iocTT.com :- TableTennis:-World's foremost multi-lingual discussion forum (Factual / parody). Free discreet membership to post. Simple registration. No email needed.

Hello ,
Your signature says your Saviga Monster 77 is a 1.3 Aspect Ratio Version.
Where did you buy it ?

Saviga Monster 77 itself is on ITTF LARC , But how can you tell the difference ?

Do you use this rubber in Offical tournaments or just for fun ?

https://aliexpress.ru/item/100500601775 ... 1768M7R1Ga

The tops of this rubber are treated, but the grip has not dropped so much that the rubber can be called frictionless. I took a ruler and measured the height and width of the pimples and saw that the height is 2 mm, and the width is 1.5 mm. I do not know if all copies have this feature or I was just lucky. In my country, official table tennis tournaments are not available for most people (they are openly available only in large cities and the capital) and most play in commercial tournaments that work on the rttf platform, where no one cares what rubber you play with (I even once saw a person who clearly had either Magic 77 or some other rubber that you promote here)

wehem wrote: ↑June 30th, 2025, 2:35 am s. I took a ruler and measured the height and width of the pimples and saw that the height is 2 mm, and the width is 1.5 mm.

That is quite interesting that you can accurately measure such a small dimension using just a ruler.

I probably could measue the width using a micrometer but length (height) , I am not so sure.
I wonder if you can do it using a pocket microscope

Anyway , 2 mm divided by 1.5 mm does give an Aspect Ratio of 1.3333

wehem wrote: ↑June 30th, 2025, 2:35 am I took a ruler and measured the height and width of the pimples and saw that the height is 2 mm, and the width is 1.5 mm.

This rubber is ITTF approved in the non-treated version. So, for the Aspect Ratio to meet the 1.1 mm requirement & given that you measure the width as 1.5 mm, then the length cannot exceed 1.5 x 1.1 which is 1.65 mm .
So if you measured the height as 2.0 mm, the treating of the top of the pips (with epoxy or whatever) has increased the length by 0.35 mm (2.00 mm minus 1.65 mm)

That is quite interesting I would say.

Birtukan wrote: ↑July 1st, 2025, 5:36 am

wehem wrote: ↑June 30th, 2025, 2:35 am s. I took a ruler and measured the height and width of the pimples and saw that the height is 2 mm, and the width is 1.5 mm.

That is quite interesting that you can accurately measure such a small dimension using just a ruler.

I probably could measue the width using a micrometer but length (height) , I am not so sure.
I wonder if you can do it using a pocket microscope

Anyway , 2 mm divided by 1.5 mm does give an Aspect Ratio of 1.3333

Well, I rounded up. The actual height is slightly less than 2 mm (by 0.03-0.05 mm).

wehem wrote: ↑July 1st, 2025, 10:59 pm

Birtukan wrote: ↑July 1st, 2025, 5:36 am

wehem wrote: ↑June 30th, 2025, 2:35 am s. I took a ruler and measured the height and width of the pimples and saw that the height is 2 mm, and the width is 1.5 mm.

That is quite interesting that you can accurately measure such a small dimension using just a ruler.

I probably could measue the width using a micrometer but length (height) , I am not so sure.
I wonder if you can do it using a pocket microscope

Anyway , 2 mm divided by 1.5 mm does give an Aspect Ratio of 1.3333

Well, I rounded up. The actual height is slightly less than 2 mm (by 0.03-0.05 mm).

How can you tell such a small value (0.05 mm), if you only used a ruler ??