PD

Back to Home Page

Pip Design Parameters & Playing Characteristics

This article discusses what the various pip design paraeters & related variant are & how each of them affect the actual usage during play in a table tennis match

For this analysis, to keep it simple explain the effect of varying each parameter for me keeping all other parameters the same

However in reality the overall behavior of the pips is usually determined by a combination of 2 or 3 parameters which may be dominant. Or in some cases a single parameter may the most dominant. Another parameter (or few parameters) second dominant etc etc

Please also view the following in the context of the current 40+ plastic ball ONLY era & the 11 rule & regulations changes since 1983 by ITTF to partially or fully limit and reduce the capabilities of choppers & block defenders

1. Pip Height (aka pip length)
ITTF Rule 2.4.3.2 defines maximum pip length allowed as 2.0 mm
ITTF Tech Leaflet T4 Item B-2 sets minimum pip length at 1.0 mm
Longer pips can produce more spin, mostly back spin & side spin via spin amplification only (long pips cannot generate lot of spin on its own). Interestingly, the longer the pips, lesser the top spin produced.

The lower the pip length the higher the speed.,
The longer the pip, lower the speed

The biggest problem with pip length for pips deceptively listed on ITTF LARC as long is that , though the ball size has increased from 38 mm to 40 mm, there was no corresponding increase in pip length needed to retain the same (back) spin
So in effect the ability to produce more spin (back spin & side spin) has been significantly reduced after 2000, when ball size was increased from 38 mm to 40- mm

Minimum pip length is mostly relevant for short pips rubbers because if you want the maximum speed you want the lowest pip length,  Some well known short pips rubbers have been caught violating this lower limit.

2. Pip diameter (aka pip width)
ITTF Tech Leaflet T4 Item B-2 sets maximum pip diameter as 2.2 mm (measured at the top or tip)
ITTF Tech Leaflet T4 Item B-2 sets minimum pip diameter (measured at the tip of pips) at 1.0 mm
Most pips are probably cylinderical with a few as trepezoidal cylinder (with diameter at top less than at the base)  There seems to be no maximum value set at the base of the pips

The lower the diameter , the more the spin & lesser the speed
The higher the diameter, the lesser the spin & higher the speed.

With pip length limit set at 2.0 mm (actually 1.7 mm if you make allowance for base of rubber & glue)

So an aspect ratio of 1.3 (before 1999) & pip length of 1.7 mm gives a pip width of 1.7 divided by 1.3 = 1.31 mm

An aspect ratio of 1.1 (after 1998) & but same pip length of 1.7 mm gives a pip width of 1.7 divided by 1.1 = 1.55 mm  and what this means is that , you get less back spin (since 1.55 mm is greater than 1.31 mm).

3. AR (Aspect Ratio) (Height divided by diameter)
Higher the AR , the more the back spin.
When ITTF reduced the AR from 1.3 to 1.1 in 1998, what really happened was that though since the maximum allowed pip height was still kept at the same at 2.0 mm, the drop in Aspect Ratio from 1.3 to 1.1 reduced the spin producing capability.
Pip diameter would be 2.0 divided by 1.3 = 1.538 mm before 1999
Pip diameter would be 2.0 divided by 1.1 = 1.818 mm after 1998
So an increase in minimum diameter required to keep the maximum allowed pip height at 2.0 mm causes a decrease ability to produce spin.
BTW the actual maximum possible pip height is only about 1.7 mm to 1.8 mm because the maximum allowed pip height includes the base of the rubber as well the glue

4. PDD (Pip Distribution Density)

Higher the PDD , higher the spin & lower the speed, higher the control

Lower the PDD , lower the spin & higher the speed , lesser the control.

ITTF lowered the PDD in 2004 from 50 pips per sq.cm down to 30 pips per sq.cm (a whopping 40% drop) to further reduce the back spin capabilities of defenders because ITTF concluded that the 1998 Durban Aspect Ratio Reduction Massacre & the 2000 introduction of the 40- ball was not doing the job enough. ITTF diverted the focus by misleading everyone that this only effect the top spin for player like Liu Guo Liang. Liu Guo Liang played along though by 2004 his career was over and he had his eye on the future (Head Coach of Men’s Team & now ITTF Deputy President LOL). Same story as 40- ball which ITTF claimed will slow the sport down for better TV viewing though they knew full well the manufacturers will come up with faster rackets in an year or two to return the speeds back to 38 ball levels & top spins as well with spin glues and now boosters both undergo near 0% chemical testing for harmful chemicals. This of course cleverly masked the real reason that defenders lost more backspin as there were no improved rackets for backspin players to this day, despite another devastating setback for defenders with the 40+ plastic ball in 2014 & the plastic ball ONLY ruling of 2022.      

5. Pip flexibility / stiffness

Stiffer pips (as were traditional short pips) give less spin, more speed & less control.

More flexible pips (traditionally only with slim pips) will in general give more spin, less speed, less control & more deception.

Neo Short pips (or fake short pips) designs are made to imitate  pips kisted as short on ITTF LARC to behave like pips listed as long on ITTF LARC by making them more flexible & to sell more rubber claiming that an amateur can get as much spin & variations just like Ding Song or Hou YingChao, though fact remains that these two were close to the top despite using short pips (instead of long pips) & not because of it as is the case with Mima Ito , who is not playing upto her full potential like Deng Yaping. These neo short pips are also known as social rubbers as opposed to  functional rubbers, because lots of players (including a lot of Japanese pro players) use these rubbers more for social acceptance & not suffer the wrath & disapproval of from winged inverted (spoosted) loopers who control the ITTF & are also majority of players in tabletennis.

 
6. Pip top & side smoothness / roughness / friction

Smoother pip top & sides gives lesser spin & less control but more deception.  The smoother (or glassy) the pips, the more frictionless is the rubber

Rougher pip top & sides gives more spin & more control & less deception.

There is a huge myth that the opposite is true mostly because of Tibhar Grass Dec & its success across the board. Yes Dtec can give more spin regardless of smooth top but it definitely is NOT due to glassy pip tops but is more due to other pips design parameters such as pips being more flexible almost as much as the TSP P1 Curl (the given excuse by ITTF for 1998 Durban Aspect Ratio Reduction Massacre)  & pip material also probably similar to TSP P1 Curl. And its pips alignment is also horizontal , which is a chopper design & not a blocking design & this is why Dtec is more of an all round rubber & neither blocking nor chopping though it works much better blocking mode than in chopping mode & Giant Dragon’s Dragon Talon is almost identical.

You can understand this better if you compare the glassy pip top to a glassy anti rubber. A glassy rubber will give the least spin & most deception. Same with a glassy pip top long pip.

Compare this to the banned Butter Feint Long Classic  (probably the greatest chopper rubber of all time used by almost all choppers before ITTF in its infinite wisdom banned it using TSP P1 Curl as an excuse with the 1998 Durban Aspect Ratio Reduction massacre…..this is why it is names “massacre”) or even the Feint Long 2 which was useless in the 40- celluloid era or the Feint Long 3 which are totally useless in the 40+ plastic ball ONLY era.

What do these 3 rubbers (Feint Long Classic , 2 & 3)  have  in common ? They have rougher pip tops & relatively slightly stiffer pips compared to Tibhar Dtec resulting in more control & more backspin & less deception & this is exactly why all the top choppers use Feint Long 3 & blockers use Dtec. These highest level choppers use Feint Long  for more control & more backspin & therefore definitely not for more deception or think they can trick the likes of Waldner or Ma Long with more deception.  Sure the real GOAT of all of tabletennis Joo Sae Hyuk did try Dtec & Curl P1R in desperation (after first using Feint Long 3 very early on including his finals loss at Paris WITTC 2003  ) without seemingly not understanding the real reason for losing so many close matches at the highest level , which is lowered Aspect Ratio & PDD & pip length not increasing for the 40 ball.

So the myth that frictionless pips such as Dtec gives more spin than Feint Long is pure nonsense

7. Geometric shape of the pips

Most pips seem cylindrical but there had been some designs with lower diameter at the base than top or mushroom pips to increase deception. In this context , strangely the most successful rubber at pro highest levels was in the 38 ball era &  was a medium pips rubber made by Butterfly called Magnitude, which had smaller diameter pips sitting on top of larger diameter pips at the base Was used by both at the table all round hitters & also by all round choppers. Butterfly Magnitude rubber’s classification seems to have changed so many times on ITTF LARC. First it was Long , then out (short) then long again & now out again on July 2023 LARC LOL. Yung 63-9A was a mushroom pips design rubber supposedly used by Deng Yaping before her switching to RITC 755

8. Pip alignment

Horizontal pips alignment is generally from away from the table choppers

Vertical pips alignment is generally for close to the table blockers   

9. Material content (chemical composition) of the rubber

This can affect the stiffness or flexibility of the pips

10. Base thickness

Thicker base gives slightly more speed & less spin
11. Sponge hardness

Harder sponge will give more speed and less spin

Softer sponge will give lesser speed and more spin

12. Sponge thickness

Thicker sponge will give more speed and less spin

Thinner sponge will give lesser speed and more spin

 

13. Blade composition

Blade composition can significantly impact racket behavior but this is a huge subject in itself to be explored here

 

14. Illegal spoosting / spin gluing (of the sponge)

Illegal spoosting / spin gluing (of the sponge) will slightly increase spin & speed

Note :- spoosting = spin boosting

15. Unapproved treatment of pips

Primarily used to increase deception. Not recommended since you can always find a good non-treated equivalent.

16. OX vs sponge

OX sponge gives lot more variation & more control for players below about rating of 2200. Players above 2200 need thicker sponge to prevent the ball from getting into the wood and shooting off due to the much heavier incoming (spoosted) top spins. If you are a player below 2200 , you are really defeating the very purpose of using long pips if you are using sponge because the sponge significantly offsets the advantages of long pips even if you are using the perfect blade. On the other hand for players at above 2200 level, not using sponge may not only result in loss of backspin but also loss of points with balls shooting off the wood.  

17. Ball size

Increase in ball size has decreased both spin & speed for long pips users speeds and spins have been returned to 38 mm ball levels for attacking spinny inverted users two or three years after 2003
18. Ball material (Chemical composition)

Plastic ball can produce less (back) spin for long pips users (there is no corresponding or offsetting decrease on the top spin end of the spin continuum however)

Back to Home Page