ITTF marking and the LARC list of approved rubbers
For a rubber to be usable in competition under ITTF rules, it must meet two conditions simultaneously: appear on the LARC (Listing of Approved Racket Coverings), the official list of approved coverings the federation publishes twice yearly, and carry printed on its surface the official ITTF logo together with the name of the manufacturer and of the model. The first is the administrative record; the second, the physical proof the umpire can verify on the bat.
The process connecting them is approval. The manufacturer submits each model to a procedure verifying parameters such as pimple thickness, surface density, colour, friction and chemical composition. If the product complies, it receives the right to the marking and is included in the LARC for the following period. Approval is renewed every six months.
It is worth clarifying what the marking does not mean, because the confusion is frequent. The ITTF logo does not certify the quality of the rubber in any comparative sense. It does not say it is fast, or slow, or appropriate for a particular level. It says only that it meets the technical requirements of the rules. A beginner's rubber and a professional one carry exactly the same logo. Approval is a threshold, not a grade.
The LARC list has a peculiarity that surprises anyone consulting it for the first time: it is temporary. Each half-year new models appear and others disappear. There are two reasons. The first is economic: manufacturers pay for the renewal of each model, and when a product leaves the catalogue they stop renewing it. The second is regulatory: when the rules change — a new visibility requirement, an additional chemical restriction — models that do not adapt are withdrawn.
The direct consequence is that a rubber can cease to be legal without having changed physically. A rubber bought years ago may find itself outside the LARC in force on the day of the tournament, even though it was perfectly legal at the time. The operative rule for anyone competing is clear: the rubber must appear on the LARC in force on the day of the match, not on the one in force on the day of purchase. Before a tournament, the prudent practice is to consult the current version — openly available on the ITTF website — and verify that the models mounted appear on it.
There is also an intermediate zone worth recording. Some rubbers are sold without ITTF marking: versions meant for the domestic market of the country that makes them, which never go through approval. They should not be confused with the selection versions covered in section 5.9: the Hurricane 3 National, for instance, is approved and carries its marking. A player who buys an unmarked rubber through parallel channels is getting equipment that, strictly speaking, cannot be used in a tournament under international rules.
The printed marking is what the umpire inspects at equipment control. If the logo is worn away — something common after months of play and cleaning — the bat can be rejected even though the rubber is identical to a perfectly legal one. The inspection procedure is detailed in 3.6; the signs of wear affecting the marking, in 13.5.
For the club player with no competitive ambitions, the system operates in the background: the market is dominated by manufacturers who produce with approval in mind, and practically any rubber bought in a general shop carries the marking without the buyer having to worry. The real impact of the LARC on the recreational player as against the competitor is taken up again in 3.7.