The Ball Speed "emergency"

USAP uncoming introduction of CoR is going to be interesting. First PBCoR cannot be considered exit velocity to any extent of a direct control on ball speed. Additionally, lower PBCoR does not necessarily indicate anything about elasticity of a paddle. This is part of the lie. To justify the increase in ball speed the USAP has chosen to assume it's an elastic material issue. There is no evidence of this. 

If you want evidence note the USAP asked brands to vote on trouble paddles. This rule will assumedly be selective applied as a matter of expediency. 

If this ends up resulting in paddles removed from tournament play that aren't represented in the highest level of pro play even it will be pathetic. PBCoR is aimed at paddles with different mass distribution based while using the illusion of elasticity to create a double-edged sword in which by selectively applying paddles can be probably judged to be either too "elastic" based purely on cor which is ridiculous or too powerful based purely on the final velocity component of cor which is also ridiculous. This could easily be done by setting a PBCoR that is a high value (.9) to introduce bias towards conventional designs. They could say anything below this CoR is too 'elastic' which is untrue ignore the actual effect on ball velocity Likewise, by projecting a high initial velocity always get a 'exit velocity' that proves the paddle is too powerful by their paradigm. 

Manufacturers should be more involved in this test then voting on who it should be applied to and which competition would like to eliminate. This needs to be done in a fair manner with actual transparent steps and goals in mind. The application of this is simply ridiculous and should be seen as nothing less by The general player base. 

If coefficient of restitution is equated to exit velocity it will be simply laughable. But coefficient of friction is already set at an arbitrary value. It's important for the future of paddle design that players know what's at take care and that mathematically or physically this simply does not make sense. 

If the usap ever wants to be considered an Olympic body they'll have to do better eventually. We are no more demanding than other sports companies in terms of wanting transparent rules for manufacturing and fair competition.