Answer to Jslick89 's question about useless LARC long pips versus functional High aspect ratio super long pips

[James Z]

Jslick89 asks :- Can you explain the difference between super pips (also known as high aspect ratio super long pips) and the type of long pips that are currently allowed by the governing bodies of table tennis?

To start with I will be very brief & only talk in terms the 4 most important pip design parameters

Pip Length
ITTF LARC cannot exceed 2.0 mm. Always been 2.0 mm despite arrival of 40 mm ball
Most high aspect ratio super long pips are around 3 mm which is about the correct height for a fair & level playing field
Keeping all other pip design parameters the same, lower the pip length lower the back spin produced especially for a larger 40- celluloid ball & then the even worse 40+ plastic ball

Pip Aspect Ratio
The maximum allowed limit for ITTF LARC long pips was 1.3 before 1999 . Was reduced to 1.1 after 1998 with the 1998 Durban Aspect Ratio Reduction Massacre
Some high aspect ratio super long pips ARs are around 1.5 Again this is the correct value for a fair & level playing field in the 40+ plastic ball ONLY era
BTW AR is defined as pip height (aka length) divided by pip diameter (aka width)
Keeping all other pip design parameters the same, lower the AR, lower the backspin

Pip Distribution Density (PDD)
The maximum allowed limit for ITTF LARC long pips was 50 pips per sq.cm before 2004 and was reduced to 30 pips per sq.cm after 2003 $0% drop) by ITTF's 2004 Pip Density Reduction Regulation
Lower the PDD lower the backspin (mostly back spin but also lowered top spin but ITTF used Liu Guoliang as alleged scapegoat to spread disinformation. Liu Guoliang's career was all over by then already, in fact since lower the PDD higher the speed one would tend to think LGL would have wanted a faster less spinny pips for his forehand since he twiddled at strategic junctures of a match to loop on his forehand using spinny inverted)
High Aspect ratio super long pips with high PDD needed by away from the table choppers are still not available. Most seem to focus on low PDD to increase deception as most close to the table blockers seem to ask for

Pip Friction
The minimum allowed limit for ITTF LARC long pips was increased in 2008 by the Frictionless Pips Ban of 2008.
Lower the friction, more the deception & lower the backspin as in frictionless long pips like Tibhar Dtec OX
Higher the friction lesser the deception & higher the backspin but the myth is that frictionless pips give more backspin , which is totally ridiculous & false . Just compare Butterfly Feint Long 3 & Tibhar Dtec to understand this.
Almost all Dr.Neubauer long pips were banned due to this 2008 regulation
BTW both the top of pips and side of a pips can be made frictionless or only the side or only the pip top
Though most high aspect ratio super long pips are more frictionless than allowed by ITTF, no really glassy (frictionless) high aspect ratio super long pips are still available as before 1999 preferred by close to the table blockers .
High friction high aspect ratio super long pips that are needed by away from the table choppers are not currently available.

In summary almost all low length low PDD low Aspect ratio so called long pips are just social rubbers and are functionally piece of garbage in the 40+ plastic ball ONLY era
Exceptions are few medium pips rubbers on ITTF LARC that are good for all round play or for those getting started with long pips to transition.
Rubbers like Tibhar Dtec Grass or Butterfly Feint Long 3, Victas Curl P1R etc are pure garbage in the 40+ plastic ball ONLY era. In all fairness Fient Long Classic was one of the best rubbers in history as preferred by almost all choppers before ITTF infinite wisdom banned it with the 1998 Durban Aspect Ratio Reduction Massacre Regulation

[James Z]

Please note that going forward high aspect ratio super long pips will just be referred to as super pips