iocTT.com :Most advanced multi-lingual discussion forum for tabletennis (Factual / parody). Uncensored. Free discreet membership to post. Simple registration. No email needed.

https://www.butterfly-global.com/en/pro ... 23840.html

Has anyone tried this blade ?

I am not a penhold player but as you said this is a dumb blade with composite both sides.
So I do not understand how it makes sense for a defensive player as they claim in their specification sheet when they say
" Combination penhold for attack and defence close to the table "

Yanniss wrote: ↑November 6th, 2025, 12:53 am I am not a penhold player but as you said this is a dumb blade with composite both sides.
So I do not understand how it makes sense for a defensive player as they claim in their specification sheet when they say
" Combination penhold for attack and defence close to the table "

There is nothing to understand > this is just the usual marketing hype by a manufacturer (here Butterfly) to sell a dumb blade to a defensive player.
Anyone who believes that a dumb blade is suitable for combo styles is TOTALLY clueless.
The sad part here is that Butterfly itself is so clueless . They have zero smart blades & I doubt if they ever had one

I agree this is by no means a blade for defensive players especially with outer carbon OMG

But this blade may work for a wide pips hitter who can twiddle and also loops using a spinny inverted side
But they will have to be a power looper since this not other composite material like ALC pr Kevlar (which is softer than carbon)

You can defend also blocking or lobing not only chopping, also you can defend with long pips, short pips, anti or inverted no matter the rubber & nor the blade.

merlin el mago wrote: ↑April 6th, 2026, 8:33 pm You can defend also blocking or lobing not only chopping, also you can defend with long pips, short pips, anti or inverted no matter the rubber & nor the blade.

This is a massive problem when you make statements like this related to rubbers & blades
Correct me if I am wrong but it looks to me like you are making the classic claim of robotNazis > I am paraphrasing > “You can use any rubber or blade and use any playing styles ( even same or different on your backhand and forehand) and can be equally successful. Look at a professional table tennis player >they can beat you using a clipboard or a frozen fish for a racket. It all about only technique & training. It does not matter what rubber blade or rubber or style you choose. It takes us back to the argument > We humans are all created equal. So we must all use identical rackets
We can all just use hardbat rackets or we can all just use only say 1.7 mm Tenergy both sides & Viscaria. We all use shakehand blades only
What other sport uses so many different combinations where equipment becomes the central focus of focus & not developing your “technique”
Now one cannot imagine the enormous stupidity of this argument "
The mostly nonsensical argument that all we humans are created equal & the classic telling your child “you can become anything you want to be when you grow up if you put your mind to it & pursue your dreams” > I have to be careful here. When I say this , I see nothing wrong in using such statements as inspirational & motivational tools but one also has to be very realistic about individual huma limits (& gifts etc)

Fish lob wrote: ↑April 8th, 2026, 10:06 pm “You can use any rubber or blade and use any playing styles ( even same or different on your backhand and forehand) and can be equally successful. Look at a professional table tennis player >they can beat you using a clipboard or a frozen fish for a racket. It all about only technique & training. It does not matter what rubber blade or rubber or style you choose.

Interestingly let us also look the political side of this argument

Probably more than 67% (two thirds) believe that everyone should use same identical dumb rackets
In most elections in any civilized nation you only need 51% to win an election

But the rule change proposed by the Swedes in mid 1990s > All rackets must have identical rubbers on both sides did not pass because it would be extremely difficult to get the 75% vote > which is even more than the 67%

But it could be possible to strong arm 75% into passing this. Like former ITTF supreme leader Adham Sharara did to pass the 40 mm ball after failing in his first try

But ITTF is quite clever. They know all too well that banning all pips & anti would definitely finally force the pips / anti players to grow some spine & start a separate all spins diversity association and demand at least a separate entry in the Olympics if not replace the ITTF, in addition to demanding reparation payments from IOC (not ITTF for admitting ITTF into Olympics to start with.......given that the abuse started in 1977 well before 1988 , the first time TT was allowed in Olympics ) for chopper abuse since 1977 foe semi-pro & pro choppers. iTTF learned this lesson in 1995 when they tried to ban spein glue & the robotNazis forced the ITTF to repeal the ban within months by threatening to form their own association ( in USA this was led by none other than Rev. Larry Hodges)

Fish lob wrote: ↑April 8th, 2026, 10:06 pm Look at a professional table tennis player >they can beat you using a clipboard or a frozen fish for a racket.

Fish lob , you are correct in exposing above nonsense

When comparing two players with very different playing styles and or rubbers and blades , you need to compare two players rated at about the same level . It is absurd to compare two players at TOTALLY different skill levels

Fish lob wrote: ↑April 8th, 2026, 10:06 pm

merlin el mago wrote: ↑April 6th, 2026, 8:33 pm You can defend also blocking or lobing not only chopping, also you can defend with long pips, short pips, anti or inverted no matter the rubber & nor the blade.

This is a massive problem when you make statements like this related to rubbers & blades
Correct me if I am wrong but it looks to me like you are making the classic claim of robotNazis > I am paraphrasing > “You can use any rubber or blade and use any playing styles ( even same or different on your backhand and forehand) and can be equally successful. Look at a professional table tennis player >they can beat you using a clipboard or a frozen fish for a racket. It all about only technique & training. It does not matter what rubber blade or rubber or style you choose. It takes us back to the argument > We humans are all created equal. So we must all use identical rackets
We can all just use hardbat rackets or we can all just use only say 1.7 mm Tenergy both sides & Viscaria. We all use shakehand blades only
What other sport uses so many different combinations where equipment becomes the central focus of focus & not developing your “technique”
Now one cannot imagine the enormous stupidity of this argument "
The mostly nonsensical argument that all we humans are created equal & the classic telling your child “you can become anything you want to be when you grow up if you put your mind to it & pursue your dreams” > I have to be careful here. When I say this , I see nothing wrong in using such statements as inspirational & motivational tools but one also has to be very realistic about individual huma limits (& gifts etc)

I see excelent classical defenders using only two inverted rubbers. Please try again to convince me how not can't defend with two inverted rubbers...

Rubber are rubber no matter inverted, long pips, short pips, anti, etc. What matters is the skills!!!

Yesterday at club a dumb mate told me that I win due to using long pips as bakchand, my answer was giving him my racket to see if he can win me and I using ids double inverted, of course didn't accepted....

To play at high level with long pips close to the table isn't easy and requires a lot of more technical skills than playing with the rest of rubbers: inverted, anti, short pips, etc.

At low level I agree with you than 75% or more players dosen't have enough skills to use inverted at backhand.

merlin el mago wrote: ↑April 9th, 2026, 8:25 pm I see excelent classical defenders using only two inverted rubbers. Please try again to convince me how not can't defend with two inverted rubbers...

Again it is not clear to me as to what you are trying to prove here ?
Are you saying that any player can use any rubber equally well and play the exact level ?

Ok let me be brutal here > Simply because some players are stupid enough to think that spinny inverted rubbers is the best option for themselves no way proves that it is the best option even for themselves only , let alone for others.

Anyone can play with any rubber for just fun. But if you are talking from the competitive standpoint , a smart racket is far superior to a dumb racket PERIOD.'

If you claim that anyone can with any rubber equally well, then there is no need for any of us to use different rubbers or use smart rackets. We all could use dumb rackets.
I could ask you > If they can play well suing spinny inverted rubbers, why can't you also do the same ? Or are you suggesting that slim pisp or long pips were invented originally for at the table blockers only ? SERIOUSLY ?

You need to read the topic

Click link > Original initially intended purpose of long pips and anti spin

From a competitive standpoint , classical defence using two spinny inverted rubbers is a complete joke after 1980s when spein glues arrived
Norio Takashima was the last.
Joanna Drinkall does well against second tier players but gets wiped out by top 10 players

Let us be clear hers , you are talking about classical defense not all round defensive . If that is the case have you heard of something called the
expedite rule ?

Players like Mima Ito , Manika Batra , Sreeja Akula , Sabine Winter , Ayhika Mukherjee, Hou Yingchao etc etc are using wrong rubbers and blades They SEEM to be highly successful but that in no way proves that they are playing at their best potential. They are so successful DESPITE their wrong choice of rubbers and blades because they are so enormously talented and they succeed despite bad rubber & blade choices

merlin el mago wrote: ↑April 9th, 2026, 8:25 pm At low level I agree with you than 75% or more players dosen't have enough skills to use inverted at backhand.

You said it yourself ???? LOL
Even at the pro levels not a high % of players can succeed as 2 wing loopers using dumb rackets
Or of course as choppers or blockers using pips or anti both sides.
Johnny Huang & very very few others (maybe less than 5 at national level) like Scott Bogan in USA were successful as 2 wing pips out hitters

Do you still not understood what I'm saying: you can defend with all kind of rubbers & blades, if you don't understand that I give it up.

merlin el mago wrote: ↑April 10th, 2026, 8:18 pm Do you still not understood what I'm saying: you can defend with all kind of rubbers & blades, if you don't understand that I give it up.

Yes you can defend with any kind of rubber
But only slim pips, long pips & anti spin are defensive rubbers
Wide pips & spinny inverted are NOT defensive rubbers

Every rubber type in table tennis has a PRIMARY purpose.

Spinny inverted is primarily a looping rubber
Wide pips is primarily a flat hitting rubber
Non-ITTF actual high friction long pips (with sponge for pros & semi-pros & OX for others) is primarily an away from the table chopping rubber
Non-ITTF actual frictionless long pips (OX type only for all players) is primarily an at the table blocking rubber
That is it. These are the only true functionally useful rubbers in table tennis

There are two other gimmick rubbers for the clueless and ITTF brainwashed
Anti spin rubbers for at the table blocking. It is currently (April 2026) the top trending fad due to Sabine Winter
ITTF LARC slims pips are mostly a big joke especially in the 40+ plastic ball only era but may be useful with sponge for some all around players or those getting their feet wet into the slim pips or long pips world


Simply because you can also defend with spinny inverted or wide pips in no way implies that it is equally the best rubber for defending as well.

Claiming that you can defend using a dumb racket with either spinny inverted only or wide pips only both sides is just almost (not completely) as ridiculous as claiming that you can attack using a dumb racket with anti both sides or with ITTF slim pips both sides or actual non-ITTF long pips both sides.

Again I go back to insane robotNazi claims > We all should be able to use same racket because all humans are created equal & also since the majority mandate must prevail in any civilized society, all pips & anti must be banned.

Let me also clarify the concept of spin contrast for a racket design .
Yes a dumb racket with spinny inverted both sides is the best possible racket for all round play. But how many players can do this ? Not even 10% of humans probably because the human backhand is inherently bad compared to forehand in so many ways. But this is not your fault or anyone's fault. It is just the nature of human anatomy (structural), human physiology , huma bio-mechanics etc . But it is definitely your fault if you refuse to admit this & it is far worse if you try to convert everyone else into robotNazis just because a spinny inverted umb racklet is the not only only the best but the one & only way to table tennis nirvana and eternal salvation

A dumb racket with identical rubber both sides has zero spin contrast. This is the super dumb racket.
a dumb racket can have same rubber type but may be different brand or different thickness or top sheet etc. This dumb rackt still has poor spin contrast though not zero spin contrast like a super dumb racket.
Some 10% of humans may have functionally equal forehand and backhand and I doubt even 1% of them could be two wing choppers using spinny inverted
Most pro players can use dumb rackets but I doubt if even the likes of Ma Long or Waldner played using super dumb rackets because their forehand and backhand rubbers may have been slightly differently tuned even if the same rubber brand.

The spin contrast is the maximum when you use one of the following types of smart rackets
1. with spinny inverted on one side and actual frictionless OX long pips on other side (Loop & block style at the table)
or
2. with high friction wide pips with thicker sponge on one side and frictionless non-ITTF actual long pips OX on other side (all round flat hit / drive and block style at the table)
or
3. with frictionless non-ITTF wide pips with thicker sponge on one side and high friction OX non-ITTF actual long pips on other side ( flat hit forehand , chop backhand, fake (no spin) chop on forehand)

The reason I very strongly oppose the claims that any player can play with any rubbers equally well is this > They can't
Bigger problem is that this confuses new players.
They all get brainwashed by the robotNazi controlled ITTF and its coaches that they can use any racket and rubbers and be equally successful.
It would make sense if the probability of success is even 51% but the probability of success is only like 10%
Every player has unique playing styles that are different on both backhand and forehand . The probability of being same especially looping is only 10%
Most players especially newbies force the issue by trying to be two winged loopers because two winged top spin table tennis is promoted as the ONLY cool style to play table tennis

Ralph how you can do more backspin if you aren't receiving topspin so a no spin ball:

-Tacky/sticky Chinese inverted rubber.
-Slim long pips.
-Anti.

Think about, try for yourself & be honest with your reply, so no come back for Robotnazis etc.

merlin el mago wrote: ↑April 11th, 2026, 9:10 pm Ralph how you can do more backspin if you aren't receiving topspin so a no spin ball:

-Tacky/sticky Chinese inverted rubber.
-Slim long pips.
-Anti.

Think about, try for yourself & be honest with your reply, so no come back for Robotnazis etc.

You are focusing on the lesser aspect of being a chopper.
You need to look at the overall functional value of a racket and not just how it behaves against just one type of incoming ball
Anti and then long pips (few years later) in early and mid 1970s were introduced in the sport to be able to handle the heavy top spins loops & not the no spin balls or low spin balls or any back spin etc (Anti of course was quickly discarded as a chopping tool as soon as long pips arrived and that is why long pips themselves were banned quickly at the 1977 Birmingham BGM and as far as I know , there has never been an anti top 50 pro chopper in the history of the sport........I am not talking about blockers)
Again all this goes back to the original initially intended purpose of introduction of anti & then long pips. If you seriously think just a double spinny inverted dumb racket is good enough for any player pro or amateur then there absolutely no need to keep anti or long or slim pips in the sport.

You have to look at the TOTALITY of functional behavior of the entire racket.
Let me flip your question right back at you > which return of a no spin ball especially using a float return is more likely to cause your opponent to make a mistake ? Is it the return from a long pips or from a spinny inverted rubber or a anti inverted rubber ?
The return from a spinny inverted rubber will give least problems to the opponent if you use a float return.
If you chop a no spin ball back using a long pips or anti rubber , yes it would have just enough back spin for your opponent to loop kill it.
But the key is is this > even if you chop it back with a spinny inverted rubber , it does not have lot more back spin anyway & it also can be loop killed .
Also keep in mind that your (robotNazi) opponent has to do very little thinking when he or she faces a spinny inverted rubber ............because since spinny inverted rubber is the most popular rubber, everyone more or less know how to play against it with almost no thinking and instinctively.
Compare this to playing against a smart racket ........your opponent has to think. robotNazis hate thinking . They just want to loop every ball (& when they can't they want to be able to blame your long pips and make more rule changes LOL)

At any level of the sport, in today's 40+ plastic ball only era , a two winged double inverted dumb racket chopper has much lesser chance of playing his or her potential compared to using a smart racket (the 3 types that was explained earlier).

I also know of some dumb racket choppers & most have been using dumb rackets they are afraid of social rejection by robotNazis . These players so desperately want to be admired and loved by robotNazis . Believe me > My first brainwashing as a player was like this too. Though I was not too concerned about what robotNazis thought I was still cnvinced by coaches that using a double inverted dumb racket is the one & only normal way to play table tennis.
So when you start claiming that two wing chopping using a dumb racket is a viable style , you are misleading newbies (like me 45 years ago)
You are doing ITTF's brainwashing job and you do not even know it LOL

Another brainwashing technique used is that they claim that the pros can vary spin using spinny inverted or wide pips. Yes they can but can all amateurs do it ? Of course not. Also the pros like most Japanese choppers would be far better using non-ITT long pips but using long pips is secretly but politely frowned upon Japanese society despite their great choppers like Matsushita & Shibutani and few other combo slim pips choppers. Yes Japanese are not overt robotNazis like say Africans or Swedes or male Indians but they still are biased against slim / long pips

I give it up the 2 cents $ for you.

You can also try this blade
Yasaka Double Face