Busted Balls aren't a Zero Sum Game

Much attention has been given to the effect of breaking or damaged paddles on the game of pickleball. This all the while while it is considered advantageous to use pickleballs that have been played with as it is considered that roughing of the surface will make them somehow spin better. Based on the current level of coefficient of friction it's very unlikely that would ever be the case but if it were it would exemplify unfair play as ball spin is first and foremost a player skill before anything.

No real research has gone into the effect of ball wear over time and some players falsely believe that a broken ball will equally effect both players. This is totally untrue and we can go into anything from game theory to Monte Carlo to discuss this but we won't because it doesn't happen. If players are playing with a broken ball it will not effect them equally. In fact stronger players will probably leverage this more as they are the drivers behind their own play far more than any paddle ever could be. 

We have coefficient of restitution testing coming where we are asserting the paddles are now elastic or breaking into something elastic. We set a total different standard for balls and have no idea of what effect where has on them. Especially as we are now dealing with paddles that are able to introduce greater force onto the ball. 

Coefficient of restitution doesn't even pretend to be fair. It's a total joke of a rule based on a president but hasn't been proven and is not even logical on paper. A core crushed paddle will very likely be more of an detriment to their player then it will ever be any sort of useful implement. That being said it is a common misconception that a broken ball will affect players equally. We don't see pros blaming the ball when they get bad bounces but they sure as hell will blame on the other players paddle when it makes an odd sound. 

This is why we should not be letting pro level psychosis frankly affect the sport as a whole. The idea that balls are even moving faster is based on data collected at pro events. Not to mention no less than Selkirk has already called that data set bs.

If you have a Vulcan ball just go grab it and ask yourself when it starts to show dead spots do you continue to play with it or do you throw it away. We need a more durable ball that is modified to withstand the current forces that paddles are able produce. The Vulcan ball was a flop from the start let's face it most reviewers even said so.

We've attached the heat map of CoR. It should be noted that testing at higher angles and speeds not only totally makes what the the point of this test is even more murky. This is not how you control ball speed whatsoever. If this is the USAP's idea of controlling ball speed they are being deceived or simply out of their minds.

They're jumping fully on a idea that is questionable and assuming totally assuming that the increase in ball speed is a material problem exclusively with the paddle rather than a much simpler physical one. Instead of going after energy which would be meaningful they go after materials. This definitely suits big brands just fine as it will hand them back the market. It will also make innovation in the sport meaningless as they will be nothing left except for swing weight to modulate paddle power. So pros can go ahead and slap on as much lead tape as they want and they'll get the same effect. 

It's can be confusing when so much meaningless drama exists all predicated on the idea that paddles are the reason the the ball is now flying faster and if you are confused it's understandable as there are many people lying about the situation. It's very simple though there are not elastic paddles on the market. No one is producing them and if they are they're probably getting returned before they ever make it to the court. 

I mean go take a paddle and smash it up with a hammer lightly see how well it plays. I doubt it will play better.

A broken ball is very far from a zero-sum game. Especially in standard team gameplay.