would make the

> > rubber more like Leyland.  His assessment of my lack of talent may be

> > correct, but his assessment of the intent of the experiment was quite wrong.

> >

> > I don't know if the classic game is hopelessly lost or not.  My best

> > estimate, however, is that it won't arise naturally just because someone

> > manages to perfectly copy Leyland, Barna or Slazenger rubber and then

> > standardize a game based on that.  As others have said, there have been

other

> > influences and it seems unlikely that players will naturally gravitate to a

> > style of play that is largely the same as the classic game. It would

probably

> > move in that direction, but I doubt seriously that it would make it all the

> > way.  There have been too many other influences since 1959.

> >

> > I think the only way you get back to the classic game as it was played in

the

> > day is if the players purposefully make it a point to eschew those tactics,

> > serves and strokes that have been developed since.  You might be able to

make

> > some rule changes about serves that would help, but implementing rules that

> > limit tactics and strokes is going to be more of a problem.

> >

> > Getting back to copying Leyland or the other classic rubbers, I'm not at all

> > optimistic.  I've read that a lot of money was spent trying to develop the

> > Reisman rubbers, and Marty seems to think that attempt failed.  Perhaps an

> > attempt to do this again unfettered by the need to get ITTF approval would

> > make success more likely.

> >

> > And success would be further enhanced if somebody has good technical

> > information on the formulation of the original Leyland or other rubbers. 

The

> > Leyland company has reorganized and is now operational.  I wonder if

> > information about Leyland table tennis rubbers survived the reorganization

> > and if they would be willing to part with it.  I doubt they would be willing

> > to produce a niche product like table tennis rubber, but they might not mind

> > getting a licensing fee from some other company that wanted to produce it.

> >

> > Events like the Hardbat Classic might make resurrecting a classic rubber

more

> > viable also. But I don't think companies like Killerspin are likely to help

> > much.  Killerspin seemed to put a higher priority on getting three plastic

> > medallions built into the HBC-501B than in providing a decent blade to play

> > with.  I wonder if Marty has had a chance to play with a Killerspin HBC-1 or

> > HBC-501B?  Heck, a number of the HBC-501Bs warped - something that I

> > understand just doesn't happen with Bernie Hock's blades.

> >

> > The name Killerspin should be a clue as to what to expect.  The fact that

> > they don't sell one OX rubber or even one "pips-out" rubber with sponge is

> > another clue.

> >

> > I think Marty is quite right that the current hardbat play is not the same

as

> > the play in the classic era.  Though at times I think we can catch a glimpse

> > of a shadow of that style of play in some matches.  If people want that

> > classic game revived, then I think a different approach than what has been

> > employed to date is quite obviously needed.  And that is not intended as a

> > put-down of the previous efforts.  I'm glad the efforts were made and

applaud

> > them.  That they were made has enhanced my enjoyment in playing table tennis

> > - even if my play is a sadly mutated style executed in the absence of any

> > talent.

> >

> > Jay Turberville

> > www.jayandwanda.com

> >

> > BTW, when I play at John's house, we have quite often discussed strokes and

> > tactics.  And even on this forum there was a recent discussion about books

> > that would properly teach classic table tennis strokes.  In fact, we were

> > just discussing the Miles forehand this afternoon - referencing the sketches

> > in his book, "The Game of Table Tennis". Go figure.

> >

> >

> >

>

And here's another one with Marty Reisman playing against Al Papp : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TcxKsmRTwcA

--- In hardbat@yahoogroups.com, "Reverend Gordon" <sgordon@...> wrote:
>
> Go back and search this board for the term "liha".
> There is a big interest in sandpaper. Here is a video
> of a sandpaper championship in the Philippines:
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WXV8E4NzVrw
>
> Rev.

gentlemen,



liha is played with 38 mm balls !

and  everything  will become  normal

you use big balls like  40  mm and it breaks easily

dont mixed liha with rubber or hardbat.

separate that pls. !



its a spinless game, - till you hands gets  so better then you produce some

degree of "magical"  moderate spins that  your opponent  thought  , thought  its

suppose to be  spinless game ahahah



let me tell you liha ---is the game !!!



move back history just a little bit more.



away with those super very  technical rules. we never have a problems  with that

for decades.



pete

philippines

---------------



see this exotic  liha racket  i donated to chuck hoey curator of ittf museum who

is also a "darn" lihador when he was young he said.



http://www.ittf.com/museum/donations.html











--- In hardbat@yahoogroups.com, "Francis LEIBENGUTH" <francisdef54@...> wrote:

>

>

> And here's another one with Marty Reisman playing against Al Papp :

> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TcxKsmRTwcA

> <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TcxKsmRTwcA>

>

>   [;)]

>

>

> --- In hardbat@yahoogroups.com, "Reverend Gordon" <sgordon@> wrote:

> >

> > Go back and search this board for the term "liha".

> > There is a big interest in sandpaper. Here is a video

> > of a sandpaper championship in the Philippines:

> >

> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WXV8E4NzVrw

> >

> > Rev.

>

Peter,

The sandpaper clip with Reisman and Papp

WAS played with 38mm balls!!



Scott



--- "kusangloob" <kusangloob@...> wrote:

> liha is played with 38 mm balls !

> and  everything  will become  normal

> you use big balls like  40  mm and it breaks easily

> dont mixed liha with rubber or hardbat.

> separate that pls. !

  I know scot! i did figured that  out, reisman youtube.the speed it was

gainning, i can see it.



but i was refering to some peole here who says , the liha racket  breaks the

ball easily. yes easy to break if you use  40

and also  becomes slow in speed.



      no we dont have any problem with that here breaking, for us its just a

normal wear and tear using that old type of ball ,we

never complain



        liha and even up to extend of using plain wood - we call it : "kahoy"

meaning wood  in tagalog. . all accepted  in a liha tournament.



   we never discussed any technicalities. . becsue  there is no spin

technicalities to discuss about. its just a a spinless game and yet exciting in

its unique ways.



pete



--- In hardbat@yahoogroups.com, "Reverend Gordon" <sgordon@...> wrote:

>

> Peter,

> The sandpaper clip with Reisman and Papp

> WAS played with 38mm balls!!

>

> Scott

>

> --- "kusangloob" <kusangloob@> wrote:

> > liha is played with 38 mm balls !

> > and  everything  will become  normal

> > you use big balls like  40  mm and it breaks easily

> > dont mixed liha with rubber or hardbat.

> > separate that pls. !

>

> Has anyone taken a look at sandpaper? Never played with the stuff myself, but

I

> can't imagine one could load up too much spin with it.



I just uploaded a PDF file of a 1902 patent, 703,519, on the application of

granular coatings for a table tennis racket.  The object being to improve on the

velum or plain wood racket.  Here is a brief excerpt, "The results produced by

my improved coating or covering for rackets are obvious.  It is apparent that

rackets provided with either will, on account of their rough surfaces, enable

the player to return the ball by a side cut of the racket and cause the ball to

rotate rapidly in its flight, so that when it stikes the table it will rebound

at an unexpected angle, to the confusion of his opponent.  .... Furthermore, in

rapid playing with a racket having a rough surface it takes a better "hold" so

to speak, of the ball, and consequently permits greater accuracy in delivering

the ball."



Spin and deception were the name of the game - even back in 1902.  :)



Jay Turberville

www.jayandwanda.com

Wallywood says :





Jones Baldanado played with several of

us, and coached us on the liha rules...easy serve, easy return...and the 5 point

playoff if the score is 19 all. He thought the Parker Bros. bats were too fast.

This July I gave him a vintage 3-ply Harvard bat with 400 grit wet/dry black

paper I put on it. He liked it a lot. When I asked him what kind of sandpapers

were used in liha table tennis, he said "anything". So room to experiment here.



= good old jones. I know him well even when we are teens – give my regards

whoever  see him again , tell him im trying to get in touch with him.



we never discuss racket technicalities about liha  papers

thats  why jones says: " anything" ahahahah

because  there is nothing there to discuss about.

As a matter of fact even if you use plain  bare wood nobody cares here

and can be included in our own liha tournament.



Its the techniques , footwork  strategies we usually discuss here.

Not "equipment "war. !

Thats  whats good with liha.



Hardbat , or sponge. Seems like a  room should be prepared  just to talk about 

these " equipment. "

Oh boy. !We are not use  to such discussion, I thiught  "equipment " war should

be  out or "spin war "is

set aside. and focus on technique.



   The " essence "of these – vintage game.  Drive and counter drives should be

more appropriate not "spin" war. if spin war is like ,then go to sponge playing.

a good line must  be drawn apart.



   thats why jones is so  vague to answer these things.

Ask any Filipino. They will answer you vaguely and wonder why people ask so much

"questions "

its  " simple tools " we use here.



Xxxxxxxxxxxxxx



beside jones look for certain filipino guy that was jsut recently able to get

there

his name is : Dario

good lihador from here.

but perhaps his english is not as good as jones.

dario will be around - youll see.



pete









--- In hardbat@yahoogroups.com, "Jay Turberville" <jay@...> wrote:

>

>

> > Has anyone taken a look at sandpaper? Never played with the stuff myself,

but I

> > can't imagine one could load up too much spin with it.

>

> I just uploaded a PDF file of a 1902 patent, 703,519, on the application of

granular coatings for a table tennis racket.  The object being to improve on the

velum or plain wood racket.  Here is a brief excerpt, "The results produced by

my improved coating or covering for rackets are obvious.  It is apparent that

rackets provided with either will, on account of their rough surfaces, enable

the player to return the ball by a side cut of the racket and cause the ball to

rotate rapidly in its flight, so that when it stikes the table it will rebound

at an unexpected angle, to the confusion of his opponent.  .... Furthermore, in

rapid playing with a racket having a rough surface it takes a better "hold" so

to speak, of the ball, and consequently permits greater accuracy in delivering

the ball."

>

> Spin and deception were the name of the game - even back in 1902.  :)

>

> Jay Turberville

> www.jayandwanda.com

>

Dario came to the Sacramento club last week!  But I didn't get to talk to him. 

If he stays in Sacramento I will definitely approach him about liha!



--- In hardbat@yahoogroups.com, "kusangloob" <kusangloob@...> wrote:

> beside jones look for certain filipino guy that was jsut recently able to get

there

> his name is : Dario

> good lihador from here.

scot,



tell dario  i told you about him ------- ahahah

im also looking for his email address



you didnt approach  him becasue   perhaps - you dont know !

and  dario dont know too.  whos who - new kid on the block.

but  just ask him who peter is.



show him the  liha- ultra 'card'



im sure he will be shock  with your name on it.  !  - hes in charge of the liha

event at that time.



another ultra liha will be on this  october. the 2nd one.



xxxxxxxx



come  to think of it. by the way. by the way....



where is mr.   mr. andy  abad ? im looking for him.

hes the real liha /kahoy  pioneer reaching you guys.

but  he told me ( close  to a teary  eyes , you guys want him to   sort of :

change his "pants'  ! so to speak.  ahahahah)



so should he  be advise  now NOT  to change his "pants"

(  to hardbat ) remain as is ,  and simply tell him to teach   you guys what 

you dont know about the filipino liha play.? i think this is  more positive isnt

it not?



pete









--- In hardbat@yahoogroups.com, "Reverend Gordon" <sgordon@...> wrote:

>

> Dario came to the Sacramento club last week!  But I didn't get to talk to him.

If he stays in Sacramento I will definitely approach him about liha!

>

> --- In hardbat@yahoogroups.com, "kusangloob" <kusangloob@> wrote:

> > beside jones look for certain filipino guy that was jsut recently able to

get there

> > his name is : Dario

> > good lihador from here.

>

--- In hardbat@yahoogroups.com, "Andy Abad Jr." <shaq95138@...> wrote:

>

> Pete,

>  

> I apologize for being out of circulation

= no porblem really mr. abad. glad you are okay



  as far as posting but I am now using Dr Evil  on my liha blade and playing semi

regularly as schedule permits.

= okay



I tried using liha paddle with my buddy the other day and was surprised the

difficulty of readjusting.

= i wonder why peole say, hardbat and liha is the same

  i mean  how ball -behaves.

  hardabt  still has more spin  war leaning closer more  to rubber than  liha





  Beleive me that I have been reading and following what is going on about our

group bu decided to watch from the sideline.

= okay

>  

> It is not that I am giving up on liha but in order just to be able to play I

have to use ITTF or USTT approved rubber

= i undersatnd.



although I still do encounter players that tell me that a hardbat paddle is

still illegal which I blame them for their ignorance.

= you  you encounter both

some ignorant peole  say hardbat is  "illegal"

so is sandpaper- well this is true.

>  

> As I mentioned before I am more of recreational than tournament type but

stilll enjoy the rush of the game...

= okay



  It has been awhile since I officially played with liha against liha but

remember fondly the easy serve/easy return rule where the server is basically

the attacker and the receiver can do counter attack to turn the table.

= yap



  To me that evens out the playing field where victory will be determined by

plain skills although deception is still the name of the game regardless of spin

capabilities.

= deception 'name of the game 'is decrease.

  for exmaple the serve alone , if you dont like it throw it back.



in the middle of the game if you "read "the ball wrongly its either your ball go

straight to the net or out.

but how you play with balls  prodcue by liha , that is generally ,spinless,

"soft" in feel , is entirely another kind of ballgame.   and ball science.



for whatever reasons, the bottomline is that : for some reasons , i sweat more

in liha ,becasue  of those drives and rallies  ,  smiles more ! very rhythematic

/'aerobical', similar to  "holding  a stick by the director" in an orchestra. 

without the usual aches and pain in the arm done by playing   "erratic"  

sponge.  and i can almost play everybday becasue of that. . same too with most 

grandfather  here who are 80 years  of age. and yet enthusiastic of playing this

type  of vintage pingpong. .



best,

pete

>  

> Cheers,

>  

> Andy Abad

> --- On Sat, 7/18/09, kusangloob <kusangloob@...> wrote:

>

>

> From: kusangloob <kusangloob@...>

> Subject: Sandpaper??? Re: [hardbat] Re: Historical Distortion

> To: hardbat@yahoogroups.com

> Date: Saturday, July 18, 2009, 5:33 AM

>

>

>  

>

>

>

> scot,

>

> tell dario i told you about him ------- ahahah

> im also looking for his email address

>

> you didnt approach him becasue perhaps - you dont know !

> and dario dont know too. whos who - new kid on the block.

> but just ask him who peter is.

>

> show him the liha- ultra 'card'

>

> im sure he will be shock with your name on it. ! - hes in charge of the liha

event at that time.

>

> another ultra liha will be on this october. the 2nd one.

>

> xxxxxxxx

>

> come to think of it. by the way. by the way....

>

> where is mr. mr. andy abad ? im looking for him.

> hes the real liha /kahoy pioneer reaching you guys.

> but he told me ( close to a teary eyes , you guys want him to sort of : change

his "pants' ! so to speak. ahahahah)

>

> so should he be advise now NOT to change his "pants"

> ( to hardbat ) remain as is , and simply tell him to teach you guys what you

dont know about the filipino liha play.? i think this is more positive isnt it

not?

>

> pete

>

> --- In hardbat@yahoogroups .com, "Reverend Gordon" <sgordon@ > wrote:

> >

> > Dario came to the Sacramento club last week! But I didn't get to talk to

him. If he stays in Sacramento I will definitely approach him about liha!

> >

> > --- In hardbat@yahoogroups .com, "kusangloob" <kusangloob@ > wrote:

> > > beside jones look for certain filipino guy that was jsut recently able to

get there

> > > his name is : Dario

> > > good lihador from here.

> >

>

--- In hardbat@yahoogroups.com, "martyreisman" <martyreisman@...> wrote:

>

> I have watched in silence as the posts on this site go endlessly over

technological and other extraneous issues which the posters seem to believe have

some relevance to the game we played in the Classic Era ... the game that we

tried to resurrect under the banner of "hardbat".  But it is past time that I

spoke up … and so, in this and subsequent postings I intend to address some of

these controversies.

>

> At the outset, let me say unequivocally that the motivating impulse behind the

resurrection of "hardbat" was not to give a home to sponge players to play a

modified sponge-light, 3-Ball, serve-intensive variation of the modern game sans

sponge.  Who in his right mind would SEEK to do that?

>

> Rather, the intent was to restore the classic game of table tennis to USATT

tournaments so its beauty, dialogue, and spectator appeal would not be lost, and

also to provide to players of the modern era, a peek into their rich heritage –

a heritage few modern players know about – to a world of table tennis when

spectator interest was at its peak and American table tennis players were truly

world-competitive.   The world where technique, not technology, was the focus of

the game.

>

> Contrary to what anyone may believe, the constant barrage of opinions,

observations, suggestions and insights in reference to the current hardbat game

that appear regularly on this forum bears little relationship to classic table

tennis as was played during The Golden Era, because at the elemental equipment

base-level, the current hardbat game incorporates elements of deceit, fraud and

deception made possible by the very nature of the modern hardbat rubbers, not

one of which existed prior to 1952.

>

> Most hardbat players of today, in reality, are playing and discussing a mutant

variation of the sport, being neither Classical nor Sponge. Just because the

modern rubber does not have an underlying sponge layer does not automatically

qualify it to parade under the banner of the classic game -- the game that was

played by Barna, Bergmann, Leach, Vana, Andreadis, Sido as well as everyone else

prior to the advent of sponge.  Have no illusions, today's hardbat game is not

the classic game by a longshot, yet that was its reason for being.

>

> A more apt description of the game as currently played should be Junk Hardbat.

It's certainly not Classic table tennis because the purity of that game was

based on utilization of spin for control, not befuddlement of the opponent.  Yet

this is a key element of Junk Hardbat -- and the selection of such rubber to

produce such havoc is indisputably a prime consideration of most of today's

hardbat players.

>

> Present-day hardbat rubbers, most particularly Dr Evil, Butterfly Ox, Hallmark

Magic Pips, Yasaka, Cobalt even the Reisman Classic, etc, despite what anyone

thinks, are capable of producing disturbing springiness and aberrational spins,

elements which have contaminated and undermined what we sought to resurrect,

bastardizing it in a manner having no relationship whatsoever to the classic

game as it was played with Leyland, Dunlop, and Slazenger coverings, and the

like.

>

> Regrettably, the table tennis game that was played during the Golden Era has

been so bent out of shape by the spin-oriented mentality of the longtime

spongers gravitating between sponge and hardbat that the art of the classic game

relating to strokes, technique, footwork and strategy is never even discussed as

it once was when its artistry and stroke-analysis were the topics of discussion

among neophytes and experts alike.

>

> As an unrepentant purist and foremost expert on the subject of Leyland, and

based upon my ability to assess the precise effect that respective junk rubbers

have on the ball, as well as my knowledge of having played the game for almost

70 years, I find these discussions by most posters on this forum to be totally

without merit – on a fool's errand really – as they attempt to analyze, compare

and decide on the best junk coverings that are currently being paraded as

classic rubbers but that are actually more closely related to a peanut butter

sandwich than to rubbers used in the Classic Era.

>

> The fact that we cannot any longer obtain Leyland rubber is no reason for

despair or a throwing up of hands.  With a revival of interest in table tennis

that seeks to level the playing field, a decent paddle with rubber conforming to

the playing characteristics of the Classic Era can be manufactured and

successfully marketed.  Had Killerspin sought classic expertise instead of

choosing to follow its own lights, such a paddle could already be in existence.

>

> In all my years as a player during the Classic Era, the effect of the rubber

was never a topic of discussion because none of the extreme outcome-influencing

products even existed.  The absurdity by some players, apparently bereft of

talent, to experimentally tamper with the modern rubbers to further increase

efficiency by sandpapering the pips or adding linen-backing to rubber sheeting

indicates a growing desire and a never-ending quest to bring even a greater 

degree of sponge insanity – and elements of chaos – into what is already only an

extremely poor remnant of the classic game.

>

> To those of you who are not tuned into the purity and the art of the genuine

game of the Classic Era – which, I suspect, is most of you (for reading books

and seeing a few newsreel clips is not the same as experiencing years of such

play) – who are hell-bent on finding and using the most effective rubbers

possible, all I can say is that it is just such a sponge-driven mentality that

has contributed to transforming my intent into a watered-down version of

pimples-out sponge, a far cry from my half-century-long ambition to resurrect

Classic table tennis with all its integrity.

>

> The inescapable fact is that most everyone here is playing, promoting,

discussing and analyzing a considerably butchered and bastardized version of the

game of the Golden Era, so let's not try to palm it off to the world, to each

other, to me and especially to generations to come, that this is Classic table

tennis, because it's not. When you see it played you'll know it.  So will

everyone on the planet.

>

> Reisman

>



Hi Marty,



This is a post, written as a response to an eloquent post mourning the demise of

the classic game both with respect to table tennis and tennis, made by a poster

under the internet name of gmstarguy.  It is pasted from about com, and as the

last living player of that era who can still play beautifully, I'd be interested

in your response, should you choose to make one, to it. Here it is.



A very eloquent and astutely written post.  I believe you captured the essence

of what Marty was trying to point out, and as one who learned his table tennis

at the twilight of the hard rubber era in America, and as a tennis player as

well, I mourn the loss of the beautifully balanced Hocks, MacCrossens, Barnas,

Slazengers, and Dr. Simon hard rubber rackets and Davis Imperial tennis rackets

with their exquisitely laminated wood that made music if you were musician

enough to use them.



I sometimes think, gmstarguy, as a musician (pianist, folk guitarist and

vocalist) who supported the Early Music in Columbus programs in the mid 1990s,

that classic table tennis could be treated in the same manner.  After all, Paul

O'Dette, the best lutenist of our day, could not possibly have taken lessions

from John Dowland, the best lutenist of Shakespear's day.  But, as with early

music, there is enough material in terms of films, film clips, and even

instructional videos (Barna made one in the 1940s), to illustrate the classic

game as it was played and although virutally no one save for Reisman, his

disciple Scott Gordon, and Steve Berger, and myself, as I plan to switch back to

the classic style a la Reisman from my Wang Hao hardbat game, can teach

aspirants how to play classically.



All is not utterly lost, however.  The Bud Light tournament, an excellent idea

though not without flaws, gave the best modern American players and classicists

such as Berger a chance to strut their stuff.  Wayne Overtone, a classic player

from the 1950s and at 73 still a fine player and a finalist at the Bud Light,

exemplified the classic game as I had known it, seen it, and played it.  This

tournament, using hardbats only (i.e. Killerspin hardbats), will doubtless

return, be shown on ESPN2 September 27, and might possibly revive an interest in

table tennis as it was once played and to a lesser extent as the best barroom

players still play it.  Stay tuned for further developments.



Berndt Mann