The blocker’s bat
The five previous profiles cover a spectrum running from pure control to extreme attack, taking in defence from distance along the way. One profile is missing, operating at a different distance and on a different logic: the blocker close to the table. This game is not built on generating speed or on chopping from far back, but on using the opponent's energy — returning it, redirecting it, cancelling it — from a position barely a metre beyond the end line. The equipment it calls for reflects that premise.
The blade is stiff, of medium or medium-high speed. It may be an all-wood five- or seven-ply with hard outer species, or even a composite blade, though the choice is not about power but about directness. What the blocker needs from the base is that it should not yield under impact. When the opponent plays a loop loaded with spin, a flexible blade absorbs and amplifies the incoming rotation; a stiff blade rejects it, returns the ball on a brief contact and reduces the influence of the incoming spin. The time on the surface described in 2.5 is shortened deliberately: the less time the ball spends on the surface, the less the opponent's spin affects it.
The rubber is where this profile parts company with all the others in the chapter. There are two options, and the choice between them defines two variants of the same style.
The first is short pimples, whose properties were covered in 6.2. Short pimples on a stiff blade produce a dry, direct block with little sensitivity to incoming spin. The ball leaves flat or with minimal rotation, which disconcerts an attacker used to having their topspin come back with spin on it. Where the short pimples are oriented towards hitting — stiffer, less grippy — the blocker can also counter-attack with flat strokes of surprising speed, using the stiffness of the assembly to turn the opponent's energy into outgoing pace. It is the more active variant of the profile.
The second is anti-spin, described in 6.5. The smooth but non-grippy surface cancels almost entirely the spin of the incoming ball: the opponent's topspin does not grip, and neither does backspin. The ball comes back dead, without perceptible rotation, at a speed that wrong-foots because it does not answer to what the attacker expected. On a stiff blade, anti-spin produces blocks that seem to absorb the energy of the stroke. The variant is more passive than the short-pimple one: a blocker with anti-spin generates less counter-attack, but the discomfort produced in the opponent is at its maximum. Few players know what to do with a ball that comes back without spin and without speed from half a metre off the table.
The asymmetry between sides follows the pattern of the third degree described in 11.4, though with a nuance compared with the defender of 12.5. The short-pimple or anti-spin side carries the tactical weight of the block; the other side mounts an inverted rubber — a tensor of medium or medium-low hardness — for the strokes where the blocker decides to attack. The difference from the classic defender is the playing distance: the blocker does not chop from far back but attacks and blocks close in, and that calls for an inverted rubber that works at short range, with compact strokes and minimal reaction times.
The assembled weight sits in a middle range, between 165 and 180 grams. The stiff blade may weigh somewhat more than the defender's, but the special rubber — short pimples or anti-spin, with thin sponge or none — compensates. The result is a manageable bat, with enough inertia for the blocks to have firmness but without the weight that penalises quick transitions between sides. Section 11.5 applies here with a nuance of its own: the blocker needs fast hands more than a powerful arm, and excess weight works directly against the style.
The general rule of 11.3 — a fast blade with a restrained rubber — is met here in a particular way. The stiff blade is not after power but rejection. The special rubber is not after progressive control but insensitivity to spin. Both components push in the same direction, but that direction is neither speed nor control in the classic sense: it is neutralisation. The profile of the player who fits this equipment is developed in 16.6. Here it is enough to note that it is a style demanding in reading the game and in reflexes, that it works best close to the table, and that the equipment does not forgive passivity: whoever blocks without tactical intent becomes comfortable sparring for any attacker.