Shouldn’t the Houston 2021 World Championships be cancelled  ?

 

One of my friend’s aunt’s niece asked me to post the following . She said as follows :-

=========== ===== ======== ======= 

         IMHO USATT Board of Directors & CEO Virginia Sung, have the legal, moral & ethical obligation to notify the mayor of Houston & Governor of Texas  to have the World Championships to be cancelled on November 2021.

              Obviously if it is not important for a defensive player like Virginia Sung to have the  Durban Aspect Ratio 1998 repealed as well have the Aspect Ratio increased to proper value to compensate for later developments after 1998, then one would also think at least she has the decency to properly advise the Houston mayor of the possible health issues involved with table-tennis related to lungs (cancers & tumors) if there are (or were after 1995) any, especially in the context of the sad current ongoing pandemic related to lungs. Because it would not be fair to the city of Houston, state of Texas & its fine people to spend their taxpayer money on a celebration only to realize later after July how wrong it was to have wasted money on a wrong venture without fully investigating all the facts about the darkside of table-tennis. This information is made public so that City of Houston can make the right decision as soon as possible without spending any of taxpayer’s money and later realize it was a waste. I could have easily waited till July,2021 to bring this issue up during another matter but I do not want this on my conscience.

Yes as an American I have to say it would be really really great to have the first World Championships on US soil & I am not trying to ruin Houston’s party. But the secret Durban Aspect Ratio regulation of 1998 is an egregious civil rights violation (at least in USA) robbing the defensive players of a level playing field (by not providing an equal & fair access to the sport) purely for political reasons but with zero technical merit, especially in the context of further rule / regulation changes that followed, to further oppress defensive styles. Get mad at me all you want but two can play the game, and Virginia Sung & USATT & USOPC have a  legal, moral and ethical obligation to do what is right and advise the mayor of Houston & the Governor of Texas honestly about all the risks involved, if any.

     And I am not suggesting Houston or any other US city should not to host this event next year or so when the pandemic is hopefully over & ITTF had sorted out their health & civil right violations issues, but I see no need to rush the event in 2021 in Houston (or any other city in the world for that matter).  City of Houston may also want to consider the simple fact that table-tennis is not a major sport in the USA and it is not worth taking this risk due to multiple risks involved

          All I am saying is that, even if there are (or had been in the past after 1995) zero lung related health issues related to table-tennis, the city of Houston & State of Texas must carefully evaluate this situation & associated risks in the context of the current pandemic and a second wave with or without COVID-19 variants, as it is sadly happening in some other countries.

     There are at least 4 known table-tennis players / coaches that died from lung cancer. All these four were active before 1995 or shortly thereafter. I am by no means suggesting conclusively or remotely that any table-tennis issues caused these deaths but I can only evaluate them for myself mostly based on what Dr. Rufford Harrison (then chairperson of the ITTF equipment committee) said in 1995, when he implemented the Speed-Glue Ban due to extreme health concerns & but then quickly repealed it submitting to robotNazi threats & extortion to keep his job. I will have to especially think about the second-hand effects of  supposedly banned substances that used to be called speed-glues (I think they go by a different name like boosters now to circumvent the fake speed-glue ban of 2008).  You cannot blame me if I wonder how many more (100s ? 1000s ?) such deaths or just illnesses are unknown or swept under the rug and how many were first hand and how many were second hand or if this is still an issue in table-tennis, how could COVID-19’s variants can compound it ? Call me a conspiracy theory nut all you want but simple fact remains that lung cancer is lung related & COVID is lung related and need I say more ? And you cannot blame me if I wonder what the compounding effect of two issues can be. How many deaths is too many ?  Is ITTF &  USATT &  city of Houston willing to accept a minimum sacrifice as collateral damage 

           Eberhard Scholer, an equipment peddler, should never ever have been, of all places, a member of the ITTF Equipment Committee. If  that is not a monumental conflict of interest, I do not know what is

 

IMHO   Houston World Table Tennis Championships, November 2021 must be cancelled as early as possible in the context of issues explained above related to the pandemic.”

 

I wish Virginia Sung (other defenders from before 1998, such as Koji Matsushita, Hiroshi Shibutani, Li GunSang, Chen Xinhua, BK ArunKumar, Derek May, Thomas Norberg, Aliison Holt, Lisa Lomas, Jill Hammersley Parker, Gregg Letts etc etcgrow some spine &  do the right thing for once in your life,  like Matt Syed, (John) Prean & Jorg Rosskopf (at 2018-WVC) have already spoken publicly. Almost all above defenders were Butterfly Feint Long (outlawed AR 1.3 version) users and yet Butterfly stood by and did nothing as did TSP, who were being punished for a handful of users modifying them. Maybe all the facts were not out then but now that we know the truth, it is time now for any defensive player with spine & an ounce of self-respect, to start boycotting Butterfly, TSP and Victas (Koji Matsushita) , Dr.Neubauer & any such manufacturer,  if they refuse to stand with the defensive players and demand the ITTF to act on the Aspect Ratio issue. If you do publicly speak out , it would probably take like 5 minutes to at least repeal the Aspect Ratio Regulation of 1998, (this even despite the ITTF being totally controlled by the booster sucking robotNazis), if not adjust up to at least 1.5 if not the fair 1.7. Keep in mind that this author is not asking for an increase in unpredictability, but just only asking for ITTF to give back the repeatedly stolen back-spin, since 1998, over & over and compensate for  the 40 ball of 2000, pip density regulation of 2003  & 40+ plastic ball of 2013 thereafter not to mention the health thingy.  Eberhard Scholer had managed to fool the table-tennis world for 23 years into believing that that Aspect Ratio change is not political but is based on technical merits & that aspect ratio is the sole parameter that determines unpredictability, whereas truth is far from that, as was demonstrated by Dr.Neubauer between 1998 & 2008. Truth is that it is possible to design long-pips rubbers with much higher Aspect Ratios before 1998 but with very low unpredictability (5 or 6 parameters of long-pips control unpredictability. Aspect Ratio is neither the sole nor dominant parameter). The paranoia just lies in the heads of robotNazis. (Of course I don’t expect the defensive player Eberhard Scholer to admit any guilt as I cannot expect of Adham Sharara, the former ITTF strongman, who was later convicted by ITTF for fraud and another defensive player). Your shameless silence & apathy is only hurting the sport.

 

Of course Virginia Sung, a defensive player herself, if she wants to do the ethical thing (and not be like the sell outs Eberhard ScholerAdham Sharara, Gregg Letts etc etc), could very easily submit a proposal to the ITTF equipment committee via Kagin Lee & request a regulation change (as was done secretly in Durban in 1998),  for the proper adjustment of the Aspect Ratio to 1.5 (if not a fair 1.7 if reparation payment for past 38 year defensive player abuse that started in 1983 is included) to reflect for current conditions & changes after 1998,  or even better, request the complete elimination of fraudulently mandating the Aspect Ratio as the sole determinant of unpredictability.  Though events between 1998 & 2008 regarding long-pips are convincing proof of this, since the ITTF executive committee is probably majority robotNazis, I will be shocked if such a regulation change could happen & Virginia Sung is probably better off (for her selfish reasons) continuing to kiss up to the robotNazis.

               Oh BTW,  Ma Long is not the GOAT. Joo Sehyuk & Waldner are the real GOATs.  Of course all robotNazis think I am crazy and start false rumors that I am anti-Chinese. I never question that Chinese are the very best. But for those who are open-minded, please go back and look at videos of 7 game match between Kong Ling Hui & Joo Sehyuk & many very very close matches between Ma Long & Joo Sehyuk. Now visualize the same matches with Joo Sehyuk using a just 1.3 Aspect Ratio (not even 1.5 Aspect Ratio, for 2003 conditions) long-pips Rubber (not even subtracting for boosters & speed-glues allegedly used by Ma Long or Kong). Joo Sehyuk would decimate Kong Linghui & Ma Long (&  Schlager in 2003). If Waldner & Joo Sehyuk met in their prime it would be a toss-up & that is why I think they are the GOATs..   But of course the robotNazis would like to keep the defenders as the case of “always the bridesmaid and never the bride” or “fourth-class citizens (given that short pips users are second class & anti users are third class)” or “doormats” of the table-tennis cesspool & the spin(e)less cowards gladly accept it.  Additionally, booster will always be an asterisk on Ma Long.  Keep in mind that Lance Armstrong, Marion Jones & few others were busted well after their alleged cheating winning ways.

      In fact I would like to invite Ma Long to a challenge match against Joo Sehyuk today (May 2021), with Ma Long using his usual boosted racket & Joo Sehyuk (with his age & health issues) using Feint Long Classic. Joo Sehyuk should win in 6 or 7 games.  If Joo Sehyuk used the Dawei 388D like large pimple racket (suitable for the 40+ plastic ball & a fair level playing field) , Joo Sehyuk should easily win in 4 straight games. But I doubt very much that Ma Long would accept this challenge.   

     In all fairness players like Ma Lin or Alexander Shibaev may always beat Joo Sehyuk head-to-head but overall Joo Sehyuk would undoubtedly have been #1 in his prime in a level fair playing field.

    I always hear pure nonsense like ‘What the hell, it is only 0.2 change in Aspect Ratio . What is the big bloody deal ? A good player can play with any racket”. My question to them then simply is  “OK if that is the case why not stop using unhealthy boosters / speed-glues & reduce the maximum sponge thickness to a fair value of 1.7 mm (Especially if ITTF is honest about its supposed craving for longer rallies & slowing down the sport) . Do you accept that ?”  What most table-tennis players (even advanced) don’t seem to understand is the fact that microscopic changes you make to you racket can greatly effect your performance (comparing two competitive players at the about the same skill level not comparing a pro player to a beginner). Try playing with a straight handle if you use a flared handle. Or try taping your handle 1 wrap instead of your usual 3 wraps. This is true in many sports but in table-tennis, it is even more important. 

           I am by no means suggesting that 50% of table-tennis must be defensive long pips players or even all pips / anti players. That is pure rubbish. All I’m saying is that robotNazis (using the ITTF)  must stop stealing the back-spin again & again from spin(e)less cowards while enhancing their top-spin with criminal means. But as long as the spin(e)less cowards continue not to speak up loud & clear (as robotNazis did in 1995 to quickly repeal the speed-glue ban) but continue to accept the endless abuses by robotNazi controlled ITTF, by changing rules (and cleverly passing them as regulations when they cannot change the rules), these problems will never end. The most dominant element of  table-tennis that distinguishes it from other sports is spin. Yet ITTF continues to find ways to remove spin from table-tennis desperately trying to make it look like tennis or pickle-ball etc with moronic concepts such as the 40 mm ball or worse a totally new sport called TTX. 

     ITTF continues to whine daily about how they need to find ways to make the sport exciting for spectators (with longer rallies and slowing down the sport) but only constantly invents ways to continue the extermination of defensive styles. While most matches between two attackers even at highest levels are usually a third-ball comedy of errors (with very little for spectators), every open-minded table-tennis person will agree that the probability of an exciting match happening is the highest when a world-class defender faces an attacker. Yet all robotNazis complain is how they are so offended by a match between two low level long pips players, simply over-looking the fact that low level players only play for themselves and not to entertain the few spectators, while professional player play to entertain a large number of spectators.   

     The crazy thing about all this is that in a strange way maybe Aspect Ratio 1998 was a good thing because but for that robotNazis would not have been caught making more and more anti-defender changes cleverly using the ITTF. Eberhard Scholer is like a serial murderer. He thought he got away with murder in 1998 , so he tried it again in 2008 but eventually got caught well after, as truth always comes out one way or the other.  It is also a bitter irony that one the most attacking style players Jorg Rosskopf himself pointed out at 2018-WVC that the plastic ball & other changes have hurt the defensive style but no defender other than Matthew Syed had the spine to openly talk about how ill conceived  the Aspect Ratio 1998 was.  

             There is another very important factor that the spin(e)less cowards & any pips / anti players don’t seem to understand. The RobotNazi controlled ITTF is not keeping pips & anti legal just because they so much love your playing styles as they would claim to your face but backstab you by trashing you among themselves.  The only reason they have not banned all pips and anti is because they do not want pips / anti players to start their own association, just as the robotNazis themselves threatened to do in 1995 after the speed-glue-ban and got it reversed immediately.  The robotNazi ITTF does not want their power base diluted.   Another reason is that strangely most short pips and anti players themselves hate long-pips, since it is the fashionable thing to do to identify with & get accepted by robotNazis. In table-tennis, it is always the case of  “My racket (& playing style) is holier than your racket & that by itself makes me a superior table-tennis athlete”  The pips and anti players don’t understand the fact that robotNazis hate you as well though just not as much as they hate the spin(e)less cowards. Ideally robotNazis do not want any pips / anti at all period but they are willing to tolerate this nuisance just to keep total control of the ITTF.  But the brilliant thing about robotNazis is that how they slowly but steadily squeeze the life out of the spin(e)less cowards with rule changes (cleverly calling them regulations sometimes as in 1998, 2004 & 2008) in the past 38 years. Even more brilliant is how they have used the defensive players themselves such as Eberhard Scholer , Adham Sharara, Gregg Letts, Virginia Sung etc to achieve this goal.

  At every level of table-tennis, the sport is dominated & controlled by robotNazis. Take any club or local association or ITTF affiliate. The person at the top is most likely a robotNazi. Take the general council or executive council or any committee of ITTF . What do you think is the probability that the majority are not robotNazis ?  Even when there are some defensive players like Eberhard Scholer or Adham Sharara or Virginia Sung, they immediately  sell their soul to the robotNazis to keep their jobs (This is not unusual. A politician will do whatever it takes to keep their power however sleazy it may be) 

    The most unfortunate thing about all this is that ITTF keeps hoping against hope that the Aspect Ratio issue will go away instead of having the decency to do the right thing (It is interesting here to note that they did the wrong thing by repealing the speed glue ban  immediately in 1995 submitting to robotNazi extortion & blackmail but refuse to do the right thing in the case of Aspect Ratio)  . But it had been 23 years and this issue had not gone away & never will, as long as ITTF wants to continue to make fools of themselves with its narrow-minded arrogance.. 

========== ============== =======

 

BTW, my friend’s aunt’s niece would also like to collect some additional information as follows :-

 

Her request
==== =========  =====
I am looking for any historical information for following items
1. Two Color Change of 1983
2. Speed-Glue Ban Change of 1995
3. Speed-Glue Ban Repeal Change of 1995
4. Failed Aspect Ratio Reduction Change (rule or regulation ?) at Tianjin BGM-1995
5. Durban Secret EGM-Aspect Ratio Reduction Regulation of 1998
6. Failed Swedish Proposal to require both sides of rubber on a racket to be identical (year ?)
7. Failed First 40mm Ball Change proposal (Need year, was it 1998, 1999 ?)
8. Second 40 mm Proposal (Year ?)
9. Pip Density Reduction Change of 2003 or 2004
10. Frictionless pips regulation of 2008
11. (Fake) Speed Glue ban of 2008
12. Failed Swedish proposal - (request to repeal frictionless pips ban / related to Fabian Akerstrom ??) (year ?)  (Strangely, this was sort of total opposite of item 6 above, LOL)
13. Plastic 40+ Ball Change (Year 2013 / 2014 ?).

First information I need is whether each of the above was a Rule Change or regulation Change
Second information is the vote for and vote against count
Third information who proposed (country if a rule change or person if a regulation change)
Fourth if possible (I know this is digging deep) the persons voting for and against each
Fifth the rationale provided for each change.
Sixth : who was the mastermind behind each of above change
Seventh : who was ITTF president (during that rule change) or who was chair of committee (during regulation change)
Any other relevant information
===========  = ===============