Did you know ? Butterfly Feint Long (Classic) was the sad collateral damage to TSP Curl P1

[Nikki&]

Lots of choppers d not realize this horrible fact

The 2nd Chopper Massacre happened in 1998 with the passing of the Aspect Ratio Reduction Regulation at the Durban EGM

According to ITF, they claimed that the intended target was primarily TSP Curl P1 (and secondarily few other rubbers like Tibhar Grass)
They claimed that this rubber had too much "kink" (Not my word I am using exact word used by ITTF)

ITTF claimed that reducing the maximum allowed pip aspect ratio from 1.3 down to 1.1 would magically remove all the problems in table tennis

They knew very well that this regulation change would result in Feint Long Classic getting de-approved & would impact about 15 top pro choppers , including 2 in top 10 ( Li Gun Sang & Chen Xinhua )
Scholer was specifically asked about this & he just did not care

[Erland]

I thought TSP Curl is still approved though not manufactured
Are you certain

[Garziaa]

I thought TSP Curl is still approved though not manufactured
Are you certain

Your confusion is very understandable & ITTF very much wants all the choppers to stay confused & clueless

The original TSP Curl P1 before the Aspect Ratio rule of 1998 is very different from the post 1998 rubber TSP Curl P1r
Note the r at the end
TSP Curl P1 had an Aspect Ratio of 1.3
After the 1998 Durban Aspect Ratio Reduction chopper massacre, the TSP Curl P1r was only allowed too have an aspect ratio of 1.1

This is the same difference between the Butterfly Feint Long Classic before 1998 & the Feint Long 2 after 1998

Vistas Curl P1v & Butterfly Feint Long 3 came after that . These became bigger asswipes & even more useless due to the 40- celluloid ball and later the 40+ plastic ball

[Garziaa]

That is a fascinating fact because the Birmingham BGM long pips ban chopper massacre 1 of 1977 only "killed" about 5 or 6 choppers (all Chinese) but the Durban EGM Aspect Ratio reduction chopper massacre 2 of 1998 ended up "killing" more than like 15 pro choppers and 100s of other choppers from all nationalities

[James Z]

Personally I do not have a problem with the "close-to-the-table" blocking style.
It is especially important for older players though it is indeed a tactical style for younger players as well including at the pro levels (though mostly women & girls) .

However what I have a huge problem with is ITTF continually using at the table blockers to punish the away from the table chop defenders
The above case of Feint Long Classic vs TSP Curl P1 is a clear angle.

Again I have no problem with blockers using disruptive rubbers as tactical weapons but away from table choppers never went out looking for deceptive or disruptive rubbers. In fact choppers prefer rubbers with maximum control (meaningless disruption).

This is why almost all choppers chose Fient Long Classic before 1998 since it was the most controllable (meant least disruptive) rubber & did not choose TSP Curl P1 . But ITTF used TSP Curl P1 as as excuse to punish blockers using it but knowingly also brutally punishing choppers using Feint Long Classic