In this article, I would like to share my experiences regarding the durability of a table tennis rubber. On what does durability depend? How can I extend it? And when should I change my rubbers at the latest?

How long does a table tennis rubber last?

Basically, the durability of table tennis rubbers is highly dependent on the number of playing hours and the intensity of play. With a modern tensor rubber, the best performance can be expected for approx. 40-60 hours of use.

Classic rubbers or robust Chinese rubbers have a significantly longer durability, as classic rubbers do not have a built-in tension. Therefore, 80 playing playing hours or more are easily achieved.

For example, a amateur athlete who trains twice a week (approx. 2-3 hours each time) and participates in competitions will experience a rubber lifespan (with tensor effect) of approx. 3-4 months. I myself need two sets of rubbers, respectively four rubbers, per season. During the summer break, I usually try out different rubbers, which is why it is not necessary to change rubbers again.

Contributing factors on the lifespan of table tennis rubbers

Basically, the durability of a table tennis rubber comes to an end when it loses its grip and tension. Consequently, its catapult and dynamics decrease significantly.

The loss of tension is the most important factor in determining the lifespan of a Tensor rubber, which features a high built-in tension. As a result, the playing characteristics change to a much greater extent than you would notice with the reduction in friction.

On the other hand, a classic rubber can be played successfully for a very long time as long as the grip of the top sheet is not affected.

However, it is also a question of what expectations a table tennis player puts on his material. An experienced spin player will notice the loss of grip more quickly and perceive it as negative than a typical allround player, who compensates for the loss of grip with more control through less spin-sensitivity.

In addition to the rubber technology or your own demands, the rubber hardness, especially that of the top sheet, is a key factor. In most cases, the loss of tension can be traced back to the top sheet. If the rubber composition is designed to be relatively soft, this can be compensated by a lesser degree.

Finally, the stroke technique and your own target window on the racket play an important role. For me, the ball contact spot on the backhand side is distributed across the full width of the racket in the upper third of the hitting area.

On the other hand, I hit most soft topspins at exactly one point in the middle of the forehand side. Since all the abrasion takes place in this area, I notice the loss of spin more clearly than on the backhand or when using other forehand techniques. I quite often had rubbers that still looked good, but were useless in the hitting area.

This is annoying, but makes a change necessary if you want to retain the usual level of spin on the first topspin.

Differences in durability are noticeable from rubber to rubber. There are rubbers that basically wear out faster than others, even though they are based on the same technology. This can only be determined in a long-term testing and through the experience of several table tennis players.

Table tennis rubber: 4 phases of durability

I would like to divide the durability of table tennis rubbers into four phases. I differentiate between modern tensors and classic rubbers. The information presented in the section and the graphic refers to tensor rubbers.

For classic rubbers, a significantly longer durability can generally be assumed. In addition, the drop in performance during phase 4 is significantly slower.

Phase 1: Everything is new (1-2 training sessions)

The first phase of a table tennis rubber’s durability is from the time it is applied until the first 1-2 times of play. During this phase, the rubber is completely new. Typically, there can be a loud squeaking noise when the top sheet is brushed over.

Depending on the rubber, this squeaking also occurs with very fine topspin strokes. Furthermore, the rubbers appear somewhat less elastic and harder than normally. At the same time, the dynamics of the rubber develop noticeably stroke by stroke.

Phase 2: Knock in (3-4 weeks)

From the third practice or playing session, the table tennis rubbers enter the second phase of their durability, which can last up to four weeks. During this time, the performance of the rubbers is at its absolute best. The actual playing feel and its catapult effect begin to emerge more and more.

Personally, I play my best table tennis during this phase: offensively, riskily and successfully. The level of rotation is also at its absolute maximum. The initial squeaking no longer occurs and the ball contact is ideal.

Phase 3: Real performance (3-6 months)

By the third phase, the rubbers exceed their absolute maximum performance and stabilize at a very high performance level, which is more or less maintained until the rubbers are worn out.

Depending on the intensity of play, the first signs of abrasion on the rubber surface become apparent, but these have no influence on the playing characteristics. The rubbers are slightly slower than in phase two, but have much better control. The spin sensitivity usually decreases slightly.

As quite described above, the exact length of this phase is difficult to define and depends on the individual circumstances.

Phase 4: Wear off (6+ months)

The entry into phase 4 for the durability of table tennis rubbers is often abrupt and a significant drop in playing performance is noticeable. In most cases, this is triggered by a loss of tension from the rubber, which causes even perfectly hit balls to starve, be harmless, become inaccurate or simply react significantly differently than before.

For some players, however, the rubbers are simply worn out and offer significantly less spin, while speed and control are still more than enough. You can therefore continue to play with the rubber.

However, if a rubber is changed too late, the player’s own game, which has adapted to the used rubber, needs to be changed once again. People are then all too happy to complain about the changed playing characteristics of the new rubber, even though they have simply become too accustomed to the old one.

How to increase the longevity of table tennis rubbers

Taking proper care of table tennis rubbers is an important cornerstone when it comes to the durability of rubbers. This is because the rubber surfaces are sensitive to dust, dirt, moisture and sunlight.

It is best to clean the table tennis racket after every game and put it safely away inside a racket case. Opinions differ on the subject of rubber foils.

I recommend using a non-adhesive rubber foil or a thin cardboard or paper to protect the top sheet. I don’t know whether it is necessary to clean the racket before every game. In any case, for many players it is a kind of ritual to take the racket out of the case when it is still clean and clean it again

In my opinion, the use of glue also matters in terms of durability. If you apply your rubbers, especially tensor rubbers, with solvent-based VOC glues, you expose them to additional tension. This can have a negative impact on durability.

A latex glue is probably better. And apply gentle pressure when applying the rubber. This means that the rubber does not shrink as much when it is removed later.

I have one more tip for used rubbers. If they are still grippy but have noticeably lost tension, re-gluing often helps to extend the playing time. As a result, a rubber usually lasts 2-3 weeks longer before it needs to be replaced.

If you use a VOC glue when applying a re-glue, you gain about a week, i.e. the duration of the “speed glueing effect”. After that, the rubber quickly loses tension again and either has to be applied again or you have to get a new one.

Long-lasting table tennis rubbers

I would like to show you a few examples of long-lasting table tennis rubbers. I have either played most of these rubbers myself or have at least been able to observe them for a long time.

Butterfly Tenergy 05 / Tenergy o5 FX

The great success of the Butterfly Tenergy 05, its FX version and perhaps even the entire Tenergy rubber series is not only due to the excellent playing characteristics of the rubbers, but also because of their long durability.

After many months of play, the robust 05 top sheet still offers a lot of rotation and spin elasticity. A comparison between a new Tenergy 05 and a well-worn one shows that the characteristics are largely retained.

I know a player who took the old Tenergys from me and other club colleagues for a certain period and played successfully with them for quite a while. His replacement model only failed because nobody played with Tenergys any more

But even for youth players who may not yet be able to handle a new Tenergy, the used 05 rubbers offer sufficient playing characteristics.

In the course of the price increases of the other brands, I consider the Tenergy prices to be very fair, taking into account the extraordinary durability compared to modern Tensor rubbers.

Yasaka Mark V / GPS

Among the classic rubbers, I would like to emphasize the durability of the Yasaka Mark V and its soft version Mark V GPS. Even compared to the robust Butterfly Sriver, you can count on a longer durability.

I know a player who has had a Yasaka Mark V on his backhand for over 10 years. The rubber still looks good and plays like it’s still new

Of course, this is partly due to the fact that he doesn’t practise regularly and perhaps doesn’t produce the best topspin with his backhand. But his backspin and the many blocked strokes that deflect the opponent’s spin should actually generate enough friction.

There are certainly other classics and China rubbers that can be played for a long time. But in my experience, the Mark V stands out even more.

Tibhar Aurus / Aurus Soft / Aurus Sound

When it comes to looking for a particularly robust Tensor rubber with very good durability, the Tibhar Aurus is the first rubber to be mentioned. As the rubber is extremely compact and direct to play, the gradual loss of tension is not so noticeable.

The surface of the rubber still has a good grip, even if there are clear signs of abrasion. In combination, the Aurus can be played noticeably longer without experiencing a complete loss of the original playing characteristics.

Within certain limits, this can also be applied to the softer rubber versions Aurus Soft and even Aurus Sound. My Aurus Soft (see cover picture, together with a Xiom Omega V Euro) only deteriorated noticeably after six months of intensive use.

In comparison, I had to replace the Omega V Euro, which also has a good durability, quite 6 weeks earlier. The rubber simply lost its tension earlier. There was still enough grip though.

Donic Baracuda / Baracuda Big Slam

As one of the few real Tenergy 05 alternatives, the Donic Baracuda can convince with similar playing characteristics. Meanwhile, the durability of the rubber must also be emphasized positively, although I would put a T05 or Tibhar Aurus on a higher level.

With the softer version Baracuda Big Slam, long play is equally possible. Unfortunately, during my short intermezzo with the rubber, I noticed that it becomes significantly more catapulting after phase 2 ended, which I personally don’t like.

Compared to an Aurus Soft, which is of course also becomes smoother, the effect is quite distinctive. The knock-in simply works too well with the Big Slam

Tibhar Genius

I have played with the Tibhar Genius for a very long time and can therefore provide the most accurate impressions. The durability of the rubber is exceptionally good. The top sheet is slightly more flexible compared to the Tenergy 05, Aurus or Baracuda.

This only has a limited negative effect. On the contrary, I had very good experiences with the Genius when it came to re-gluing. Afterwards, the rubber played well again for several weeks.

I was also able to repeat this several times, so that even a completely worn off Genius could be played for another 1-2 weeks. I even once had one whose top sheet was still good after eight months and I only had to reactivate the sponge.

Nittaku Fastarc G-1 / Fastarc C-1

Perhaps the best Tenergy 05 alternative can shine with a very pronounced durability. The Nittaku Fastarc G-1 hardly loses any tension. The low-catapult and at the same time elastic feel is maintained for a very long time.

Only when the top sheet has been used up completely does the G-1 requires a rubber change.

The Nittaku Fastarc C-1 offers similar durability. Due to the softer sponge, however, the elasticity plays a somewhat greater role, which makes a change necessary sooner.

andro Hexer Duro

Over the years, I have observed an interesting phenomenon with the andro Hexer Duro. The more used the rubber becomes, the more control there is. Can’t that be said about all rubbers?

No, because for me precision is a key factor when assessing control. The possibility of creating rotation and therefore being a threat to my opponent must also be taken into account.

It’s always amazing to see how worn out the rubber can be and it still delivers. The rubber really is the embodiment of the “egg-laying wool-milk sow” (“Eierlegende Wollmilchsau” in german. Meaning something that meets every need and every requirement). It’s a shame that the do-it-all rubber is generally too harmless for me. Being able to do everything doesn’t mean being able to do everything perfectly.

Conclusion on the 4 phases of the durability of a table tennis rubber

There are certainly other experiences with the durability of table tennis rubbers. For me, the four phases of durability are noticeable with every table tennis rubber. With some rubbers, however, the impressions sometimes overlap.

However, the most important thing is that you are aware that a table tennis rubber does not last forever and that you should think about changing it in advance. I have experienced quite often that replacing the rubber too late had negative consequences for their playing technique.

In contrast, I would like to mention the example of the Yasaka Mark V again. There are certainly cases that allow a significantly longer lifespan than usual. It’s just not the norm.

So take a close look at your rubber and make the right decision. Your game will say ‘Thank you’ for it.

The post Durability of a table tennis rubber (4 phases) appeared first on TT-SPIN.COM - Table Tennis Reviews.

Whether Tibhar will still expand its Evolutions, I dare to doubt, at least from today’s perspective. Except for a few minor improvements, there are no more expansion options that really make sense. Furthermore, they shouldn’t compete with other Evolution rubbers.

It will be much more interesting to see if the other “Pro Player Version” rubber series called Tibhar Infinity will be launched on the market in the near future. After all, two versions are already included on the ITTF approval list LARC: The Tibhar Infinity MX-P and the Tibhar Infinity MX-S.

It will be interesting to see if I am right.

A rare species: medium rubbers

In general, there seems to be very little choice in rubbers of the medium range (44-45° EUR). Very frequently, rubber series with hard (50°), medium-hard (47.5°) or medium-soft (42.5°) versions offer a broad selection for table tennis players. Only medium lovers are many times left empty-handed.

And if there is a medium rubber, it often has high catapult characteristics. I think of the andro Rasanter R45 or andro Hexer Grip, but also of the Tibhar Aurus Select.

I personally consider this a great pity, but I can understand the context. Looking at the different player types, experienced attackers get along well with harder rubbers. On the other hand, those who have difficulties with their technique or simply want to disguise a weaker backhand side don’t perform badly with softer rubbers.

Furthermore, a softer medium rubber fits into the comfort zone of many passive players, but still offers good attacking qualities.

However, I think that medium rubbers with good performance and a moderate ball impact are overlooked too much by the brands. I personally am enthusiastic about the Xiom Omega V Euro and recommend this rubber on a regular basis. A Nittaku Fastarc C-1, Tibhar Evolution EL-S, Donic Bluefire M2 or Xiom Vega Japan are among the most popular table tennis rubbers.

Labeled Medium – But Soft Inside

When I take a look at the product description and the perceived hardness of the Tibhar Evolution FX-D, it seems obvious that it is a rather soft medium rubber. The total hardness of the rubber should correspond to 43.0-45.0° EUR.

Therefore, a comparison to the faster medium-soft rubbers should not be forgotten. Especially modern rubbers like the Tibhar Evolution FX-S, andro Hexer Powergrip SFX or Donic Bluestorm Z3 come to mind. In the process of the review, I’ll see which other alternatives to the FX-D come to mind.

Expectations on the FX-D

Based on the experience with the EL-D and the described characteristics on the part of Tibhar, I expect a rubber that will offer me plenty of catapult and support. It will also be interesting to see how soft the combination of the rather flexible Evolution D top sheet with a medium sponge will feel.

Another interesting question to me is whether the Tibhar Evolution FX-D can be an upgrade to the FX-P. Because I considered the concept of soft sponge with powerful top sheet already exciting at that time, but I always wondered if there might be a better balancing between top sheet and sponge.

I will clarify the following questions, as well as others, during the review of the FX-D: What are the strengths of the FX-D? What about weaknesses? Where does the Tibhar rubber rank in the jungle of table tennis rubbers? Are there good alternatives or for which rubbers is the FX-D a good replacement? Which type of player should take a closer look at the rubber?

Technical characteristics of the Tibhar Evolution FX-D

As quite with its harder variants, the Tibhar Evolution FX-D uses a relatively elastic top sheet. At first glance, a grippy top sheet can be found. It is slightly matt, with still visibly shining through pimples.

The pimples are comparatively wide, but not short. Moreover, they are close to each other.

The sponge hardness of the rubber is within the medium range. Due to the medium-sized pores, however, it can be squeezed quite easily.

During the compression testing, this combination proves to be very elastic. A real hardness can only be determined at maximum compression. Especially in the first third, it feels more like a soft rubber.

I was somewhat surprised by the high weight of the rubber. I would have expected 1-2 g less. With packaging, my tested rubber (red 2.1-2.2 mm) weighs 109.39 g. So there is not much less weight than with the EL-D.

The uncut rubber comes to 70.51 g. Cut on the main testing blade (Tibhar Offensive Premium), 46.21 g remain on the racket.

Playing characteristics of the Tibhar Evolution FX-D

With the initial strokes, it is obvious that the feel with the Tibhar Evolution FX-D tends in a very soft direction. Counter strokes are played comfortably and accompanied by a rich sound.

The rubber seems very smooth, although the basic pace is not that low. I was able to determine a high level of support with every stroke. Overall, I would place the FX-D within the mid-range as far as general speed is concerned.

The rubber also accelerates the balls well, but just within the bounds of the soft feel. The strong owned catapult predominates the good, but not overarching dynamics of the rubber.

Topspin game & offensive action

You can play very safe and medium fast when playing topspin. Especially the slow topspins performed well. In all offensive strokes, control and support are not lacking.

At a faster pace, especially on final strokes, the Tibhar Evolution FX-D has obvious limitations. You can accelerate the ball well at first, but it lacks hardness and power to force direct points.

Instead, the FX-D offers a very variable game. Although the rubber doesn’t necessarily have the best precision, I was able to outplay my opponents well. The high safety in offensive actions and the strong, but not exaggerated, dynamic of the rubber make every stroke look very easy.

Counter topspin, half distance & rotation

In open play you can compete very well. Counter topspins are quite reliable, but noticeably harmless. From half distance, the Tibhar Evolution FX-D looks very comfortable. There is just enough speed to control the rallies and to set own accents.

The spin performance in general is good. With slower strokes, clearly more rotation can be brought into play. During the faster play, the arcs seem rather flat and harmless.

Preparing your own attacking strokes suits the FX-D, whereas finishing with a faster stroke side makes more sense. Emergency strokes succeed outstandingly well. The mixture of high catapult, appropriate dynamics and pleasant feel even cover up incorrect positioning to the ball, which is something I’m only used to from soft rubbers.

Service & return

When it comes to serving, the Tibhar Evolution FX-D can produce a good amount of spin. More important than a dangerous serve, however, is the good feel for the ball. With it, I was able to produce very accurate and reliable serves.

On short-short, I could establish a good touch, allowing me to place the ball behind the net without any problems. What I missed was the extra spin on such strokes. In addition, the returns turned out to be a bit too high sometimes.

When returning the serve, the FX-D impressed with its outstanding feel and hardly spin-sensitive playability. I was able to return even difficult serves from the opponent at a high rate.

The placement proved to be more difficult. I managed to produce reasonable returns, but not always as I wanted. The rubber is sometimes just too soft and flexible. A more direct touch wouldn’t hurt, especially in connection with a lot of wrist movement.

On active returns, I was able to flip almost every ball. The flips weren’t particularly dangerous, but they broke the rhythm of my opponents. And when I did play a backspin, they didn’t know what it was anymore

The banana flip works very easily and possesses a nice curve. Openings above the table also work. But I had to get off the demand to make direct points with it.

Block play

The biggest strength with the Tibhar Evolution FX-D can be found in the blocking game. Due to the mixture of dynamic and catapult characteristics, any kind of block is applied safely and accurately. It is also possible to pressure the opponent.

For active blocks, the ball can be kept quite flat. The length is sufficient to keep opponents busy. Personally, I would wish for more direct feedback on the ball, but if it works, you can’t complain.

Passive blocks allow all topspins to rebound well. Even late blocks don’t get too high. Only the speed on the late blocks is too low to force the opponent into defense. Errors are provoked mainly during long rallies.

Shooting & high defence

The Tibhar Evolution FX-D feels very comfortable in the shooting game. The rubber is just fast enough to keep the opponent at a distance. Without the welcome assistance of the opponent, however, the rallies cannot be completed.

From the high defence, there is a lot of fun to be had. I was able to operate so confidently that long rallies were inevitable. Unfortunately, height and length are not too dangerous for the opponents, so they had fun chasing me around the court.

Counter-attacks are more possible over two or three steps, by moving further towards the table. The FX-D simply lacks the power for sudden changes of pace.

Alternatives to the Tibhar Evolution FX-D

There is no lack of alternatives to the Tibhar Evolution FX-D. Not only do I encounter a few candidates with medium rubbers, but I also have to consider quite a few among the medium-soft rubbers.

Depending on which playing characteristics are important, either the elastic top sheet or the dynamic medium sponge stands at the centre of attention. Furthermore, there are some Evolutions among the series that I consider as alternatives under certain conditions.

Tibhar Evolution FX-S & FX-P

I’ll just start with the other flexible Evolutions. The overall feel of the FX-D is even softer than with the FX-S during slow strokes. Especially passive return strokes are easier to handle. The spin-sensitivity of the Tibhar Evolution FX-S is significantly higher.

The catapult is not as effective. Apart from the fast offensive play, I would assign the FX-D more stroke support and control. However, in the attacking game, more security can be brought into play with the FX-S via the stable ball trajectory and the lower closing speed.

The FX-S builds up its dynamics later and appears more poisonous during spin play. They are simply completely different rubber concepts, but they are tangent to each other in certain areas. I can imagine switching from FX-D to FX-S and vice versa, as the demands are similar overall.

The question is whether I would rather play a faster rubber with more support, which is also very variable from half-distance. Or would I rather play a slower, more spinny rubber, which seems a bit more dangerous, but which shows off more through your own arm movement, without requiring much more physical effort.

It simply depends on the player type.

I prefer the Tibhar Evolution FX-P as an alternative rubber. What has always bothered me about this rubber is the fact that it can be played fast, despite the low hardness, but is ultimately too soft to make use of the implied power.

A bit more hardness, speed and a smoother feel would be desirable in my opinion. And that is exactly what the FX-D offers compared to its softer counterpart. The top sheet is a bit more flexible, but this is easily compensated for by more dynamics with the harder sponge.

Both rubbers do not have a high arc, but can be played with a high performance in certain playing situations. In addition, the FX-D is simply more consistent and can create a more pleasant feel with its mixture of catapult and feeling for the ball.

So if you like the FX-P but consider it too soft and unbalanced in some playing situations, you can take a closer look at its flexible-dynamic brother.

Tibhar Evolution EL-D

A good comparison can be done with the harder Evolution version Tibhar Evolution EL-D. The differences between FX-D and EL-D are not as great as between Tibhar Evolution MX-D and EL-D, but still clearly noticeable. This is primarily due to the more similar sponge hardness and the influence of a softer top sheet with softer sponges.

In combination with a medium sponge, the rubber concept seems quite flexible. I already had the feeling with the EL-D in some playing situations that a harder sponge could not do any harm.

What gets almost completely lost with the FX-D is the dominating dynamic of the harder rubber versions. This means that I receive a lot of control, feeling and a rich sound, but above all less dangerousness. While the EL-D was still able to set the tone within its limits, with the flexible version it is more of a friendly playing along.

What I like is that dynamics no longer set in too early. In passive play, this made a big difference.

Overall, I think the Tibhar Evolution EL-D is the better rubber, no question. On the other hand, the Tibhar Evolution FX-D is much more useful for players who want to feel a high level of support from a good inherent catapult and who also want to somehow play along with the fast game.

andro Rasanter R45 & Rasanter-Evolution Evaluation

Compared to the andro Rasanter R45, there is a softer feel. In general, the FX-D seems more controlled and smooth. The softer touch and the less spin-sensitive feel provide reliability from all angles.

The R45, on the other hand, is more powerful and much faster to play within its limits. In addition, I experience the ball trajectory as higher and spin-stronger, especially on slow openings.

With both rubbers you can play safely from half distance, but the R45 delivers more power.

As a softer alternative, the FX-D comes in slightly below the R45.

You can generally consider the new D-Evolution as a more flexible and variable alternative to the newer Rasanter rubbers. An MX-D offers more spin dynamics & consistency compared to the faster Rasanter R53. The EL-D is softer and more spin dynamic than the Rasanter R48. And the FX-D qualifies as a more controlled alternative to the Rasanter R45.

andro Hexer Grip

What I think is very interesting are the parallels and differences to the andro Hexer Grip. First of all, both rubbers have this very soft and catapult-like ball impact in common. Therefore, I personally see a similar control with both rubbers.

The difference is that the Hexer Grip is not quite as spin insensitive. On the other hand, a more beautiful arc can be produced. The faster and more intensive you play, the more differences between the rubbers become apparent.

While the andro Hexer Grip loses control during offensive open play and the rubber seems less consistent due to its catapult characteristics, the FX-D offers a smoother feel.

The RG seems to have its strengths at the table, although it can also be played variably at half-distance. With the FX-D, on the other hand, you can build on a lot of safety during long rallies at the table and from half-distance.

Tibhar Aurus Select

Another comparison rubber is the Tibhar Aurus Select. Both rubbers play softer and more flexible than most medium rubbers. The Select, however, does not have the same dynamics, but offers more security in the spin game.

Especially when opening at the table, the Tibhar rubber contributes more rotation and danger to the game. Passively, both rubbers forgive a large portion of mistakes.

The catapult of the FX-D is a bit more prominent. This makes it possible to build on a bit more support during strokes. Both comparison rubbers are perfectly suited for a typical backhand play and are rather faster alternatives to the softer medium-soft rubbers.

More of an alternative for medium-soft rubbers

As quite pointed out above when comparing to the Evolutions FX-S and FX-P, a Tibhar Evolution FX-D compares quite well to medium-soft rubbers. The rubber simply lacks the overall hardness to compete with high-performance medium rubbers, such as Xiom Omega V Euro, Tibhar Evolution EL-S, Nittaku Fastarc C-1, Donic Bluefire M2 or Xiom Vega Japan.

In contrast, the rubber offers more potential than a Tibhar Evolution FX-P, andro Hexer Powergrip SFX or Donic Bluestorm Z3 in terms of offensive characteristics. But without to really dominate.

Ideal blade-rubber combinations for the Tibhar Evolution FX-D

I experienced the best blade-rubber combination with an inner layer carbon blade (Xiom An JaeHyun TMXi). With this combination, I was able to compensate the weaknesses in terms of power and break through abilities, but also ball trajectory and spin development, without losing the touch for the ball.

On the other hand, the combination with all-wooden blades (Tibhar Offensive Premium, Butterfly Primorac) was rather counterproductive. I simply could not hit any dangerous final strokes. It was fun to play with such a combination, especially because of the good sound, but in the end I want to score effectively.

When playing with an outer layer carbon blade (Butterfly Viscaria), I couldn’t cope at all. The rubber simply lacks ball trajectory or hardness to carry the balls ideally. Only playing from half distance was excellent. But that’s simply because of the Viscaria, which I always consider as good there.

Conclusion on the Tibhar Evolution FX-D

On the whole, I had a positive impression with the Tibhar Evolution FX-D. Especially the support on slow strokes and the balanced dynamic development pleased me quite a bit.

The great strength of the rubber resides in the passive play, especially in blocking. With little spin-sensitivity, all controlled strokes can be hit well. In addition, it is possible to play well in the open game and from half-distance.

However, the rubber is not as powerful as some other medium rubbers and offers mainly medium-soft players an alternative. The comparison to medium rubbers with soft ball impact is equally good.

As a good upgrade to a Tibhar Evolution FX-P, the FX-D offers a smoother feel, more predictable play and ultimately a great playing enjoyment.

I see the rubber primarily with players who rather operate sensitively and want to avoid mistakes, but also want to have the potential to play faster at times. Especially variable power allrounders or former soft tensor players can be happy with the Tibhar Evolution FX-D.

It simply depends on the right blade-rubber combination, where I consider inner-layer carbon blades to be the right choice. And there is a wide range of choice within the moderate offensive spectrum, which means that a skilful allround offensive play, which the FX-D supports best, can be implemented well.

The post Tibhar Evolution FX-D appeared first on TT-SPIN.COM - Table Tennis Reviews.

As a softer rubber version of the Tibhar Evolution MX-D, the expectations are certainly high. Among all the table tennis rubbers I have tested to date, the MX-D was able to achieve my highest awarded rating. I have called the best Tibhar rubber the most complete table tennis rubber on the market.

My experience with Tibhar Evolution rubbers

When I check out which table tennis rubbers are played most often, I can’t get past the Evolution rubbers. In fact, when I saw the Tibhar Evolution MX-P, EL-P and FX-P rubbers on the LARC list, the approval list for TT rubbers, they weren’t available.

Developed especially for professional players, at least according to the legend that Tibhar created around the Evolutions, access to today’s popular rubbers was made possible only at a later time.

MX-P, EL-P & FX-P

As soon as I held a Tibhar Evolution rubber in my hand for the first time, I was so filled with excitement. I couldn’t await the launch in Europe and ordered the rubbers in Asia.

Unfortunately, the delight was followed by a great disappointment. As cool as the MX-P is, including its excellent offensive characteristics, for me, however, the rubber is not suitable. The entire P-series of the Evolutions does not appeal to me as a versatile topspin player.

Accordingly, I could understand the hype about the Evolutions, after all, perfect strokes work almost too often during practice or while testing it. But for me and my playing style, just these Evolution rubbers are not suitable at all.

MX-S, EL-S & FX-S (MX-P50)

What do you think, how happy I was about the Tibhar Evolution MX-S. A rubber that is trimmed for spin and that scores in the topspin play should be interesting to me, right? Unfortunately, I was disillusioned again, because I simply don’t produce the amount of arm movement and body effort that would be necessary to use the rubber to its full potential.

But the Tibhar Evolution EL-S and FX-S are the answer to my prayers to change to a Tibhar Evolution rubber permanently? Of course, in the end, the EL-S was too soft for me and too catapult-like when it came to blocking. The FX-S was clearly too soft on my blade at the time, an old Japan Primo.

At this point I’d also like to mention the comparatively lifeless MX-P50, but I guess that’s reserved for rubber tuners, i.e. not me.

MX-D & FX-D

After that we got the Tibhar Evolution MX-D, which I reviewed pretty intensively. I consider it to be the best attacking rubber on the market. A switch to the MX-D failed because of its heavy weight. I simply have a comfort zone when it comes to the overall weight of the racquet, as well as the head weight. With one or even two MX-D, it’s just too much…

I don’t intend to say much about the Tibhar Evolution FX-D at this point, since a dedicated review will follow. I also have a lot to say about it in the alternatives section of this review, below. To keep it short, I personally consider the rubber as too soft and too catapulting.

Expectations regarding the EL-D

Influenced by my experience with the MX-D, I’m eager to see the effect of the high dynamics in combination with a softer sponge. After all, Tibhar is not just lowering the hardness of the sponge by one step with the EL-D, which would result in a sponge hardness of around 50°. Rather, according to Tibhar, the rubber will have a perceived hardness of 45.0-47.0°.

Why Tibhar doesn’t simply specify the sponge hardnesses for the Evolutions and doesn’t leave the interpretation of the overall perceived hardness to us players is something everyone can ask themselves.

In my review, I will try to answer the following questions about the Tibhar Evolution EL-D: What are the strengths of the rubber? Are there any weaknesses? What alternatives are there? Does the EL-D come close to the performance level of MX-D, MX-S and MX-P? How does it compare to the other mid-range Evolutions EL-S and EL-P? And can the EL-D be a rubber that suits spin players like me?

Technical characteristics of the Tibhar Evolution EL-D

After examining the top sheet, I would guess that all D-Evolutions were equipped with the same top sheet. It is very grippy, slightly matt, but with still visible, translucent pimples.

The pimples themselves are put quite close together, are comparatively wide, but not necessarily constructed to be short. Overall, the top sheet seems relatively elastic and flexible.

The sponge of the EL-D has been equipped with medium pores. In addition, the sponge is very easy to squeeze at first. Very late, the actual hardness comes through. I would guess a 47.5° (EUR) sponge is used, but that’s just my feeling.

Just by the flexible top sheet and the described characteristics of the sponge I suspect a rather softer feeling during gameplay.

In terms of weight, the Tibhar Evolution EL-D is within the expected parameters. With packaging, my reviewed rubber (red max.) weighed 110.71g. The uncut rubber weighs 72.11g. Cut on my blade for the review (Tibhar Offensive Premium), 47.36g remain on the racket.

Playing characteristics of the Tibhar Evolution EL-D

When countering, a decent catapult is immediately noticeable. The Tibhar Evolution EL-D seems to be very lively and possesses a responsive ball impact. With the help of the noticeable dynamics, increases in pace can be easily implemented.

Overall, I had a good feeling with the rubber. However, I have to say that the rubber is still quite demanding to be played with. The overall pace is relatively high. The soft feel during controlled strokes should not hide the noticeable increase in power during faster play.

Topspin & final strokes

During topspin play, the Tibhar Evolution EL-D offers a good mixture of high speed, very good spin development and a high degree of dynamics. Good assistance can be expected at slower topspins as answers to the opponents’ backspins.

However, the ball trajectory is rather on a medium level. The rotation level is in the upper segment, but noticeably below the spin-strong Evolutions like MX-S, MX-D or EL-S. I sometimes had the feeling of obtaining more rotation in my strokes due to the clear feedback with fast topspins than actually reaches the opponent.

This “imposter” became even more apparent on final strokes. I sometimes felt I was hitting the ball with an enormous amount of power, but ended up with less direct points than I had expected.

My guess is that the Tibhar Evolution EL-D is just a notch too soft. But due to the early and strong initiating dynamics, it provides you with the feeling of a spinnier, faster stroke. Ultimately, however, the dynamics of the rubber have obvious limitations at the highest peaks.

Half distance & counter topspin

From half-distance, the EL-D feels very comfortable. You can play fast topspins with a nice sound from all positions. A great strength is the feel on counter loops. Quite intuitive and powerful, long rallies can be performed without any problems.

I think the medium ball trajectory is perfect for a mix of fast and slow topspins, with the Tibhar Evolution EL-D showing a slight tendency towards a tempo-dynamic playing style. Due to the soft setup, I sometimes lack the last oomph or precision on my strokes.

Dynamics & emergency strokes

Despite the early and strong initiation of dynamics, I can’t complain about consistency. All attacking strokes can be played comprehensibly once you get used to the characteristics of the rubber.

Interestingly, I don’t really manage emergency strokes well, although there is a good portion of catapult as support. In addition, the EL-D is not really spin-sensitive. I simply don’t like the strong dynamics of the rubber in such situations.

Service & return

Very easily and without much adjustment, I can deliver my decent serves with the Tibhar Evolution EL-D. Although there are more spinny rubbers for serving, the rotation level is sufficient to cause some mistakes from the opponent. Basically, serves with the EL-D helped more for set-up than for direct points.

At short-short, I had real problems. Either I pushed the returns into the net or they ended up too high or too long. I couldn’t figure out a reasonable solution with my technique over the entire duration of the review.

Attached to a Butterfly Viscaria it worked better, but still not satisfying. The bottom line is that I couldn’t manage to find the right pressure level. That was quite frustrating. So my passive returns were limited to long, flat backspins. When my opponents adjusted to that, the only option left was to play offense unconditionally.

Active returns were correspondingly no problem with the Tibhar Evolution EL-D. I was able to both flip very directly and produce a pretty spin curve with my banana flip. The mixture of spin, speed and dynamics made direct openings over the table look easy. Only the last portion of threat was missing, so that my fast attacks always resulted in longer rallies.

Block, Counter & Shot

When actively blocking with the Tibhar Evolution EL-D, I could achieve a very good length. As a result, my opponents remained under pressure permanently. Especially blocks down the line resulted in a lot of direct points.

Even more active counter strokes gained a lot of dynamics. Although the direct ball impact is somewhat lacking, the precision did not suffer. Especially slow topspins can be contested rapidly and allow the player to take the initiative himself.

The rubber provides good feedback for passive blocks. In addition, not much spin is adopted. Instead, the ball is catapulted forward as if on autopilot. Accordingly, the rubber forgives some mistakes. However, there are rubbers that are easier to play with even more support.

In the shooting game, a good amount of pressure could be brought onto the table. The Tibhar Evolution EL-D is fast enough to keep the opponents on their toes. There is an excellent feel from the high defense. The length and height can be controlled easily and comprehensibly.

Counter attacks are easy to play, but lack the final power or rotation.

Alternatives to the Tibhar Evolution EL-D

The alternatives to the Tibhar Evolution EL-D are numerous. Besides the comparison within the Evolution rubber series, I will mention some other table tennis rubbers, which come along with similar characteristics. In addition, some alternatives bring other strengths into the spotlight.

Tibhar Evolution MX-D & FX-D

First, I would like to compare the Tibhar Evolution EL-D among the dynamic Evolutions. Anyone coming from a Tibhar Evolution MX-D will encounter an extremely softer feeling. What characterized the MX-D, specifically the hard sponge and the consequential power, precision and directness, are only present to a degree with the EL-D.

Rather, the strong dynamics are in the forefront, which was complemented by the MX-D’s hardness. You can experience a similar acceleration with both rubbers. However, the EL-D reaches its limits noticeably sooner.

In comparison, the MX-D is more sharp and dangerous. But if you need more feedback, you’ll definitely be happy with the softer rubber version. Unless, like me, you can’t cope with the early starting dynamics, which make particularly passive returns difficult.

Overall, the MX-D is clearly the better rubber in my opinion, as there is more power and directness. The dynamics can be controlled even more comprehensibly due to the hardness.

Compared to the other D-Evolution rubbers, the Tibhar Evolution FX-D appears as if the handbrake is pulled on. Topspins can be delivered very easily and there is always a comfortable, well-controlled feeling during passive play.

The catapult now kicks in very early, but dynamic development is severely limited. I could also passively just hold the ball without bouncing out too quickly. However, you should not soften the sponge even more by using this top sheet, because otherwise there will simply be a squishy feeling left.

The FX-D is extremely forgiving of mistakes, but is comparatively harmless in attacking play.

Tibhar Evolution MX-S & MX-P

According to the product description, Tibhar says that the Tibhar Evolution EL-D can keep up with the TOP rubbers Tibhar Evolution MX-S and Tibhar Evolution MX-P in terms of performance. I can only confirm that partially. To me, it seemed as if the rubber immediately drops off as soon as the highest peaks in terms of spin and speed are reached.

It simply lacks a nuance more hardness, more power or more spin to be able to confirm the statement from the brand. The rubber thus scratches at the performance level of the TOP Evolutions without really achieving it. At the same time, the rubber scores with its unique dynamics, allowing dedicated half-distance players to perform better with an EL-D than with an MX-S or MX-P.

However, if the goal is to find more rotation in the spin game, the MX-S is the first choice. If absolute power and dominance is needed, there is no way around the MX-P.

Apart from the aspect of performance, which I have clarified hereby, I would never recommend the EL-D as an alternative to an MX-S or MX-P player. There is simply too little in common. The EL-D is probably a softer, more controllable alternative to the MX-P.

Tibhar Evolution EL-S & EL-P

Not to be left out of my comparison are the other elastic versions, EL-S and EL-P. Both have a firmer top sheet. The Tibhar Evolution EL-S comes with a minimally softer sponge, combined with a spin-friendly, medium-hard top sheet. The Tibhar Evolution EL-P, on the other hand, has a significantly softer sponge combined with a hard, powerful top sheet.

A change from the EL-S is advisable when less spin-sensitivity and more dynamics from the half-distance are required. When it comes to pure spin, the EL-S is clearly more dangerous. Both rubbers develop a good portion of dynamics, which, however, kicks in later with the EL-S and does not come through so extremely on all strokes.

Compared to the EL-P, the strengths are clearly in the open game and from the half-distance. It can be played more offensively. At the same time, a more benevolent feel can be achieved with the EL-D. If you want to open very spinny and fast at the table and don’t mind the spin-sensitivity, you are better off with the EL-P.

andro Rasanter R48 & R45

The feel of the Tibhar Evolution EL-D falls exactly between the Rasanter R45 and R48 rubbers. I also see a lot of similarities in terms of playing characteristics, especially with the big strength, the dynamic development.

In comparison, the EL-D has a softer touch compared to the andro Rasanter R48. The basic characteristic of the EL-D is a bit more spindynamic and a bit less tempodynamic. In addition, the R48 has more power on the final stroke. The dynamics start similarly early.

The andro Rasanter R45 is accordingly softer, more catapulting and more forgiving. However, the soft touch is quite similar. Both rubbers lack final impact power. Both can be played extremely dynamically and fast up to a certain point.

Nittaku Fastarc P-1

The Nittaku Fastarc P-1 is a bit more moderate in comparison, but has similar strengths. The medium ball trajectory and a dynamic game from the half distance are well suited with both rubbers. The touch is slightly softer with the Tibhar Evolution EL-D.

In terms of final dynamics, I see the comparison rubbers on a par. With the P-1, however, the dynamics kick in later and there is a slightly more spindynamic feel.

Donic Bluestorm AM

An interesting alternative to the Tibhar Evolution EL-D can also be found in the Donic Bluestorm AM, which I recently reviewed. With the Bluestorm AM, the focus is more on the firmer top sheet, which leads to more spin. However, the dynamics come into play quite early with both rubbers.

With the EL-D, the game can be played a bit more versatile and the feeling comes across as a bit more comfortable.

GEWO Hype KR Pro 47.5

Also suitable for the dynamic half-distance game is the GEWO Hype KR Pro 47.5. The rubber provides a softer feel, due to a softer top sheet. With the Tibhar Evolution EL-D, the dynamics kick in earlier and stronger.

On final strokes, however, I see slightly more advantages with the Hype KR Pro 47.5. I can simply get more power out of it. The rubber serves as a connector to the spinnier, but also dynamic topspin rubbers like the Victas Ventus Extra or andro Hexer Powergrip. Compared to the EL-D, these rubbers are much more spin-heavy.

Ideal rubber-blade combinations for the Tibhar Evolution EL-D

Next, I would like to say a few words about the ideal rubber-blade combination with the Tibhar Evolution EL-D. At first, I had the rubber attached onto a Tibhar Offensive Premium. The rubber and the blade together offered me an excellent feeling.

It was very easy to strike topspins. The sound has not been lacking either. While I considered the feeling to be very good with this combination, the final stroke was missing the last bit of pressure. Also, this quite gets catapulty, despite being an offensive blade and rubber.

The EL-D is much better suited on a carbon blade. As always, I used one of my Butterfly Viscaria blades. The soft feel is somewhat compensated by the directness of the carbon blade. The dynamics and power of this rubber-blade combination is impressive.

However, I had difficulties with the ball trajectory. It is quite flat. Accordingly, too little rotation arrived for my taste.

I guess I just have to acknowledge that the rubber showed both extreme strengths and extreme weaknesses for my play style on my favorite blades or blade types.

Conclusion on the Tibhar Evolution EL-D

With the Tibhar Evolution EL-D, a very dynamic game, especially from the half-distance, can be brought up. Blocks and counter strokes as well as counter topspins and medium fast attacking variations are particularly successful.

Unfortunately, due to its softer feel, the rubber just misses out on TOP rubbers like the Tibhar Evolution MX-S or MX-P in terms of performance. Compared to the MX-D, the rubber is clearly softer and less dangerous.

I see weaknesses with the maximum spin and speed development, as well as with the very early and strong dynamics. The rubber is made for players who always need high support on all strokes, but still want to play at a high level.

In addition, the focus should be on topspin play from the half-distance or during dynamic follow up. The EL-D is not a killer rubber, but still fast and capable of high performance play.

I think the Tibhar Evolution EL-D is a reasonable addition among the rubber scenery. However, I would have liked to see a version that is closer to the MX-D, especially in terms of hardness. This would have been a real competitor to the other TOP Evolution rubbers.

That way, players who can’t handle the hardest rubbers will get their money’s worth and benefit from the mixture of smooth ball impact and high dynamics.

The post Tibhar Evolution EL-D appeared first on TT-SPIN.COM - Table Tennis Reviews.

The differences in playing characteristics are very clear between the first two hybrid rubbers of the series. While you obtain a direct, uncompromising table tennis rubber with the K1 Euro, which has a good performance potential, but at the same time is only played one-dimensionally and with a relatively flat ball trajectory, the hybrid K3 can shine with more spin potential and a high arc.

Technological progress & softer sponges

The example between K1 Euro and K3 clearly shows that the development of hybrid rubbers is heading away from the traditional Chinese feel of hardness, directness and stickiness. Instead, the advantages of a sticky top sheet are to be transferred to the tensor characteristics.

I think this was necessary after the transition to the plastic ball. Many table tennis players bemoan the loss of spin in their game, but at the same time can’t handle harder rubbers.

There are reasons why the sticky top sheets could not be combined with sponges below 50° hardness. On the one hand, due to the strong tension of the robust sticky top sheet. Secondly, a soft sponge does not provide enough break-through power to be effectively playable with such a top sheet.

The solution to the fundamental problem was solved by top sheets that have less stickiness and tenacity, but are nevertheless more than just grippy. On this basis, rubbers like the Tibhar Hybrid K3, the Donic BlueGrip S2 (with a medium-soft 42.5° sponge) and the Butterfly Glayzer 09C, which is not a tensor rubber but was developed according to the same principle with less stickiness, could convince me quite well. I will publish the review of the Donic BlueGrip S1 shortly after this article.

The first hybrid generation says goodbye

After I have known about the discontinuation of the Donic BlueGrip rubbers R1 and V1 for quite some time, I have noticed that other Tensor hybrids from the first generation will be discontinued. This concerns on the one hand the JOOLA Golden Tango, which was, after the Xiom Vega China, the second Tensor hybrid rubber on the market.

On the other hand, the Nittaku Sieger PK50 will be discontinued, although I am not sure if the rubber will only be discontinued in German table tennis stores or if it will be discontinued altogether.

I can well imagine that other hybrids will follow. Maybe you should already look for alternatives to a Yasaka Rakza Z, Tibhar Hybrid K1 Euro or JOOLA Golden Tango PS.

The reasons for this are various and understandable. There is simply such a large offer of cheaper Chinese rubbers, which, more or less, can offer the same playing characteristics. In addition, I think that the manufacturers want to get rid of their less profitable products, to which I would include the first hybrid generation.

Another reason is the colored rubbers. The table tennis brands prefer to sell a blue or pink bestseller as additional versions rather than a non-seller. Another victim of this trend are also the thin sponge thicknesses 1.7 or 1.8 mm. I don’t know of any new product that will still be offered with these sponge thicknesses.

In addition to this, the thin sponges are vanishing from some well-established rubbers. The manufacturer ESN, which produces the tensors for all table tennis brands, allegedly wants to stop the production of the thinner sponges (rumor!). But that makes sense, after all, production expenses can play a role. The number of variants would also be limited with the discontinuation of the thin sponges, despite the new colored top sheets.

Expectations on the Tibhar Hybrid MK

Simply out of interest, I like to read through the, not always useful, manufacturer’s descriptions of the rubbers. Quite concretely, Tibhar describes in it that the experiences from the development of the Tibhar Hybrid K3 were transferred to the Hybrid MK.

I liked the Hybrid K3 very much. But ultimately it is also very demanding to play due to its hardness. I would be happy to see a rubber that has similar strengths while being softer and easier to control.

I am even more interested in whether the Tibhar Hybrid MK is an alternative to the hybrid rubbers I mentioned earlier. Because while I say I don’t have much hope for the continuation of this generation of rubbers, I would at least prefer to be able to provide better alternatives.

What are the advantages of the Tibhar Hybrid MK? Are the disadvantages manageable? Which type of player should buy this rubber? Or are there already better alternatives? With the answers to these and more questions, I will shape my evaluation.

Technical characteristics of the Tibhar Hybrid MK

Looking at the Tibhar Hybrid MK, it is noticeable that the top sheet has a very short pimple structure. The pimples itself are also quite narrow, as well as closely arranged. The rubber’s surface appears to be highly grippy to slightly sticky. Overall, the top sheet is medium-hard to medium-elastic.

The sponge has fine pores. The hardness of the specified 48° EUR is exactly right. While letting the ball fall onto my racket, a minimal deceleration of the ball is noticeable. However, this is no longer noticeable during active strokes.

When weighing the Tibhar Hybrid MK, my reviewed rubber (red max.) reaches 108.74 g including packaging. Unpacked, 66.92 g remain on the scales. Cut to a Tibhar Offensive Premium, 46.41 g remain on the racket.

Playing characteristics of the Tibhar Hybrid MK

When countering, the Tibhar Hybrid MK shows itself to be a controllable offensive rubber, which has little catapult of its own. The basic pace is medium to fast. In addition, the tibhar rubber can be controlled with immense precision.

Furthermore, the Hybrid MK does not feel dead, but possesses an evenly distributed dynamic, which is activated during faster play. The highly grippy and slightly sticky top sheet makes it easy to guide the ball and direct the incoming spin in the direction of your stroke.

Topspin game

The first topspins are very promising. Equipped with a strong rotation and high ball trajectory, all topspin strokes can be applied skillfully. Rarely have I experienced a rubber that makes it so easy to guide the ball in both long and short stroke movements.

The combination of medium-hard, low-catapult sponge with the slightly sticky top sheet, which due to the short pimples acts very directly on the influence of the sponge, produces enormous precision and accuracy on active attacking strokes.

Follow up, counter looping & half distance

A great strength is the fast follow up at the table. The Tibhar Hybrid MK develops a strong dynamic, which can be built up further and further during rallies. The rubber is also spin-friendly, dynamic and precise when counter looping.

From half-distance, very spinny topspins can be created, which are noticeably slower than with many tensor rubbers of the latest generation. The rubber outshines many rubbers from the first Tensor generation, which were played after the speedglue ban.

Due to the large stroke window and the perfect ball contact, long rallies with different spin and speed variations are another strength of the rubber. The Hybrid MK accepts a lot of spin, but can be controlled well on emergency strokes and has a rather forgiving feel on a wrong stance towards the ball.

Compared to the harder hybrid tensors, it lacks some break-through power, but this is compensated for by more control, better touch and variability.

Serve & return

When serving, the Tibhar Hybrid MK can impress with a strong rotation and perfect precision. All spin variations succeed dangerously and well. In short-short, I can operate accurately and flat without feeling a disturbing catapult effect. Long pushes close to the baseline are absolutely lethal for the opponents.

With active returns, pressure can be built up well onto the opponents. Fast flips have a direct feel. This allows me to establish a understandable point of attack. With banana flips a dangerous spin is possible. Whereby I was able to apply this mostly as a preparation for my next attacking strokes.

The rubber is also convincing when it comes to the passive return game. I could receive all serves well and return them safely. The rubber is not really vulnerable to the incoming spin, because intuitively a great ball security is created by the accurate performance.

That surprised me, since the rubber accepts a lot of spin mechanically. I think the combination of all characteristics and the comparison to other hybrids leads to this observation. It is also positive that there is no interfering catapult effect, but you obtain an honest, direct and unconstrained feedback.

In the opening game directly at and above the table, the Hybrid MK is really good. All balls can be perfectly carried along even when hitting very flat, which makes it possible to utilize slightly too high serves or short pushes from the opponent well. There is enough power on the shots and final strokes, although there are faster rubbers that produce more direct points.

Blocking, counterattacking and shooting

The Tibhar Hybrid MK looks good when it comes to blocking. Active blocks are another strength, because it can be played directly, without making any big mistakes. The transition from the active block, to the counter shot, to the topspin or final stroke is smooth.

Passive blocking offered me a good feel for the ball. With a direct, but not too hard response along with the medium speed, all blocks can be applied safely. However, due to the decent spin acceptance, the balls also bounce out with a small arc when holding the racquet loosely. This allows good attacking opportunities for opponents when blocking too passively.

Good break-through power can be achieved when shooting down high balls. The Hybrid MK is not a killer, but hard enough to create plenty of pressure on the opponent. In the high defense, all balls can be precisely wrapped around and skillfully placed. A little counter pressure doesn’t hurt, though. Counterattacks are more playable with spin than power.

Alternatives to the Tibhar Hybrid MK

When searching for alternatives to the Tibhar Hybrid MK, I would first like to compare the rubber within its rubber series. In terms of play, the MK is noticeably similar to the Tibhar Hybrid K3. This one is of course harder in comparison.

Tibhar Hybrid K3

During spin play, more rotation can be squeezed out of the K3. In addition, it is faster, has more power, a slightly higher ball bounce and, as a result, a wider and higher arc. With the first topspin, the differences are not as clear as when playing faster or from half distance.

However, the advantage over the K3 is the much higher control. I think more table tennis players, including myself, do better with the Hybrid MK. Simply because of the overall hardness. The biggest strength, the precise guiding of the ball while looping, works effectively with the softer sponge, even on slower strokes.

Tibhar Hybrid K1 Euro

Compared to the Hybrid K1 Euro, I don’t even know where to start. What both rubbers have in common is that the game close to the table should be preferred. But for different reasons. With the K1 Euro, the ball trajectory is much flatter and more forward. Endstrokes can be hit dangerously close to the table.

On the other hand, more spin and a higher arc can be achieved with the Hybrid MK. As a pure topspin player, I obviously prefer such characteristics. However, if you are a straightforward and uncompromising player and also want a feel that is more like a typical hybrid rubber, you will be better off with the K1 Euro.

Donic BlueGrip S1

Excitedly, I tested both the BlueGrip S1 and the Hybrid MK, simultaneously on the same blades. I wanted to see which of these two rubbers realized the new rubber concept better. For my taste, this is clearly the Hybrid MK.

Unfortunately, the BlueGrip S1 has less spin, a much flatter ball trajectory and noticeably more catapult. This means that the, from my point of view, desired advantages no longer come across so well. Especially in combination with a all-wood blade, I experienced the BGS1 as less accurate. In combination with a carbon blade, however, the stronger catapult helped me in some playing situations, but this cannot compensate for the advantages of the MK.

Butterfly Glayzer 09C

I think a comparison to the Butterfly Glayzer 09C makes sense, although I see the rubber as a rather less suitable alternative to the Hybrid MK. The G09C is a bit slower and more focused on pure spin. During topspin play, the MK is more spin-dynamic, which is why more spin and speed reach the table.

But when it comes to defensive and safe backspin play, I see the Glayzer 09C as having the advantage. Therefore, I think a switch from the G09C to the Hybrid MK is possible if a faster and more offensively designed rubber is sought, but with similar security during controlled attacks.

Butterfly Tenergy 05, Nittaku Fastarc G1, Tibhar Genius & Co.

I think that the Tibhar Hybrid MK is a real alternative to the spin-strong and low-catapult tensor rubbers from the rubber generation around Tenergy 05, Vega Pro, andro Hexer, Tibhar Genius, Donic Baracuda or Nittaku Fastarc G1.

When table tennis switched to the plastic ball, the spin game lost rotation. In addition, with these rubbers I was able to guide a celluloid ball almost perfectly during my topspins, which has become more difficult with all rubbers.

Now, for the first time, I was able to do that again when testing the Hybrid MK. I also felt the first signs of this with several hybrid rubbers, but in the end, due to the hardness of the rubbers, I did not fully find it within the play feeling.

When I dragged my first topspin during testing from the deep forehand exactly following my stroke movement to the back corner of the table, I was smilinng. When I could repeat this several times later, my astonishment was pretty good. This made me seriously think about playing on the forehand with the Hybrid MK in the future.

Currently, a personal review fails because I would probably have to move on from the Viscaria again. On the other hand, I get along very well with all-wood blades like the old Japan Primo or the Tibhar Offensive Premium. Again a dilemma, which I will solve during the summer break

Further comparisons

Basically, it can be said in general that the Tibhar Hybrid MK has come closer to the normal tensors. The rubber is playable for a broad audience of table tennis players due to the hardness of 48° EUR.

The feel is moving away from the many hybrids within the 50-52° range that have appeared in recent years. And I think that rubbers with the same style are likely to establish themselves. As I look around the rubber market, comparisons to the andro Rasanter C48 or Donic Bluestar A2/A3 will probably be interesting in order to find an alternative. Let’s see when I will be testing these rubbers.

Ideal blade-rubber combinations with the Tibhar Hybrid MK

Basically, the Tibhar Hybrid MK is playable well on all types of blades. With a all-wood blade like the OFF-/OFF blade Tibhar Offensive Premium, I was able to create a very variable, spinny topspin game. The advantages are the nice arc and the feel of the blade.

With an outer layer carbon blade like the Butterfly Viscaria, more power can be brought into play. In addition, the half-distance game comes with a nice dynamic. It just depends on the overall hardness you are willing to play. To me, carbon blades combined with a medium-hard rubber are only suitable if I position myself well to the ball (which is never the case ^^).

Since the Hybrid MK ranges already from the basic speed within the lower offensive range, the played blade should not be too slow. With an allround blade a very safe topspin game can be possible. But to finish a rally, a little power is probably missing. But that’s just my assumption.

Conclusion on the Tibhar Hybrid MK

My review on the Tibhar Hybrid MK was very enjoyable. I like spin-strong table tennis rubbers in general, which support the topspin game. So, with the MK, it is possible to attack variably and dangerously, especially close to the table.

The absolute strength of the rubber is the precise guiding of the ball. I was able to deliver every topspin exactly where it was supposed to go. The safety of the rubber comes from the fact that it is not as hard as other hybrids, but has retained their advantages of low-catapult play and linear dynamics.

In comparison, however, trade-offs must also be considered. A harder hybrid rubber like the K3 has even more spin potential. Others have more break-through power. However, in playing situations at a non-professional level, this hardly matters.

Probably the only real weakness of the rubber is its lack of power from half-distance. If you’re used to a modern tensor, you’ll have to sacrifice some steam and use your own stroke acceleration to create the necessary speed. This depends immensely on the blade chosen, however.

I recommend the Tibhar Hybrid MK for topspin players who want to operate close to the table, expect a high ball trajectory and dominate rallies with spin variations. Especially players who appreciate the strengths of low-catapult topspin rubbers, but don’t bring the same danger to the table with the plastic ball, should take a closer look at the Hybrid MK.

Also, transitioners to sticky hybrids may do better with an MK than with the many other competitors on the market. In any case, I can highly recommend the rubber and will dedicate some more testing hours to the Tibhar Hybrid MK myself.

The post Tibhar Hybrid MK appeared first on TT-SPIN.COM - Table Tennis Reviews.

This rubber concept is not new. With the Butterfly Dignics 09C, an even harder sticky attacking rubber is already available. However, the pricing is different. While the Dignics rubber is one of the most expensive table tennis rubbers, 44,90€ seems ridiculously low in times of inflation and price increases by many table tennis brands.

Butterfly Glayzer 09C & possible alternatives

The Glayzer 09C has competitors not only from within the brand. In fact, the table tennis market has been literally flooded with so-called tensor hybrid rubbers for several years now. Manufacturers and table tennis players have long been interested in combining the strengths of sticky rubbers with modern sponges.

Thus, with the Xiom Vega China, JOOLA Golden Tango or Golden Tango PS, Nittaku Sieger PK50, Donic BlueGrip C1 or C2, Yasaka Rakza Z or Rakza Z Extra Hard and Tibhar Hybrid K1 Euro, a whole range of hybrids are available.

In the meantime, Donic, for example, has already started to discontinue the first rubbers from the hybrid family, with the BlueGrip R1 and V1. Some element was still missing from the in theory brilliant rubber concept.

The effect of the strengths from both rubber concepts, if too hard sponges or too sticky rubber surfaces are used, offset each other. The differences to the cheaper China hybrids are too small in terms of performance.

Less stickiness and softer sponges keys to success

One can only speak of a breakthrough since it was possible to make the stickiness and firmness of the topsheet lower, so that even softer sponges are compatible in combination.

The most extreme example are the Donic BlueGrip rubbers S1 & S2, where the sponges from the Donic Acuda S1 and S2 respectively have been combined with a slightly sticky rubber surface. The S2 version has a sponge hardness of only 42.5° EUR.

In a similar approach, Tibhar created the Hybrid K3, a slightly sticky tensor rubber, but also with a hard sponge. In addition, there is another rubber version of the Hybrid series, the Tibhar Hybrid MK, which comes with a 48° EUR hard tensor sponge.

Expectations for the Glayzer 09C

Besides the rubber concept, there is also the question of how performant the Glayzer 09C will be in the first place. After the experiences with the Butterfly Glayzer or the Butterfly Rozena, the two other alternatives to the more expensive top rubber series Tenergy and Dignics, I do not know to what extent the G09C will be an enrichment among the large number of modern hybrid rubbers.

I will now examine this in my review of the Butterfly Glayzer 09C. In addition, I ask myself what the rubber can do at all? Where are the strengths? What are the weaknesses? Is there a type of player who should definitely should try it out? And what are good alternatives?

Technical features of the Butterfly Glayzer 09C

After unpacking the Butterfly Glayzer 09C, I discovered both the usual carton rubber protector and an adhesive foil to protect the rubber surface. However, the rubber protection foil is quite a bit stickier than the topsheet of the G09C.

I would say that there is minimal tackiness. When examining the stickiness, it is noticeable, at least with my reviewed rubbers, that the black rubber is slightly more sticky. Otherwise, it should be said that the topsheet appears very elastic. The pimple structure is kept short, slim and tightly standing.

The gray sponge of the Glayzer o9C does not differ at all from that of the Butterfly Glayzer from a purely visual point of view. A fine-pored and even pore structure is also apparent. Blind tested again, I would assume a sponge hardness of approx. 50-52° EUR. Officially, the hardness level is 42° JPN. The compression test and also the later playing suggests a 50° EUR hard rubber. At least that’s what I get from the playing feel.

The weight of my reviewed rubbers surprised me very positively. The packaged rubbers (red 2.1mm and black 2.1mm) have a weight of 97.29g (red) and 97.66g (black) respectively. The uncut red rubber shows a weight of 68.89g, while the black rubber weighs 69.25g.

The cut rubbers leave a weight of 45.96g (red) and 46.08g (black) on my two blades (prototype of the Tibhar Offensive Premium and my backup blade Butterfly Viscaria).

Playing characteristics of the Butterfly Glayzer 09C

I was able to play the first counter strokes using the Butterfly Glayzer 09C with a high level of control. The basic speed of the rubber is rather moderate and comfortable. The grippy-tacky topsheet slightly slows down the ball, which I consider more helpful than disturbing.

The hardness of the rubber in combination with the softly decelerating ball impact provides a direct and sensitive feel at the same time. For faster counterstrokes, however, the directness stands in the foreground. Furthermore, the Glayzer 09C does not really have a catapult effect, but must be activated with your own stroke hardness and speed.

Topspin & trajectory

With the topspin opening, a hefty spin can be generated. The ball release, which is strongly directed towards the tangential direction of the stroke, requires a tight closing of the racket blade in order to generate optimum traction. The arc is then rather flat to medium flat. By using the wrist, all strokes can be nicely wrapped and equipped with a sharp rotation.

Especially the spin focused topspin of the Butterfly Glayzer 09C is extremely toxic and often makes opponents underestimate the rotation due to the flat trajectory of the ball. If direct points are not scored, the opponent’s passive blocks can be effortlessly utilized on the next stroke.

Opponents, on the other hand, who like to counterloop or rely on speedy blocks, unfortunately had little trouble exerting pressure on me once they adjusted to the incoming spin. That changed when I switched between fast and slow topspins.

Final stroke, half-distance & rubber-blade-combination

Despite the moderate basic speed of the Glayzer 09C, final strokes can also be applied close to the table. The hardness of the rubber is absolutely sufficient for this purpose. In combination with a carbon blade like the Viscaria it is also possible to play straightforward and without compromise, whereas with a pure wood blade the final speed and the last power can only be extracted by your own stroke hardness.

In the half distance the Butterfly Glayzer 09C comes to its limits. The dynamics and power of the rubber are strongly limited. Although I was able to counterloop the balls cleanly and safely with the help of the topsheet, it was lacking in dangerousness. You have to put a lot of effort into the stroke in order to increase the pace.

Comparisons to the Butterfly Glayzer 09C

Compared to the many hybrid rubbers mentioned during the introduction, the Butterfly Glayzer 09C is one of the slowest alternatives. The rubber simply does not have the dynamics and power of modern tensor sponges.

On the other hand, the topsheet is very performant in terms of rotation. There the Glayzer 09C possesses more than many of the other hybrids. The best comparison to a tensor hybrid rubber I encounter in the spinny and variable JOOLA Golden Tango PS.

The difference is that the GTPS has more dynamics and power, but at the same time generates less spin. As you can see, the best comparison rubber is no true replacement. I am looking forward to the comparison with the Donic BlueGrip S1, which I unfortunately could not review yet. However, the review of the even softer BlueGrip S2 leads me to conclude that the BGS1 must definitely be compared with the Glayzer 09C, even though the Glayzer rubber is even harder.

It’s the same with the Tibhar Hybrid MK, which I will take a closer look at next week.

Now I would like to classify the Glayzer 09C within the Butterfly rubbers. I’ll start with the Glayzer. First of all, the Glayzer 09C is clearly more undynamic, a bit harder and has a different feel due to its topsheet.

The G09C is slower despite the harder sponge. In return, I could experience a maximum degree of rotation, which is generally only possible with the absolute TOP rubbers. The normal Glayzer, on the other hand, has very good, but not maximum, spin levels.

The comparison to the Butterfly Dignics 09C is also very clear. The G09C is simply slower, more undynamic and at the same time a bit softer. The topsheet is less sticky and on the pre-stage to simply extremely grippy. The trajectory of the ball has a similar height, but is shorter compared to that of the D09C.

Serive & Return

When serving, a heavy spin can be generated with the Butterfly Glayzer 09C. All my serves, but to highlight the sidespins, troubled my opponents. The control is always outstanding, as the slightly sticky rubber produces spin even with minimal motion.

In short-short play over the table, when laying up and precisely placing returns, or when pushing hard and playing towards the end of the table, the G09C appears to be precise, spin-strong and direct at all times. The rubber adopts an extremely high amount of spin when played actively. On passive strokes, the combination of a low-catapult sponge and sticky rubber absorbs quite a bit, keeping the sensitivity within bounds.

Active returns over the table are an absolute strength of the Glayzer 09C. Direct flips are precise and can be played flat. The right touch is easy and intuitive to find. No exaggerated catapult or something similar disturbs. The banana flips perform very well, bringing some opponents to despair.

The opening over the table succeeds smoothly and dangerously. The flat, spin-strong strokes often deliver points. The final stroke is also excellent when playing over the table.

Blocking, counterplay & shooting

I consider the Butterfly Glayzer 09C to be strong in the blocking game. I can play very safe and passive blocks as well as push the opponent away from the table. The direct-hard and low-catapult feel, coupled with control and precision are a feast for the eyes.

The spin acceptance is there on passive strokes, but it’s not crucial. On counterplays, the opponent’s pace can be carried along nicely. An active counter-block game close to the table works very well.

Due to the degree of hardness, finishing strokes and shots can be applied well. It becomes especially dangerous when you work with some spin in the process. But the straight, dry shot is also playable, although I would wish for more power.

Long and high defense

In general, the Butterfly Glayzer 09C is extremely dominant in the spin play. Backspins of any kind are dangerous and sharp. That’s why I positioned myself in the long defense, just to see how good the rubber is at this.

I was really surprised how controlled and spin-rich I could play. The backspin defense can be held very flat and unpleasant to the opponents. Any wrist movement is rewarded. You can dig in nicely in the long defense and wait until the opponent tries to use short pushs. Then move forward and loop dangerously or even use final strokes on too passive balls.

Glayzer 09C plays like a modern Tackiness rubber in the defensive game. And in the attacking game with enough speed to become very dangerous in switching between offense and defense.

The high defense also succeeds safely and can be integrated well as an in-between shot. I emphasize, however, that you have to play the ball very actively upwards. Due to the sticky surface, the control is very high.

Conclusion on Butterfly Glayzer 09C

The Butterfly Glayzer 09C is an exciting hybrid rubber, which has an extreme rotation and a lot of control over the ball. Its greatest strengths can be found in the spin game at the topspin opening, as well as in various backspin variations. In addition, the rubber dominates the active game above the table and can also convince in the block-counter game.

The rubber reaches its limits when it comes to final speed and dynamics. This becomes especially clear from half-distance and during longer rallies. Even when used monotonously, the advantages in terms of spin can quickly be seen through by the opponent. In combination with a more offensive rubber, however, the G09C can serve well as a setup for scoring points.

I recommend the Butterfly Glayzer 09C for spin allrounders, who want to loop safely and dangerously, who want to develop a skillful block-counter game at the table or who need a spin strong rubber for long defense, which can also attack on one or other occasion.

In addition, players who like to play with hybrids but ultimately need more control can do well with the G09C. For switching to a hybrid rubber, the G09C is great as well.

In any case, I am very pleased with the rubber, which is not simply a softer version of the Dignics 09C, but rather appeals to a broad range of table tennis players with more focus on control and is also affordable due to the comparatively low price.

The post Butterfly Glayzer 09C appeared first on TT-SPIN.COM - Table Tennis Reviews.

Generally, there seems to be a lot of excitement as soon as Butterfly announces new products. That’s not only due to the image of the traditional brand, but also to the fact that many products have previously revolutionized the market.

Success of Tenergy

Probably the biggest success was the introduction of the Tenergy rubbers in 2008. Many table tennis players were faced with the great challenge of finding a replacement for speed gluing. But how should a speed-glued Sriver or Bryce, as well as the glued classic rubbers of the other table tennis brands, be adequately replaced?

The answer came with the Butterfly Tenergy 05, which is still considered to be the benchmark for rotation and arc among table tennis rubbers. Soon after a race for the favor of the table tennis players began, which Butterfly answered with further Tenergy versions, like the Tenergy 64 or Tenergy 80, as well as the FX versions of the rubber series.

Other brands followed their lead, which was only possible due to the enormous development advances on the part of the manufacturer ESN and its Tensor rubber technology. Nevertheless, I think most table tennis players would still be playing Butterfly rubbers today if it hadn’t been for a change both in pricing and distribution structure.

The new concept of the Butterfly brand caused many table tennis players to move to other brands. But unhindered by this, the Tenergy rubbers were and are a huge success. Recently, however, the interest in another Tenergy rubber version with the Tenergy 19 was rather modest.

Butterfly Glayzer rubbers series as cheap Dignics alternatives?

Technically and in terms of performance, the ESN tensors have at least caught up with the rubbers featuring the first Spring Sponge technology, if not even overtaken them in terms of catapult and dynamics.

Rubbers that meet today’s standards in these areas and should therefore actually dominate the market are the Butterfly Dignics rubbers. With a total of four versions, the Dignics 05, Dignics 64, Dignics 80 and Dignics 09C, very good rubbers are available for the modern offensive player.

Unfortunately, the Spring Sponge X rubbers, a further development of the original sponge technology, have carried a price tag of €80 so far. This is not only a discouragement, but also makes many players scratch their heads.

Fortunately, Butterfly has now decided to offer affordable rubber variants with the Glayzer series, similar to the Butterfly Rozena. But the question is, what can the affordable rubber series, and especially the Butterfly Glayzer, actually provide? How does the rubber differ from its predecessors like T05 or D05? For which type of player is the rubber suitable? And what alternatives are already on the market?

Technical features of the Butterfly Glayzer

When looking at the Butterfly Glayzer, I can first of all state that the topsheet can be rated as very high-quality and grippy. In addition, the topsheet is not too hard, but rather within the medium to medium-soft range.

The pimple structure is similar to that of the Dignics 05, i.e. rather short, more closely spaced pimples. But the width is comparatively average. Overall, I expect a spin-elastic, but still firm ball contact.

The sponge is made in an atypical gray tone. The pore structure of the sponge is very fine and homogeneous. With compression testing, I would blindly guess a hardness of 47-48° EUR . The official specification in Japanese hardness is 38°. This means harder than the Tenergys (36° JPN) and softer than the Dignics’ (40° JPN).

The evaluation of the weight comes out very positively. My two tested Butterfly Glayzer rubbers (red and black, each 2.1mm) weighed 93.84g (red) and 94.21g (black) with packaging. The uncut red rubber weighed 69.50g, while the uncut black rubber weighed 69.94g.

When cut on my two testing blades (prototype of the Tibhar Offensive Premium and my backup blade of Butterfly Viscaria), the red Glayzer weighs 45.99g, while the black Glayzer weighs 46.33g.

Playing characteristics of the Butterfly Glayzer

My very first counter stroke with the Butterfly Glayzer I simply dropped into the net, which is rather untypical for me, since I actually counter the balls out the back. After a short adjustment of my expectations to the playing characteristics, the countering and whole warmup worked very well.

The Glayzer provides a very consistent and direct feeling for the ball without exaggerating even a nuance of catapult. The basic speed is rather in the middle range of the rubber range. Nevertheless, due to the hardness of the rubber, I can also keep up with a high pace. What is put into the stroke ends up on the table.

Topspin play & spin developement

The Butterfly Glayzer really shows off during the topspin play. The first topspins were easy and smooth. Both the secure opening and the follow-through topspin succeed effortlessly, consistently and with a medium trajectory.

In terms of spin development, a lot can be extracted from the rubber. The topsheet is very spin elastic and allows a constant guidance of the ball. However, spin peaks like with a Tenergy 05 or Dignics 05 are not achievable. Nevertheless, I would classify the spin as very good and sufficiently competitive.

Half distance, counterloops & consistency

From half distance the Butterfly Glayzer develops a good dynamic. You can hit very spin-rich and medium-fast to fast attacking strokes. Compared to modern tensors or the TOP rubbers of the Tenergy and Dignics series, it is clearly noticeable that the rubber was designed with a somewhat reduced power. It lacks the last boom, so to speak.

On the other hand, I haven’t been able to play my topspins with such consistency from all positions for a long time. I really like the honest and predictable dynamics of the rubber. Especially when I have a bad footwork and positioning to the ball, I intuitively get a good feel for the ball and can play it with a high quality.

When counterlooping, the Glayzer reacts very benevolently and follows the pace of the approaching ball well. I was able to operate very precisely and quickly. However, the rubber is not an absolute killer. Final strokes succeed with an extremely high rate, but they don’t necessarily produce points immediately. I can rather set up my opponents well and play them out.

Comparisons to the Butterfly Glayzer

Compared to other rubbers, the reference rubbers either do not do justice to the Butterfly Glayzer or it was simply not designed with the same intentions. Because it is supposed to be a rubber with high performance, which is below the TOP rubbers, but also is not a beginner rubber.

Tenergy comparison & rubber-blade-combination

For categorization, however, I would like to make comparisons with the other Spring Sponge rubbers. Compared to the Tenergy rubbers without FX sponge, the Butterfly Glayzer is somewhat slower in terms of basic speed. Due to the harder sponge, however, a almost similar speed can be achieved.

The trajectory and spin rates are somewhere between the Tenergy 19 and Tenergy 80. On my all-wood Tibhar Offensive Premium, I was able to generate significantly more rotation and noticed that the Glayzer benefited from its feeling and the spin support.

In contrast, the rubber on the Viscaria seemed much more undynamic and noticeably slower than other rubbers in this hardness range.

Dignics Comparison

Compared to the Dignics rubbers, it became clear in my tests that this is not simply a rubber that is softer and slower, but that there is noticeably less power. More focus is placed on consistent performance throughout all kind of strokes.

While a Dignics 05 is hard to manage in some playing situations, a little more liveliness and impact power wouldn’t hurt the Glayzer. I consider the topsheet in particular to be of equal quality and with a lot of potential in terms of play, while the gray Spring Sponge X sponge has been heavily restrained compared to its red counterpart without using your own arm movement.

Glayzer 09C & Rozena

Furthermore, the Butterfly Glayzer is hard to compare with the softer Rozena or differently constructed Butterfly Glayzer 09C when looking for a true alternative. It has to be said that the Rozena has more catapult and supports better allround-offensive strategies. So it can be played more variably. The Rozena is of course softer. The control comes from the balance of catapult and flexibility.

In contrast, the Butterfly Glayzer is a pure attacking and topspin rubber, which comes with restrained power, constant dynamics and very good spin development. However, it is noticeable that both rubbers are easier to play within their respective segments than the Tenergy and Dignics rubbers, which is why a comparison makes sense at first glance.

A completely different case is the Glayzer 09C. With this one, a harder sponge has been given a slightly sticky topsheet. The result is even less dynamics and basic speed, but an extremely toxic spin and a comparatively flat trajectory. Apart from the price, the name and the same sponge technology, there are hardly any similarities in terms of performance and playstyle.

Blocking & Counterplay

Blocking works incredibly well with the Butterfly Glayzer. The direct, but not very catapult-like playing characteristics create a nice pressure point, which makes it possible to return any topspins precisely and easily to the opponent’s half of the table.

I could literally dominate my opponents with fast blocks and counter strokes close to the table. The error rate is also extremely low. Following up and taking the initiative within a controlled framework is an absolute strength of the rubber.

With passive blocking, the sensitivity to spin is kept within limits. The result is a medium ball throw. This problem is quickly solved by the slight closing of the racket.

Service & Return

On serve, the Butterfly Glayzer provides a good mix of rotation and precision. This allowed me to place the serves well and play my dangerous serve play without many sacrifices. At the short-short push, the balls can be kept nicely flat.

With returns, the rubber shows itself to be reliable and equipped with a good touch. The catapult only kicks in on more powerful strokes, resulting in maximum control. The rubber absorbs an acceptable amount of rotation, but generally reacts very benevolently.

Active returns like flips or over-the-table openings can be played safely, directly and precisely. However, the Glayzer lacks the power and toxicity of other rubbers. Only my spin-rich banana flip with a lot of wrist engagement was useful for preparing an aggressive attacking game, but it never directly scored points.

Shooting & high defense

The Butterfly Glayzer appears accurate when shooting and is equipped with good dynamics. However, the terminal speed could be higher, which means that the focus is on the precise outplaying of the opponent. Due to the low catapult and the good control at the same time, high defense can be played safely, although the high balls have to be handled skillfully by the player himself.

Counterattacks are developed by several, increasingly faster strokes, but are not powerful enough to win points directly.

Conclusion on Butterfly Glayzer

The Butterfly Glayzer is an interesting rubber that should be considered by many table tennis players due to its price-performance ratio alone. I particularly like the consistent playing characteristics on the counter strokes, topspins, blocks or serves, which leads to very few unforced errors.

The rubber forgives some mistakes and is, despite its hardness, rather in the moderate to controlled offensive range. Nevertheless, it is possible to keep up with faster rubbers. The spin dynamics, especially the ball guidance and spin development, are impressive.

Unfortunately, the Butterfly Glayzer sometimes lacks power and force, which means that rallies have to be won more by a high quota and precision.

Compared to the TOP rubbers from Butterfly, a few sacrifices have to be made, which is compensated by consistency and more overall control.

The Butterfly Glayzer is recommended for players who are looking for a high performance but controllable table tennis rubber that is at the same time low in catapult and nevertheless develops a sufficient amount of dynamics. Topspin players who don’t always have a perfect stance and footwork can benefit from the rubber.

I think young players who still need to develop their skills, but who are already showing good progress, would benefit from the Glayzer. And especially because the rubber is extremely reliable in blocking and counterplay, it can also be a valuable backhand rubber or rubber for the weaker racket side. Particularly when the catapult-heavy soft rubbers do not offer the ideal playing characteristics.

Personally, I consider the Butterfly Glayzer to be a good choice and well priced, so I can highly recommend it for the mentioned player types.

The post Butterfly Glayzer appeared first on TT-SPIN.COM - Table Tennis Reviews.

Following some investigation, it was clear on the one hand that Xiom actually releases hybrid versions of the Jekyll & Hyde rubber series. It is just that once again Xiom does not bring them to the market in Europe. I would like to thank Xiom, who have provided me with the Jekyll & Hyde rubbers, as well as two blades, the Xiom 36.5 ALXi and the Xiom TMXi An JaeHyun.

Xiom Jekyll & Hyde V47.5 – True competition for the TOP rubbers?

In the past, Xiom has already released very good table tennis rubbers, which are very popular with many table tennis players and provide powerful competition to the other top dogs on the market. Think of the Xiom Vega Pro, which was (or still is) considered by many as the best Tenergy 05 alternative for a long time, partly due to the outstanding price-performance ratio.

Another very convincing product is the Xiom Vega X, a modern update of the Vega Pro and a real bestseller. Besides that, rubbers like the Xiom Omega V Tour or the Xiom Omega VII Pro are other interesting alternatives for the modern attacking game. I myself have been playing the Xiom Omega V Euro for some time. It almost matches the performance of harder rubbers, but at the same time is very variable in terms of playability.

But where does a Xiom Jekyll & Hyde V47.5 fit in? At this point, I have to spoiler a little bit and would like to clearly say that the rubber fills a rather unoccupied niche in terms of concept and demands alone, instead of being expected to be a great revolution.

It’s also difficult to stand out in the abundance of table tennis rubbers and meet mainstream demands on the other hand. I don’t think Xiom is seeking to challenge its current TOP products, but instead provide another option for playing successful table tennis.

In the process of my review, I will and have to look at a number of comparisons to other rubbers. Is there already a rubber like the Jekyll & Hyde V47.5? Or is the rubber unique and offers something completely new? And more importantly, is there a need for this rubber at all?

Technical features of the Xiom Jekyll & Hyde V47.5

First of all, as already indicated above, I was pretty baffled when I did not hold a hybrid rubber with sticky top sheet in my hands. Perhaps you know this yourself. You expect something very specific. And then when you get something completely different, the astonishment is great.

When looking at the Xiom Jekyll & Hyde V47.5 nothing remarkable is noticeable at first glance. A standard ESN tensor rubber, as I have already had it in front of my eyes hundreds of times. The black Xiom sponge has fine pores and seems to be exactly in the indicated range in terms of hardness.

However, I noticed something unusual with the pimple structure. The pimples are quite long, but also designed relatively wide. This makes the top sheet look quite compact, whereas it would have to be softer with this pimple length. This concept is probably the secret of the rubber.

Unfortunately, the wide and long pimple structure possibly also causes the comparatively high weight. My review sample (red Max.) weighed in at 107.15g with packaging. The uncut rubber weighed 72.39g. Cut onto the Xiom TMXi An JaeHyun remains 51.26g on the racket.

Playing characteristics of the Xiom Jekyll & Hyde V47.5

The Xiom Jekyll & Hyde V47.5 is much more compact than expected when warming up. I was able to place the counter shots directly and without problems. The basic speed of the rubber is high, but quite manageable even in lower classes, combined with an appropriate blade.

Topspin, spin dynamics & half-distance

The first topspins look quite promising with the rubber. I can produce a good spin onto the plate and intuitively determine the pace of the stroke. I particularly like the topspin opening with the Jekyll & Hyde V47.5. The ball is nicely carried along, which facilitates a safe topspin.

The ball trajectory is not as high as with the spin-strongest rubbers. I think a good average was reached in this case. At increases in speed the rubber reacts unexpectedly dynamically, although it does not explode particularly. You can build up the speed perfectly.

However, an extraordinary portion of your own power must be put into the stroke so that the full potential unfolds. At ball striking point, you can do a lot of work with the ball, which will eventually bring out what was put in.

From the half distance a dominant game can be brought up. The Xiom Jekyll & Hyde V47.5 contributes a good mix of spin and speed. Long ralleys are no problem. The initiative can be taken at any time, which puts the opponents under pressure.

Comparisons to the Xiom Jekyll & Hyde V47.5

When comparing to the other rubbers I first want to specify the peculiarities of the V47.5. Unlike most dynamic rubbers the top sheet of the rubber reacts quite sluggishly and rather like that of a rubber designed for rotation with little catapult.

This leads to a strange phenomenon that although a enormous power and speed comes out of the rubber, but somehow does not arrive in the feeling as feedback. I blame this on the pimple structure of the top sheet, although the sponge also plays a role, of course.

Due to its unique characteristics, you can loop very well on backspin without experiencing the spin and trajectory of spin-strong rubbers like the Xiom Vega X, Butterfly Tenergy 05 or Nittaku Fastarc G-1. At the same time, the rubber is quite precise, but not really sensitive to spin, as well as dynamic, but not explosive or extremely reactive.

So are there any comparable rubbers to the Xiom Jekyll & Hyde V47.5 at all? Apart from the ball impact and the extremely unusual feel, the rubber joins the ranks of rubbers that have a good ratio of spin and speed, but do not really dominate any of the characteristics.

The classic example is a Butterfly Tenergy 80 or the Nittaku Fastarc P-1. What is definitely different, however, is the dynamic development at the performance limits. To be blunt, the Jekyll & Hyde is extremely good in the shooting game. This reminds me of rubbers that have similar direct strengths at the table. The Tibhar Quantum X Pro immediately comes to my mind.

However, I can’t name a genuinely good comparison rubber. The V47.5 is really something special. Whether that is always good, I will examine in more detail within the conclusion.

Service & Return

When serving, I was able to generate good spin with the Jekyll & Hyde V47.5. I liked the fact that the rubber reacted very directly and could be controlled precisely. On returns, I was able to place the balls short without any problems. For active flips, a direct hitting spot is preferable.

In contrast, banana flips are quite safe playable, but noticeably harmless when I compare this with other rubbers. I would like to emphasize the spin stroke above the table. As soon as the ball is somehow attackable, you can put a lot of pressure onto the table without making many mistakes. Half-long serves can be killed off score-wise.

Blocking, shooting & high defense

When it comes to blocking, the Xiom Jekyll & Hyde is pleasantly less sensitive to spin. Even late, passive blocks fly over the net almost automatically at a flat angle. With direct blocks, good pressure can be brought to the table. Dangerous are fast counterstrokes along the line. As a typical topspin player, I have rarely blocked out or countered away so many opponents.

In shooting, the rubber develops enormous power. As soon as the balls are dominant strikeable, the Xiom Jekyll & Hyde V47.5 owns a built-in hitting window for killing strokes. Awesome is the precise, controllable catapult behavior, whereby hardly a finishing stroke goes beyond the table.

Out of the high defense away from the table the rubber can be controlled well. There are rubbers with which I could operate more safely, but hardly any which has such good counterattacks up their sleeve. Even far away from the table the rubber generates enough power to pressure an opponent into passive defense.

Conclusion on Xiom Jekyll & Hyde V47.5

My evaluation of the Jekyll & Hyde V47.5 tends to be positive, although I myself am divided in some situations during gameplay. First of all, Xiom has really developed a peculiar, two-faced rubber, which has many strengths, but at the same time makes its weaknesses very evident.

In dominant attacking play and direct strokes the rubber is absolutely brilliant. Among the dynamic, fast rubbers, there is hardly one that can be so precisely guided and at the same time has a dynamic that can be controlled according to the own movement of the arm.

However, I miss sometimes a little feel and explosiveness, what I am simply used to from other tensor rubbers. Also, I couldn’t deliver my maximum amount of spin to the table. Personally, I’m already extremely confident when opening the topspin play, which is why the rubber slows me down a bit.

Ultimately, the mix of two approaches always leads to a certain trade-off, meaning drops in performance. Nevertheless, I consider the Xiom Jekyll & Hyde V47.5 well realized, if simply a different feeling should be in the foreground.

I recommend this rubber for players who like to play directly close to the table with a safe opening topspins, as well as from half-distance without sacrificing speed and dynamics. In addition, a high impact on strokes and fast arm movement is a fundamental requirement, in order to develop the real strengths of the Jekyll & Hyde V47.5.

I discovered the best blade-rubber combination at the beginning of my testing by using the Xiom TMXi An Jaehyun. With an all-wooden blade, not enough power came out, although a better touch didn’t hurt. With an Outer Layer Carbon blade, the rubber is much harder to control, although finishing strokes have a lot of power.

The rubber, which wants to combine two strengths, thus plays best with an Inner Layer Carbonholz, which combines two strengths. How suitable

The post Xiom Jekyll & Hyde V47.5 appeared first on TT-SPIN.COM - Table Tennis Reviews.

But so far, no rubber could really blow me away. However, I have to acknowledge the progress that was made with the last hybrid generation. Despite the 50°+ sponge hardnesses, these rubbers can be played well, although I would recommend softer rubbers for most players. But ultimately, the question must be raised as to why one should purchase an expensive Tensor hybrid that is only slightly better at best or simply different from the cheaper China hybrids, such as a DHS Hurricane 3 Neo or similar.

The positive development of the Tensor hybrids

To answer this question, or at least to fuel the discussion a bit, I would like to share my view on the development of ESN hybrids. The first hybrid rubber made in Germany that comes to mind is the Xiom Vega China. I was able to review this one a few years ago. In the focus of the conception of the Vega China was still the complete imitation of the newly developed China hybrids, which combined very sticky Chinese topsheets with Japanese type sponges.

Thus, the rubber showed little to no catapult. The topsheet was quite sticky and energy absorbing. The sponge felt undynamic, which was also due to the lack of sponge pores. The characteristics of the JOOLA Golden Tango cannot be described much differently. The rubber has even more undynamic playing characteristics, which is especially noticeable during spin play. Whether I play with a China rubber or the Golden Tango makes hardly any difference to me.

After a while, table tennis brands rediscovered the hybrid niche. Subsequently, a whole series of hybrids appeared, sometimes rubbers in the range of 55-60° sponge hardness. With the JOOLA Golden Tango PS, Tibhar Hybrid K1 Euro, Donic BlueGrip R1 and V1, Nittaku Sieger PK50, Yasaka Rakza Z, Donic BlueGrip C1 and C2 or the Xiom Omega VII China Guang, table tennis players can choose from a variety of sticky ESN tensors. Butterfly’s Dignics 09C is a rubber that is similar to its ESN counterparts in terms of playing ability.

Most recently, the wave of hard, sticky new releases has been used to establish regular tensors with very hard sponges as well. Unfortunately, the table tennis regular can’t really control and exhaust an andro Rasanter R53 or Xiom Omega VII Tour. Still, there are positive examples like the Tibhar Evolution MX-D or Omega VII Asia, which are certainly playable despite their hardness.

Ultimately, the first step towards a better symbiosis between sticky topsheet and tensor sponge was taken with a softer rubber. The Donic BlueGrip S2 has an only minimally sticky upper rubber and a tensor sponge with pores from the generation around the lower-catapult tensor rubbers (Donic Acuda S2). What this still lacks, however, is more speed and power to compete with the TOP-ESN rubbers. That’s why the release of Donic BlueGrip S1 is very intriguing to me.

Expectations on the Hybrid K3

When it comes to the level of expectation that I associate with the Hybrid K3, it is set quite high. The rubber must make a clear step forward, otherwise it makes no sense to have another rubber with the widely emphasized playing characteristics in the product portfolio. In addition, the MSRP is already set quite high at 59.90€. Let’s see if the new rubber from Tibhar can deliver.

In my review, I will target the following questions: What are the advantages or disadvantages of the K3 compared to its predecessors? Can the recent positive development of sticky ESN hybrids be continued or does the ever further symbiosis of the contrary approaches evaporate? With which rubbers can the K3 be compared most closely or is there no other like it?

Technical attributes of Tibhar Hybrid K3

Observing the Tibhar Hybrid K3, the first thing that stands out is that the rubber only has a minimal stickiness. The topsheet appears a bit softer than I would have expected. The pimple structure is kept very short and thin. The pimples are quite close together. Overall, the topsheet makes a high-quality impression.

The white cream-colored sponge only has very fine pores. The high degree of hardness is clearly noticeable during the pressure check. Together with the top sheet, however, a bit of flexibility can be noticed.

I was somewhat relieved by the messured weight. The rubber is not quite as heavy as feared. My rubber (Red Max.) weighs 111.71g with packaging on the display. Uncut, the rubber weighs 70.58g. Cut on my Xiom Diva blade, there remains 48.94g on the racket.

Playing characteristics of the Tibhar Hybrid K3

During my warm-up play with the Tibhar Hybrid K3, I noticed a high basic speed. All counterstrokes can be played directly and straightforward. Nevertheless, I get a nice feedback at the point of ball contact, which I would attribute to the top sheet that harmonizes well with sponge.

The slightly sticky surface hardly has a decelerating effect on the ball. The power of the sponge immediately comes through due to the pimple structure. This allows speed increases to be performed with the usual Tensor dynamics. The low-catapult, hard sponge does not play lifelessly and develops a well controllable speed dynamic.

Topspin, counterspin & half-distance.

In the topspin game lies the great strength of the Tibhar Hybrid K3. Despite the sponge hardness and the overall conception, the rubber is not one-dimensional, but rather allows the entire range of topspin strokes. The arc is relatively high with the typical topspin opening. Spin development is in the very high to maximum range.

The rubber grips slow topspins on backspin very precisely. A good, steady spin dynamic is developed, which I already know from the first generation of low-catapult, spin-strong rubbers. The new dimension is formed by the slightly sticky top sheet in combination with the harder sponge, which gives a high power potential on fast topspin strokes. Spin-shots and finishing strokes have a poisonous effect and are extremely difficult to block.

During counter topspins at the table, you can hit the ball with full force. However, the weakness I would identify is that the racket angle and ball impact point with the Hybrid K3 require a good timing. A fast arm acceleration is the key to unlocking the full potential.

The ball follows the direction of impact very precisely. Apart from the top sheet, the sponge leaves little margin for error. However, I quickly got used to the rubber and understood that I only use my counter topspins when I have more time to adjust my stroke execution. Slow, high topspins of the opponent are a feast for the eyes and can be controlled even at medium playing level.

Unlike most hybrids, the Tibhar Hybrid K3 can be played well from half distance. Due to its nice arc and decent spin dynamics, long rallies can be played effectively. With the help of a good arm acceleration, the rubber can be played with very high quality counter topspins. The top sheet is always precise and spin-favorable. The catapult and dynamic development is linear and comprehensible.

Comparisons to the Tibhar Hybrid K3

Compared to the other Tensor Hybrids, the K3 performs noticeably different. The rubber is closer to the typical Tensor rubber, both in terms of the sponge and the top sheet. To me, the rubber is a hard, playable version of the first topspin rubbers around Tibhar Genius, Donic Baracuda, andro Hexer, as well as the Nittaku Fastarc G-1 or Xiom Vega Pro.

Only in passive play, when backspinning or blocking, the hybrid feel comes through a bit more. The spin dynamics in particular totally convince me.

Another advantage of the Tibhar Hybrid K3 is the harmony between top sheet and sponge. If I take the Hybrid K1 Euro, for example, the rubber felt very numb and unbalanced in comparison, especially on in-between strokes or soft attacking balls. Only when using a typical Chinese, direct style of play did the rubber feel like complete. (Please consider these statements in the context of the Hybrid K3).

What bothered me a lot with rubbers like the Butterfly Dignics 09C or the Donic BlueGrip C2, but also the Xiom Omega VII China Guang, are these decelerating characteristics. In addition, there are some strokes where the rubbers then suddenly do explode. Sometimes the perfect contact pressure point is not achieved and the strokes fizzle out. Of course, you can adapt and get used to it. Tuners or a matching blade can also help. But ultimately, I want to improve my playing style and not make strange compromises on certain strokes.

The development towards a hybrid like the K3, which better combines the playing characteristics between tensors and china rubbers, started with the Donic BlueGrip S2. However, anyone who has played the rubber will notice that a medium-soft sponge (sponge of the Acuda S2) does not provide enough power to keep up with the TOP rubbers of this hardness range. Especially in passive play, the rubber is very slow, but of course extremely controlled playable, which in turn appeals to allrounders and advanced players with control demands.

Donic, by the way, has made a start and is discontinuing the first hybrids containing the BlueGrip V1 and R1. I can imagine that other brands will drop their first developments in the field of hybrids and introduce rubber innovations to the table tennis market with the latest concept, consisting of even less stickiness of the top sheet and a standard tensor sponge with degrees of hardness from 45°-55°.

Serve & return

It is very reliable to play all kinds of spin-strong serves. The grip/stickiness of the Tibhar Hybrid K3 rewards any increase in wrist movement and arm acceleration. Literally, very high thrown serves can be “caught” well and get a deep ball bounce with a nice amount of spin.

Especially a lot of spin is possible with sidespin serves. Also the reverse pendulum serve works optimally due to the low-catapult characteristics. I was also able to make my sidespin serves very short and thus confuse the opponent again and again by switching between topspin and backspin.

On the returns, the hybrid characteristics of the rubber show through in particular. Even difficult serves of the opponent can be controlled very well. The Hybrid K3 is anything but a forgiving rubber, but you can be very precise due to the comprehensible, linear dynamics. The sticky top sheet provides additional stability.

A great strength is the spin-strong short layup. But also the cut-off and high pressure backspin pushs are real weapons in the arsenal of the K3. Only when trying to play spinless returns I failed a bit. Thereby the rubber behaves between a tensor rubber and the previous hybrids.

When attacking over the table, the rubber proves to be uncompromising. Control is achieved when the ball is swiped flat over the table due to the formal grip of the ball in the direction of the stroke. Slightly too high, inaccurate serves or returns can be attacked mercilessly. The error rate is surprisingly low.

A good speed can be generated with the direct flip. A direct touch makes it possible to attack even good serves. But since this is not my strength, I tried my luck more with spin-strong banana flips. With that the K3 delivers a toxic spin and a medium trajectory and can force a few mistakes.

Overall, I would describe the play over the table as very good, allowing aggressive attackers to succeed. That said, for me the Hybrid K3 is more of a spin than a speed rubber, which is why there are definitely better solutions for the one-dimensional, uncompromising attacker. However, if I add spin variability, straightforward shooting players can also benefit from the K3.

Block play, shot & high balloon defense

When it comes to blocking, you’ll encounter a direct, low-catapult, hard rubber that makes an active blocking game very easy. Due to the good basic speed and the fact that the Hybrid K3 seems to take on just a little rotation on fast blocks, opponents can be well pressed and do not get easy points. Flat, long and fast blocks are a strength of the rubber.

In the passive blocking game, the K3 seems rock solid as well. The sensitivity to spin increases noticeably. However, the slightly sticky top sheet compensates for some mistakes and absorbs incoming spin on a small scale. I would say, though, that passive blocks are not necessarily the Hybrid K3’s strength. Hard rubbers should rather be played actively, which is no different despite all the variation possibilities of the rubber.

In the shooting game, pressure can be built up well. Opponents can be dominated with a lot of power. In terms of finishing speed, the Tibhar Hybrid K3 is in the upper, but not maximum, range. Due to its hardness, the rubber offers the potential for maximum fast attacks. In combination with a fast carbon blade, the rubber is an absolute machine. I played the K3 on a Viscaria among others and could not complain about lack of power or potential.

There is enough feel to make good, high defensive strokes. Most tensors with more of catapult work better though. Counterattacks are possible quite well. However, if you don’t want to do a lot of body work, you should quickly move back to the table, where the rubber’s real strengths can be found.

Conclusion on the Tibhar Hybrid K3

The Tibhar Hybrid K3 convinces me with its overall playing potential and shows that the development of tensor hybrids is progressing. With the K3, a spin-strong topspin play with great variability can be achieved. Especially at the table the rubber shows a good mixture of directness, precision and rotational dynamics.

A fast arm stroke and an optimal position to the ball guarantee dangerous attacking strokes, which in a moderate form can also be played by the attack-savvy amateur. The rubber is similar to the low-catapult, spin-strong Tensor generation, but is equipped with more power and optimal ball contact.

As weaknesses the passive play must be mentioned, because the reduced stickiness doesn’t decelerate the balls as much. Hard rubbers require a high level of ability in many situations, especially if the potential needs to be fully utilized. With the Hybrid K3, however, the bandwidth and variability has been increased, so that not every shot has to fit 100%. I would also like to mention that the more one-dimensional China Hybrid rubbers are definitely more uncompromisingly usable, whereas the K3 tends more in the direction of a modern topspin rubber.

I would recommend the Hybrid K3 for players, who can handle hard rubbers and want to apply poisonous, rotation-rich topspin strokes of any kind. In addition, the controllability and the low initial catapult allows even amateur players to give the rubber a try.

In my opinion, the development is going into the right direction. But I hope that rubbers like the Hybrid K3 or the Donic BlueGrip S1/S2 will be improved even further. Maybe there will be a rubber with this concept in the future that will outshine all other TT rubbers as the absolute top dog.

The post Tibhar Hybrid K3 appeared first on TT-SPIN.COM - Table Tennis Reviews.

The Butterfly Dignics 05, 80 and 64 follow the same scheme, which could already be observed with the successful Tenergy series. One takes a proven sponge (in this case 50° EUR) and combines it with different topsheets.

But somehow the Dignics 09C has emerged alongside it. Timo Boll, the most successful German table tennis player, was largely involved in the development. The rubber was mainly created by and for him. This is what he says about it:

“DIGNICS 09C is a rubber of a totally new type. I have long wished to play with such a rubber”

If now even Timo Boll plays with a rubber that is harder than the other TOP rubbers and also has a sticky rubber surface, many amateur athletes will probably try such rubbers themselves.

The trend to harder and harder rubbers, which should also be played by the normal club player, is obvious. Donic Bluegrip, Xiom Omega VII China Guang, Ying and Tour, andro Rasanter R53, Tibhar Hybrid K1 Euro, JOOLA Golden Tango or Golden Tango PS are only a small selection of such rubbers. Butterfly had already made a first attempt with the T05 Hard.

Therefore, what matters most to me in my reviews is whether the rubber in question is at all suitable for amateur players. What use has the best rubber if it could not be mastered or used optimally by anyone?

I am also interested in the differences to similar rubbers. And of course I’m looking for player types who can cope with the rubber in question. It won’t be any different when reviewing the D09C.

Technical attributes of Butterfly Dignics 09C

After unpacking, the covering foil must first be removed. Underneath is a slightly to medium-lightly sticky rubber. The rubber compound appears to be very elastic. The pimple structure is short and closely spaced.

A fine-pored, hard sponge can be found investigating the rubber. Overall, the Butterfly Dignics 09C appears a little softer in the compression test than the stated hardness would suggest.

In terms of weight, the rubber is still within reasonable limits. With packaging, my sample (red 2.1mm) weighs 103.66g. The square rubber piece has a weight of 73.75g. Cut to my blade (150x157mm fiberglass OFF prototype), 49.10g remains on the racket.

Playing characteristics of Butterfly Dignics 09C

The play-in succeeds well right away, although the Butterfly Dignics 09C is already a strange rubber. The basic speed is very low. You get the feeling that the entire energy of the incoming ball is absorbed during passive and slightly swung strokes.

This braking effect gives you a very long dwell time to return the ball. Due to the hardness of the rubber and the previously mentioned playing characteristics, counterstrokes seem safe, precise and easy to play. The feel is completely accompanied with a low catapult-effect.

Topspin-Opening, Counter-loops & finishing strokes close to the table

The topspin opening is one of the strengths of Butterfly Dignics 09C. With extremely strong rotation, topspin openings on backspins succeed with a lot of security. The ball trajectory is enormously high. When looping close to the table, a high speed can be built up during rallies, which is strongly dependent on the arm acceleration.

Another strength is the counter topspin or counterattack close to the table. Especially during backhand topspins, which quickly move over the ball with the wrist, the Dignics 09C develops a high spin-dynamics as if out of nowhere. With this spin-strong acceleration, unprecise attacks of the opponent are dangerously answered.

On finishing strokes, the strokes have to be executed in the rising phase / on the highest point in order to be dangerous in terms of velocity. This also works very well. If, on the other hand, you drop the balls a bit, you can play with extreme rotation, but the speed is then much lower.

Half-distance & Blade-Rubber combination

From the half-distance, the Butterfly Dignics 09C has a very hard time. It simply lacks the lightness of a catapult-strong, dynamic table tennis rubber. You need a lot of your own arm movement to be successful even from half- to long-distance.

I could make an interesting observation with the choice of the blade. While the D09C in combination with a slow all-wooden blade did not want to spark at all, the faster and more dangerous the rubber becomes when a harder carbon blade is used.

It is not only the increase in speed that plays a role here. Almost at an exponential rate, the Dignics 09C develops its full potential on stiff carbon blades. In the past, I have observed such phenomena sometimes more, sometimes less. But in this case, it is clearly visible.

Comparison

When comparing the Butterfly Dignics 09C with other table tennis rubbers, I find it very difficult. This is due to the fact that the rubber resembles different rubbers and rubber types in different stroke techniques. In direct counter, block and shooting play, I can think of a few China or China hybrid rubbers that present comparable characteristics.

In topspin-openings on backspin, D09C certainly feels almost similar to an ESN hybrid rubber. JOOLA Golden Tango PS, which is a bit softer to play, comes to mind at first. But also a Hybrid K1 Euro or the recently tested Omega VII China Guang have their comparable moments with the respective hitting hardness or stroke technique.

But when I enjoy the spin-dynamics of the Dignics 09C, the comparisons all fall short. Because then the rubber is clearly more competitive with a hard version of Dignics 05.

Service & Return

Serving is a showpiece of the Butterfly Dignics 09C. I was able to serve really dangerously with extreme rotation. As with traditional Chinese rubbers, I like hitting the ball particularly softly to fool opponents and disguise the spin based on my stroke motion.

In addition to the short, well-placed serves, extreme direct and sidespin serves can also make life a living hell for the opponents .

When returning, the rubber is very slow and controlled. Backspin in any form makes problems for the opponents. What I find difficult are direct openings that are supposed to be without spin for a change. Or returns that are played spin-empty with some variation in mind. The D09C is only really good when I have committed myself to spin.

The banana flip is also very dangerous. Nasty rotation, equipped with a strong arc, makes opponents sweat. Unfortunately, I hardly succeed in direct flips with the forehand. A strong spin-sensitivity acts there, which requires perfect timing. And I don’t always have it.

Blocking, shooting & long-defense

In the blocking game the Butterfly Dignics 09C is good, but also strange to play. Sometimes active blocks are too slow to be dangerous for the opponent. Especially when I’m not quite early or don’t go over the ball.

With passive blocks, the rubber absorbs the incoming pace and spin nicely. Unless I apply a certain amount of pressure. Then a full dose of spin-sensitivity comes through. Ultimately, the rubber wants you to always go over the ball and make completely passive shots the exception. Despite the good control, the rubber follows its own rules.

In the shooting game, the Dignics 09C is precise, but also non-dynamic. I can understand why one would want to turn the racket then. Just stupid when the rubber sticks on both sides

High defense is playable and spin-heavy, but not particularly effective. It does better with a long-backspin cut and thten to continue playing at the table. I was able to develop a hefty portion of backspin, which makes the rubber very interesting for modern defensive play.

Conclusion on Butterfly Dignics 09C

Spin, spin, spin. Close to the table and early timing. These are the basic recipes with which the Butterfly Dignics 09C can be played successfully. If you want to attack, you should also use a carbon blade or a hard & fast all-wooden blade. On a soft all-wooden blade the rubber seems to be pulled with the handbrake.

Strengths & weaknesses

In general, it can be said that this rubber has very great strengths. The spin development and the spin-dynamics close to the table are absolute arguments for using the Dignics 09C. But you always have to be on time and should actively do something.

Although the rubber is passively very controlled, it can also be very ineffective. If it is not played at a certain angle or with the required speed, you will get problems. Personally, I don’t find a real comparison rubber, but a lot of alternatives in the different playing directions. Depending on which characteristics you like.

Recommendation & final thoughts

I can imagine the D09C very well on the backhand side. Especially if the player always wants to play actively and opens mainly with the backhand, following up with the forehand in attacking play. With the spin-dynamics, tempo accelerations can be added to your game concept out of nowhere, so to speak.

I think the rubber is unsuitable for the common player. It’s true that everyone can cope with the basic speed, but there are much more favorable spin-controlled rubbers in this range. To utilize the offensive advantages, you need an adequate technique and the right blade. In addition, the change to this rubber requires a really big adjustment. I could observe that on my own.

There are strokes that I couldn’t play as well with any other rubber. I see the spin development as particularly good, even with short acceleration. But then I would have to adjust my entire technique to it and abandon other strokes that I are my strengths. Do I want that? Actually not…

The review was a lot of fun. I’m always happy when not the hundredth version of the same rubber scheme comes out. And the Butterfly Dignics 09C can offer that. Please more of it! But not for 80€!!!

The post Butterfly Dignics 09C appeared first on TT-SPIN.COM - Table Tennis Reviews.

With the Rasanter rubbers, the table tennis brand andro has caused quite a buzz among the table tennis players in 2017. This was partially due to the fact that the rubbers are using a new rubber concept, which had not been applied to tensor rubbers until then. By using a thinner topsheet, a thicker sponge can now be implemented.

But more to the point, it was the end of the Rasant rubbers. It is not often that a table tennis brand has the courage to discontinue a successful rubber series practically overnight.

As a result, many table tennis players had to switch to new rubbers. Actually the change to the new Rasanter rubbers was obvious. At that time, the series included six rubbers: R50, R47, R42, R37, V47 and V42.

Unfortunately, the rubber innovations could not convince me completely. Although these had more speed and also an increased strong ball acceleration. Both attributes became more important when switching to the plastic ball, but the rubbers are not optimally matched to each other. The feel was often simply spongy.

Other brands did it better. When I think of the Tibhar Aurus Prime, Xiom Omega VII Pro, JOOLA Rhyzer 48 or Donic Bluestorm Z1, it is difficult for me to name a Rasanter of the first series that I consider better than the mentioned competitors.

So it is pleasing that andro has now further developed its series and can correct the hasty change. The beginning has made the andro Rasanter R53, which I am currently simultaneously testing. Recently, the Rasanter R45 has been on the market, which will soon receive a review on this blog.

How should the andro Rasanter R48 be categorized? What are its special features? Where are the major strengths? And which rubbers are comparable? All of this and more I will clarify in the following review

Technical attributes of andro Rasanter R48

As with all modern tensors, a slight smell of a rubber booster is noticeable. With andro rubbers, this is always the same kind.

The topsheet appears very grippy. The surface is also matt. However, you can still quite easily see the shape of the pimple structure. The pimples themselves are rather short and closely spaced. The top layer is very thin.

The sponge has nicely visible, medium-sized pores. Despite the 48°, a certain flexibility seems to be present. The topsheet is comparatively soft due to its thin design and the rubber mixture used. In combination, the rubber is initially very easy to squeeze. Only with greater pressure does the actual sponge hardness become noticeable.

In terms of weight, nothing remarkable is noticeable. The packaging weight is 99.92g. The uncut sample (red Ultramax) weighs 69.57g. Cut on a Viscaria blade, 47.87g remain.

Playing characteristics of andro Rasanter R48

The warm-up strokes succeed without any problems. The andro Rasanter R48 has a strong catapult and a high basic speed. The good sound also comes through on counterstrokes. In direct play, the rubber seems a bit softer than expected, but still has a reasonable precision in the stroke.

When accelerating and at higher speeds, the catapult and speed dynamics affect the stroke to a great extent. I had the feeling that the precision increases along with the impact strength, while the inherent catapult has an extremely strong effect on slow strokes.

Topspin play, Finishing strokes & Counter-loops

In topspin play, the Rasanter R48 has an interesting characteristic. With slow topspins, the rubber seems to me more like a softer version, which makes looping extremely easy accompanied with a lot of catapult. At the same time, there is a high amount of spin.

When I accelerate even more, the dynamics and power of the sponge come through. This makes it possible to play variably at the table, whereby the focus should be on the more dangerous fast topspins and on finishing strokes. The latter can be applied very skillfully. Those who like to prepare safely & slowly and then finish extremely fast will discover the Rasanter R48 to be an ideal rubber.

The rubber’s great strength can be found in counter topspin play at and further away from the table. The early and strong development of speed-dynamics makes it easy to dominate opponents. Longer half-distance rallies are no problem with the R48 and comparatively easy to play. During the review, I often dropped back to then accelerate my game from a half-distance.

Trajectory, Rubber Attributes & Catapult-effect

The trajectory of the ball is in the medium high range for all attacking strokes and can become very long, depending on the applied speed.

Although the andro Rasanter R48 develops very good playing characteristics in terms of pure spin capabilities, the speed feel ultimately dominates. The rubber has a kind of automatic system for intuitive emergency strokes. Due to the strong catapult, some mistakes can be compensated.

The disadvantage is that the rubber is not as precise on slow to medium fast strokes as other comparable rubbers. The question then is, what do you prefer? A rubber that does a lot of things well for you or one that plays more perfectly but also tends to make more simple mistakes? In any case, it’s good that I could at least adjust to it, although I actually prefer rubbers with less catapult.

Comparison

An alternative for the andro Rasanter R48 is the JOOLA DYNARYZ ACC. Both rubbers are roughly on the same level in terms of performance. However, the R48 is even more extreme in terms of catapult and dynamics. On the other hand, the ACC is a bit more variable in playability. In regard to the spin level, the two rubbers don’t give each other much.

The Tibhar Aurus Prime is designed more for pure spin play and doesn’t have nearly as much catapult. Nevertheless, I see the two rubbers as interesting alternatives due to the similar power development, if a change in one or the other playing direction is to be made.

As already mentioned in the review of the Tibhar Evolution MX-D, I can imagine switching between the rubbers there as well. If you are looking for a harder alternative with more spin potential, you can play without the strong catapult and at the same time you welcome a slightly softer feel due to the topsheet, you can switch to MX-D very well. On the other hand, the Rasanter R48 is a bit softer and easier to play, although equipped with a similar dominance in open playing situations.

Compared to the other Rasanter rubbers, the R48 ranks as the best solution for modern attacking players. Why I don’t like the Rasanter R53 as much, I will analyze in more detail in the R53 review. In short, topsheet and sponge do not harmonize nearly as well with each other. In addition, I consider the strong catapult to be out of place on a hard high-performance rubber.

Compared to andro Rasanter R47, the rubber has more power, spin and a higher arc. Especially during counter-topspins, the comparison “Old Polo – New Golf” comes to my mind. This applies even more to the V47. But even with R50, there is simply more playfulness, dynamics and, in my opinion, more rotation, which is why I clearly prefer the R48.

Which medium-hard andro rubber can you recommend?

If I were asked for advice at this moment and it has to be an andro rubber, I would say the following:

There are three good options in the medium-hard rubber range. If you like it low in catapult in passive play with focus on pure spin while looping, you should choose andro Hexer. If more spin dynamics are required and more catapult is desired, andro Hexer Powergrip is the best choice. And if you want a modern, pure attacking rubber, you can’t get around the Rasanter R48.

Service & Return

When serving, I appreciate the fact that the ball feels like it’s dipping into the rubber. This makes it comparatively easy to generate spin. Unfortunately, this also means that I can see slight losses in maximum spin development. Overall, the spin is very good, but not maximum.

Already in the short-short game, the catapult effect of the andro Rasanter R48 sets in. I don’t consider this annoying, but it is noticeably present. When returning the serve, the rubber interacts strongly and I had to adjust my technique a bit. Basically, the passive strokes over the table show a good quality. However, I personally miss a more direct feel.

Opening at and above the table succeeds perfectly. Especially the faster banana flip with the focus on playing to the opponent’s baseline can be played almost perefectly. The catapult has an equally strong effect on active flips, which makes it easy to actively attack even late hit balls.

Blocking, Counter-play & Shooting

Active blocks possess a high pace. This makes it very difficult for opponents to be always on time. You get a good feel for the ball, as the high speed is easy to control. The nice sound is also helpful (to my ears ).

In the passive blocking game, the strong inherent catapult helps to play good blocks. Overall, the R48 is rather average spin-sensitive, which forgives some mistakes. Nevertheless, this should not be overdone. Due to the high pace of the rubber, many blocks quickly end up behind the table or in the net.

On counter strokes in open play, the Rasanter R48 seems fast and well controllable. The dynamic development is overall well manageable, although it is not always steady and sets in very strongly.

Power can be generated well in the shooting game. Catapult and dynamics help to raise a dominant attacking game on high balls. Out of the high defense, the andro Rasanter R48 is well playable and has a good feel for the ball. Counter attacks from distance are effectively playable.

Conclusion on andro Rasanter R48

With the andro Rasanter R48 a pure attacking rubber is on the market, which can convince especially by its speed-dynamics and catapult. In open play, and most of all during counter-topspin duels, the rubber shows its great strengths.

In passive play, the strong and early setting in of the catapult helps to compensate for many errors. This built-in automatic help comes somewhat at the expense of precision in play, which becomes apparent on slow to medium-fast strokes. Overall, however, the dynamics are relatively stable and more advantages than disadvantages arise from this characteristic.

The rubber ranks as a catapult-strong and tempo-dynamic alternative among the rubbers with thinner topsheets. The best comparison so far is with the JOOLA DYNARYZ ACC, but other rubbers like Tibhar Aurus Prime or Tibhar Evolution MX-D can also serve as substitutes in certain cases and vice versa.

For me, the game-changing leap that the R48 has made saves the Rasanter rubber series. In addition, I would recommend the rubber as the TOP rubber of the brand if a modern attacking rubber is sought.

From my point of view, the first Rasanter rubbers are done as alternatives. Clearly more than in 2017, andro can gladly discontinue the rubbers completely. Preferably combined with the return to some cheaper Rasant rubbers, as well as the addition of other sponge thicknesses to the Rasanter series with the new technology. The andro Rasanter R45 seems already promising.

The post andro Rasanter R48 appeared first on TT-SPIN.COM - Table Tennis Reviews.