Here are a few potential flaws in the test protocol:
* Test Ball Characteristics: The test protocol specifies using a Franklin X-40 Certified Pickleball with the holes deleted as the test ball. Modifying the ball in this way can significantly alter its aerodynamic properties and weight, potentially affecting the PBCoR measurement. Additionally, the protocol states that the modified ball gains approximately 0.1 oz in weight, but it does not specify how this weight gain is measured or controlled. It also does not seem to account for dead weight. How's the lack of holes will alter its elastic performance who knows?
* Test Ball Rest Time: The protocol specifies a minimum rest time of 5 minutes for the ball between impacts. However, it does not provide any justification for this rest time. It is unclear if this rest time is sufficient to allow the ball to return to its original state, especially considering the potential for deformation during impact. How many times will it all be used and should even be used more than once?
* Impact Location: The protocol specifies adjusting the paddle position in 1/2-inch increments for testing. However, it does not specify how the impact location on the paddle is controlled or measured. Inconsistent impact locations can lead to variations in PBCoR measurements. We have shown in our machine learning model that coefficient of restitution based on the outliers and ppl's analysis very closely matches the arbitrary curve being set here.
* Rounding of PBCoR Value: The protocol specifies rounding the average PBCoR value to the nearest tenth (2 decimal places). However, it does not provide any justification for this rounding. Rounding the value can introduce inaccuracies and potentially mask small but significant differences in PBCoR measurements.
* Compliance Criteria: The protocol specifies a peak PBCoR value for compliance but does not specify how this peak value is determined. It is unclear if the peak value is based on the average PBCoR at a single location or the overall maximum PBCoR value across all locations. What's very clear is that this peak value is meant to arbitrarily cap the maximum velocity that can be achieved from a impact while in no way representing dynamics of pickleball paddle impact.
These are just a few potential flaws in the test protocol. Aside from the way it was implemented. The simple logic is that paddles with foam filled faces and hollow celled faced paddles cannot coexist. These tests take no interest in elasticity and seem to purposely look away from mass.
