Скачать с ютуб Part 2 of 3: 2.2mm vs 2.0mm TT sponge thickness - Robot testing: throw height, trajectory & speed в хорошем качестве

Part 2 of 3: 2.2mm vs 2.0mm TT sponge thickness - Robot testing: throw height, trajectory & speed 12 лет назад

Скачать бесплатно и смотреть ютуб-видео без блокировок Part 2 of 3: 2.2mm vs 2.0mm TT sponge thickness - Robot testing: throw height, trajectory & speed в качестве 4к (2к / 1080p)

У нас вы можете посмотреть бесплатно Part 2 of 3: 2.2mm vs 2.0mm TT sponge thickness - Robot testing: throw height, trajectory & speed или скачать в максимальном доступном качестве, которое было загружено на ютуб. Для скачивания выберите вариант из формы ниже:

Загрузить музыку / рингтон Part 2 of 3: 2.2mm vs 2.0mm TT sponge thickness - Robot testing: throw height, trajectory & speed в формате MP3:

Если кнопки скачивания не загрузились НАЖМИТЕ ЗДЕСЬ или обновите страницу
Если возникают проблемы со скачиванием, пожалуйста напишите в поддержку по адресу внизу страницы.
Спасибо за использование сервиса savevideohd.ru

Part 2 of 3: 2.2mm vs 2.0mm TT sponge thickness - Robot testing: throw height, trajectory & speed

Second in a three part series looking at the differences in performance between 2.2 and 2mm table tennis sponge thickness - using Giant Dragon Maxspin. In this video we test to see if there are differences in terms of: 1. Maximum throw height 2. Trajectory - high arc or shallow 3. Speed Using high speed footage we also look at why one of these sponge thicknesses is possibly slower and has a steeper throw arc and show the ball "visibly climbing up the top sheet surface". We also identify problems with testing and comparing rubbers and why it's important not to look at just one factor, such as sponge thickness, when considering how or why a table tennis rubber performs as it does. In particular we look at tackiness, sponge hardness and thickness and show how different combinations of these factors can have significantly different results. Other videos in this three part series are: 1. Physical properites including dome, curl, weight, top sheet, tacky test, grip test, cutting on a bubble in the top sheet and other possible quality control issues and 3. Human testing - demonstrates how different people can rate the same rubbers performance.differently in terms of serving, returing serve, pushing, top spin driving, blocking, power loop, brush loop, smash, chopping and questions the relevance of generic speed, spin control ratings. These videos will be released staggered. Part 3 to be released some time next week.

Comments