Transversely-held table tennis bat convenient to control

Abstract

The utility model relates to a transversely-held table tennis bat convenient to control, which comprises a ball hitting plate and a grab handle, a holding beam is arranged on the grab handle, the holding beam is respectively connected with the shoulder of the ball hitting plate and the grab handle, and the projection of the outer edge of the holding beam on the plane of the ball hitting plate is a straight line. The outer edges of the holding beams are parallel to the center line of the batting plate or gradually get close to the center line of the batting plate from the end close to the batting plate to the end away from the batting plate and form an included angle A with the center line of the batting plate. The utility model has the effects that the clarity of the hand feeling is obviously improved, and the fine control on the batting of the racket is obviously improved. The utility model has the advantages of simple structure and low production and processing cost, and is beneficial to popularization and popularization of the national ball.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] This utility model relates to a table tennis racket, and more particularly to a table tennis racket that is easy to control with a horizontal grip. Background Technology

[0002] Currently, shakehand grip has a clear overall advantage over penhold grip. However, in some usage details, shakehand grip is far inferior to penhold grip, mainly in terms of feel and dexterity in controlling the racket shape. This is why penhold grip is always stronger than shakehand grip in receiving serves and control. This is mainly because when holding a penhold grip, the fingers participate in the contact area of ​​controlling the racket, including the thumb, index finger, middle finger, and ring finger, all of which are in contact with the racket. This allows for a clear perception of subtle angle changes and vibrations of the racket. In contrast, with shakehand grip, the middle finger, ring finger, and little finger are all on the handle, with less participation in racket control; their main function is gripping.

[0003] Based on the above analysis, the existing problems and defects of the horizontal grip are as follows:

[0004] (1) The feel is relatively dull compared to the penhold grip, and the perception of subtle hitting sensations is poor, which means the feel is not good.

[0005] (2) Poorer control compared to straight-grip shot.

[0006] (3) The difficulty in controlling the ball makes it slow for beginners to learn.

[0007] The difficulty in solving the above problems and defects is as follows:

[0008] Solving the control problem of horizontal racket must be done without affecting the use of existing technical systems. If it increases the difficulty of implementing existing mature technologies, it will be difficult to promote.

[0009] The target audience for solving the problem of shakehand grip is professional players, or at least professional enthusiasts. This is because the commercialization of table tennis rackets can only be promoted after they have been recognized by the professional community. This poses a high challenge to the solution and requires a considerable level of technical knowledge to discover and verify the solution.

[0010] The horizontal grip has been developed for over a hundred years, but its shape has remained largely unchanged, and there are basically no prior technologies to draw upon for solving control problems.

[0011] The significance of solving the above problems and defects is as follows:

[0012] It is beneficial for beginners to learn table tennis with a shakehand grip. The characteristics and charm of table tennis are self-evident, but its biggest obstacle to development is the difficulty of learning, especially with a shakehand grip. The core of this difficulty lies in control. If control can be significantly improved, it will be a great benefit to beginners and may change the competitive status of table tennis among various sports.

[0013] It enhances the viewing experience of the game. The excitement of table tennis lies in the various high-difficulty rallies. Increased control leads to more rallies and fewer mistakes, which naturally improves the viewing experience and enhances the charm of table tennis.

[0014] It helps increase the enjoyment of table tennis. For amateur players, the enjoyment of table tennis also lies in reducing mistakes and increasing the number of competitive rallies. Increased control also helps in this regard.

[0015] Furthermore, increased control may enhance the technical system of shakehand grip table tennis, allowing players to execute more difficult, varied, and tactical shots within their current physical capabilities, thus benefiting the evolution of table tennis techniques. Control is the core of everything in table tennis, and this control requires subtle and rapid responses to the racket angle, striking power, and adjustments to grip posture after contact with the ball. Changes in control are a key factor in improving table tennis technique. Utility Model Content

[0016] This invention provides a horizontal grip table tennis racket that is easy to control by improving the structure of the racket at low cost.

[0017] The technical solution adopted by this utility model to solve the above-mentioned technical problems is: a horizontal grip table tennis racket that is easy to control, including a hitting blade and a handle. The handle is provided with a grip beam, which is connected to the shoulder of the hitting blade and the handle respectively. The projection of the outer edge of the grip beam on the plane of the hitting blade is a straight line. The outer edge of the grip beam is parallel to the center line of the hitting blade or gradually approaches the center line of the hitting blade from the end closer to the hitting blade to the end farther away from the hitting blade and forms an angle A with the center line of the hitting blade. Grip beams are provided on both sides of the handle.

[0018] The effect of this structure is that it significantly improves the feel of holding the racket compared to a shakehand grip, and also significantly improves the control of the racket when hitting the ball, reducing errors. These will be analyzed one by one below. First, improved feel: When holding a standard shakehand ping-pong paddle, the index finger and thumb can sense the impact of the paddle and have some awareness of the paddle's angle. However, most of the middle finger, along with the ring and little fingers, grips the handle without contacting the paddle. This results in less finger involvement in paddle control and perception, leading to poorer perception and control. The added grip beam in this invention allows the fingers and palm to directly grip the extended part of the paddle, significantly increasing paddle awareness. This results in clearer tactile feedback, such as information about the paddle's tilt angle and the vibration of the ball, thus improving the feel. Second, improved control: The grip beam increases the grip width and friction, which in turn increases the grip torque. This increased radial torque of the grip allows for greater control of the hand at the moment of impact and higher sensitivity to the paddle's contact with the ball. Since the paddle generates torque upon impact, a key factor in sensing the impact, this torque is transmitted and amplified by the grip beam, achieving a superior feel. Compared to a standard shakehand grip, this new design offers a wider grip torque to counteract torque, resulting in better ball control and greater power. The projection of the outer edge of the grip beam onto the hitting surface of the racket is a straight line, making the judgment of the racket angle more accurate; a curve would lead to blurred perception. Thirdly, it makes it easier for beginners to perceive and control the racket tilt angle, leading to faster learning and progress. The difficulty in fixing the grip posture, judging the racket tilt angle, and controlling the racket are problems that amateur players urgently need to solve. Amateur table tennis players have been using the same racket design and results as professional players, which is not conducive to their technical progress. Mature professional players need a highly flexible and adjustable weapon, while amateur players need a racket that helps them master the grip posture and hitting state. The presence of grip beams on both sides ensures that the control torque on both sides of the handle is consistent, preventing imbalance in control.

[0019] This invention also has unexpected benefits: First, the wider grip torque increases the concentration and power of the shot, significantly improving power in both topspin drives and fast attacks. More fingers are involved in the power generation, and more fingers are at the point of contact, increasing absolute power. Second, the grip on this invention allows for a more relaxed hand position due to the greater friction. This looser grip allows the wrist to relax, resulting in better power generation. Third, this invention allows more fingers to participate in controlling the racket, providing excellent feel and control for various grip styles. It adapts to different grip positions, such as deep or shallow grips, offering good control. Traditional shakehand rackets rely more on the fingers gripping the racket shoulder in a deep grip, which can lead to wrist inflexibility and racket head tilting. Fourth, the larger grip torque of this invention expands the sweet spot, reducing errors and improving accuracy.

[0020] Furthermore, the projected length of the grip beam along the center line of the hitting blade is less than or equal to half the handle length. The effect of this structure is that it does not affect the flexible adjustment of the racket. This structure eliminates the grip beam at the little finger and hypothenar eminence grip positions, thus not affecting the racket's rotational adjustment in the hand. This is because the fulcrum for the instantaneous racket angle adjustment when hitting the ball with a shakehand grip is at the little finger and hypothenar eminence grip position; if a grip beam were present there, it would hinder racket rotational adjustment.

[0021] Furthermore, the grip beam is an inclined beam, with inclined beams on both sides of the grip. The projection of the outer edge of the inclined beam onto the plane of the hitting plate is a straight line, and the angle A between the outer edge of the inclined beam and the center line of the hitting plate is an acute angle. The effect of this structure is that it allows the hitting plate to obtain greater control and power while maintaining high flexibility, because the inclined beam makes the lower part of the grip beam very thin, minimizing the impact on the flexibility of racket adjustment.

[0022] Furthermore, the grip beam is a crossbeam, with at least one side of the grip having a crossbeam. The projection of the outer edge of the crossbeam onto the plane of the hitting blade is parallel to the center line of the hitting blade, and the width d of the crossbeam is less than or equal to 6mm. The effect of this structure is to allow the hitting blade to obtain a greater grip torque, thereby increasing the power of the shot. If the thickness of the crossbeam perpendicular to the center line of the hitting blade is greater than 6mm, it will lead to less flexibility in rotating the racket. This design provides sufficient control while reducing the impact on flexibility.

[0023] Furthermore, the grip beam is a protruding beam, with at least one side of the grip having a protruding beam. The angle A between the projection of the outer edge of the protruding beam onto the plane of the hitting plate and the center line of the hitting plate is an acute angle, and the angle C between the lower edge of the protruding beam and the center line of the hitting plate is less than or equal to 90 degrees. The effect of this structure is that it allows the middle finger to grip the protruding beam without the ring finger participating in the grip, thus reducing racket head tilting and facilitating power generation. The angle C between the lower edge of the protruding beam and the center line of the hitting plate being less than or equal to 90 degrees provides good flexibility for the ring finger in rotating the grip.

[0024] Furthermore, the included angle A is between 5 degrees and 40 degrees. The effect of this structure is that if it is less than 5 degrees, the torque will be too small due to the small protrusion, resulting in insufficient control force; if it is greater than 40 degrees, the outer edge of the grip beam will be too steep, making it inconvenient to grip and make fine adjustments.

[0025] Furthermore, the cross-section of the outer edge of the grip beam is arc-shaped. The advantage of this structure is that, typically, the edge of a racket's striking surface is a right angle, which facilitates production and eliminates the need for an arc shape. However, the grip beam, which controls the racket, is different; it significantly hinders the rotation of the racket's grip posture. Changing it to an arc shape reduces friction and makes the racket smoother when adjusting rotation in the hand, facilitating fine-tuning.

[0026] Furthermore, the projected length of the grip beam on the center line of the hitting blade is less than 5 cm. The effect of this structure is that it does not affect the racket's rotational flexibility in the hand. If the length exceeds 5 cm, the little finger will grip the grip beam, directly limiting rotation, because the little finger's grip position is the rotation axis for adjusting the racket's angle.

[0027] Furthermore, the maximum distance between the projection of the outer edge of the grip beam onto the plane of the hitting plate and the handle is less than or equal to 1.7 cm. The effect of this structure is that it allows the hand to grip the grip beam without losing control and affecting grip strength.

[0028] Furthermore, the thickness of the grip beam is the same as that of the hitting blade, and both sides of the grip beam and both sides of the hitting blade are on the same plane. The advantage of this structure is that it simplifies manufacturing and provides a clear sense of direction and hitting feel, allowing the user to have a clearer understanding of the racket's hitting direction and the feel of the ball.

[0029] Furthermore, the grip beam and the striking plate are integrally formed. The advantage of this structure is that it is simpler and easier to manufacture, and can also be designed as separate components to meet diverse user performance needs.

[0030] Comparison of performance indicators between this utility model and traditional penhold and shakehand grips:

[0031]

[0032]

[0033] This invention utilizes a grip beam with a wider grip torque than ordinary grips, resulting in a more stable grip posture. This not only makes it suitable for beginners to quickly master racket angle fixation, but also enables high-level players to maintain racket angle stability and perceive racket position during competition.

[0034] Compared with existing technologies, this utility model has the following advantages: By slightly modifying the racket structure and increasing the grip width and holding torque of the shakehand table tennis racket, it improves shot control and the sense of contact with the ball. This enhances shot control and power generation without altering the player's technique. The structure of this utility model does not change shakehand grip techniques or usage habits, nor does it introduce new problems. It helps beginners quickly master complex shakehand table tennis racket techniques and tilt adjustment skills, such as fixing the grip posture, sensing the racket tilt angle, and increasing control power—techniques most difficult for beginners to master. It is a racket that assists players in mastering grip posture and shot control. Furthermore, it is conducive to market acceptance; the simple structure and low production cost of this utility model facilitate widespread adoption. Attached Figure Description

[0035] Figure 1 This is a front view of Embodiment 1 of the present utility model.

[0036] Figure 2 This is a right view of one embodiment of the present utility model.

[0037] Figure 3 This is a bottom view of one embodiment of the present utility model.

[0038] Figure 4 This is a front view of Embodiment 2 of the present utility model.

[0039] Figure 5 This is an anatomical diagram of the BB portion in Embodiment 2 of this utility model.

[0040] Figure 6 This is a front view of Embodiment 3 of the present utility model.

[0041] Figure 7 This is a right view of Embodiment 3 of the present invention.

[0042] Figure 8 This is the front view of Embodiment 4 of this utility model.

[0043] Figure 9 This is a right view of Embodiment 4 of the present utility model.

[0044] List of reference numerals in the attached diagram:

[0045] 1-Strike blade 2-Grip 3-Beam 31-Giant beam 32-Lower edge of the giant beam 4-Cross beam Detailed Implementation

[0046] In this utility model, "front," "rear," "up," "down," "left," and "right" all refer to the position relative to the front view of the racket. Figure 1 In terms of the direction closer to the observer (i.e., the front of the racket), the direction farther from the observer is "back" (the back of the racket), and "vertical" refers to the up-down direction.

[0047] Example 1:

[0048] See Figure 1 , Figure 2 and Figure 3 As shown, the racket consists of a hitting blade 1, a handle 2, and a diagonal beam 3. The diagonal beam 3 is located at the front end of the handle 2. One end of the diagonal beam 3 connects to the shoulder of the hitting blade 1, and the other end connects to the handle 2. The diagonal beam 3 is an integral part of the hitting blade. The projection of the outer edge of the diagonal beam 3 onto the plane of the hitting blade is a straight line, and the angle A between the outer edge of the diagonal beam 3 and the longitudinal center line of the racket is 18 degrees. The maximum distance L between the straight portion of the projection of the outer edge of the diagonal beam 3 onto the plane of the hitting blade and the handle is 1.2 cm. The projection length of the diagonal beam 3 onto the handle is 3.5 cm, and the handle length is 10 cm. The diagonal beam 3 and the hitting blade 1 are integrally formed. The thickness of the diagonal beam 3 is the same as that of the hitting blade 1, and both sides of the diagonal beam 3 and both sides of the hitting blade 1 are on the same plane. The grip of this utility model is the same as that of a regular horizontal grip ping-pong paddle. Due to the setting of the inclined beam 3, the control torque of the hand on the hitting blade 1 is widened, resulting in better control at the moment of impact. In addition, the perception of the tilt angle of the hitting blade 1 is clearer, improving the feel. Since the inclined beam 3 is added to the control area of ​​the hand grip, and there is no inclined beam 3 in the rotation area, that is, the little finger grip area of ​​the handle 2, it will not cause the rotation fine adjustment to be obstructed. The grip of this invention is similar to that of a regular shakehand racket. The thumb and index finger pinch the base of the racket's striking blade 1, while the middle finger and the web of the thumb grip the diagonal beam 3 on both sides of the handle 2 and the handle 2 itself. The ring finger and little finger loop around the end of the handle 2. In use, the grip of the thumb and middle finger on the wider outer edge of the diagonal beam 3 during a shot increases the torque for controlling the racket, increases the grip strength for swinging the racket, increases the power for instantaneous racket shape adjustment, and increases grip stability. When it is necessary to rotate the racket in the hand, the middle finger and the web of the thumb relax the grip, and the middle finger assists the index finger and thumb in adjusting the racket shape. Like a regular shakehand racket, the racket rotates in the hand with the little finger as the fulcrum to achieve racket shape adjustment. Compared to a regular shakehand racket, this embodiment has slightly less flexibility, but significantly increased control and feel, especially in terms of hitting power and the control range of the racket's sweet spot, which is greatly increased due to the wider grip torque. These changes significantly improve attack power, stability, and feel in fast-attack tactics that combine topspin and fast-attack.

[0049] Example 2:

[0050] See Figure 4 and Figure 5 As shown, it consists of a hitting plate 1, a handle 2, and a diagonal beam 3. The difference from Embodiment 1 is that the projection of the outer edge of the diagonal beam 3 onto the plane of the hitting plate 1 is a straight line with a maximum distance of 0.7 cm from the handle; the projection length of the diagonal beam 3 onto the handle is 4 cm; the handle 2 is FL-shaped; and the width of the diagonal beam 3 is narrower and longer than in Embodiment 1. Other differences include... Figure 5 As shown, the cross-section of the outer edge of the inclined beam 3 is arc-shaped, which reduces the resistance when fine-tuning the racket. All of the above make it more flexible to change the racket tilt angle. The length of the inclined beam 3 increases the total grip torque and the overall strength of the racket's contact with the ball, making Embodiment 2 more suitable for the varied and flexible topspin-based fast attack style. The grip of this utility model is the same as that of Embodiment 1. The difference in the use of this utility model from Embodiment 1 is that the width of the inclined beam 3 is smaller and the length is longer. This makes the flexibility of this embodiment almost the same as that of a regular shakehand racket, but the feel is greatly increased. The long outer edge of the inclined beam 3 amplifies the feel of the slight change in the racket angle at the moment of contact with the ball, making the feel clearer. The overall grip torque is slightly less than that of Embodiment 1, but significantly improved compared to a regular shakehand racket. The power and accuracy of topspin shots are improved, as are the control precision of rallies and short balls. The flexibility of instantaneous changes also increases with the improved feel, making it suitable for the flexible and varied topspin-based fast attack style. The way to rotate the racket in this embodiment is the same as that of a regular shakehand racket and Embodiment 1.

[0051] Example 3:

[0052] See Figure 6 and Figure 7 As shown, it consists of a hitting plate 1, a grip 2, and a slanted beam 3. The difference from Embodiment 1 is that it has a raised beam 31, the length of which is only at the middle finger. This prevents the ring finger from gripping the raised beam 31. This has two advantages: while maintaining feel, power, and control, the racket head in Embodiment 3 is lower than in Embodiment 1, which helps reduce head tilt and makes it easier to use. In addition, not having the ring finger gripping the raised beam 31 makes the racket rotation more flexible. The grip of this utility model is the same as in Embodiment 1. The difference in the use of this utility model compared to Embodiment 1 is that the racket shape is mainly adjusted by pushing the raised beam 31 with the middle finger. Here, the angle A between the outer edge of the raised beam 31 and the center line of the hitting plate is 20 degrees, and the angle C between the lower edge 32 of the raised beam and the center line of the hitting plate is 80 degrees.

[0053] Example 4:

[0054] See Figure 8 and Figure 9As shown, it consists of a hitting plate 1, a handle 2, and a diagonal beam 3. The difference from Embodiment 1 is that it has a crossbeam 4 with a width d of 4mm. This makes the grip of Embodiment 4 more stable and the control force greater, but the relative flexibility is also less. The grip and use of this embodiment are the same as in Embodiment 1.

[0055] Those skilled in the art to which this utility model pertains may make various modifications or additions to the specific embodiments described, or adopt similar methods to replace them, as long as they do not deviate from the structure of this utility model or exceed the scope defined in the claims, they shall all fall within the protection scope of this utility model.

Claims

1. A ping-pong paddle for easy control, comprising a hitting blade and a handle, characterized in that, The handle is provided with a grip beam, which is connected to the shoulder of the hitting blade and the handle respectively. The projection of the outer edge of the grip beam on the plane of the hitting blade is a straight line. The outer edge of the grip beam is parallel to the center line of the hitting blade or gradually approaches the center line of the hitting blade from the end closer to the hitting blade to the end farther away from the hitting blade and forms an angle A with the center line of the hitting blade. Grip beams are provided on both sides of the handle.

2. The easily controllable horizontal grip table tennis racket according to claim 1, characterized in that, The length of the grip beam projected along the centerline of the hitting plate is less than or equal to half the length of the grip.

3. The easily controllable horizontal grip table tennis racket according to claim 1, characterized in that, The grip beam is an inclined beam, and inclined beams are provided on both sides of the grip. The projection of the outer edge of the inclined beam onto the plane of the hitting plate is a straight line, and the angle A between the outer edge of the inclined beam and the center line of the hitting plate is an acute angle.

4. The easily controllable horizontal grip table tennis racket according to claim 1, characterized in that, The grip beam is a crossbeam, and the grip has a crossbeam on at least one side. The projection of the outer edge of the crossbeam onto the plane of the hitting plate is parallel to the center line of the hitting plate, and the width d of the crossbeam is less than or equal to 6mm.

5. The easily controllable horizontal grip table tennis racket according to claim 1, characterized in that, The grip beam is a boss beam, and the grip has a boss beam on at least one side. The angle A between the projection of the outer edge of the boss beam onto the plane of the hitting plate and the center line of the hitting plate is an acute angle, and the angle C between the lower edge of the boss beam and the center line of the hitting plate is less than or equal to 90 degrees.

6. The easily controllable horizontal grip table tennis racket according to claim 3 or 5, characterized in that, The included angle A is between 5 degrees and 40 degrees.

7. The easily controllable horizontal grip table tennis racket according to any one of claims 1-5, characterized in that, The cross-section of the outer edge of the gripping beam is arc-shaped.

8. The easily controllable horizontal grip table tennis racket according to any one of claims 1-5, characterized in that, The projected length of the grip beam on the center line of the hitting plate is less than 5 centimeters.

9. The easily controllable horizontal grip table tennis racket according to claim 1, 2, 3 or 5, characterized in that, The maximum distance between the projection of the outer edge of the grip beam onto the plane of the hitting plate and the straight portion of the grip is less than or equal to 1.7 cm.

10. The easily controllable horizontal grip table tennis racket according to any one of claims 1-5, characterized in that, The thickness of the grip beam is the same as that of the hitting plate, and both sides of the grip beam and both sides of the hitting plate are on the same plane.

11. The easily controllable horizontal grip table tennis racket according to any one of claims 1-5, characterized in that, The grip beam and the hitting plate are integrally formed.

Images