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.

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.

I will soon complete the andro-reviews with Rasanter R45 and Hexer Grip SFX. In the meantime, I have some other things in the pipeline.

Soft rubbers on the market

What is missing to me lately within the rubber market is the development of independent soft rubbers. There are some new releases, but always connected with the fact that there is a complete series with harder rubbers.

I see some understanding for this approach in the fact that the market around soft rubbers works somewhat differently than it does with the absolute TOP rubbers. Those who choose a softer rubber usually don’t need the best playing characteristics, but are actually looking for a moderate rubber in combination with a lot of control. Or a nice sound feeling. In addition, thinner sponge thicknesses are more likely.

If I stay just with andro, there are already good solutions in this field. The “All-Rounder” and popular andro Hexer Duro offers just that. A nice feeling, moderate speed and still enough potential for all topspins and attacking strokes.

Even softer and more controlled is an andro Hexer Powersponge. Even this rubber already offers the necessary characteristics that define a soft rubber.

Top softies & the lack of power

Especially players who are just about to make progress then choose the more spinny and somewhat dangerous TOP softies around Tibhar Evolution FX-S, Donic Bluefire M3 or Butterfly Tenergy 05 FX. The only thing is that such rubbers often serve as a intermediate step to choose even harder, faster rubbers with more performance capacity.

Where I see potential, and the issue is the same with all modern speed-glue-effect, ESN or Spring Sponge rubbers so far, is this: While a soft, speed-glued rubber could also have a lot of power and speed, from my point of view this is no longer the case with the modern soft rubbers.

The only rubber I ever had such a feeling with was a Donic Baracuda Big Slam, freshly glued (without VOC) straight out of the package. After 2-3 weeks, however, this became much softer and also slower again.

This “problem” cannot be solved if, as with the andro Hexer Powergrip SFX, it is primarily a matter of developing the harder version and then later a soft sponge is put under the same or a similar topsheet. You would have to come up with a completely separate approach.

Expectations with the HPG SFX

Even though this was a bit off-topic, questions like this concern me while I’m evaluating a rubber like the Powergrip SFX. It’s no secret that soft rubbers can never achieve the same rating from me than harder rubbers do. And this is one of those reasons.

Turning to the andro Hexer Powergrip SFX, I examine what characteristics the rubber has compared to its predecessors. Which types of players should switch to the SFX? Which rubbers can be compared with it and where does the rubber rank?

Technical attributes of andro Hexer Powergrip SFX

The andro Hexer Powergrip SFX has the same topsheet as its harder brother. The pimple structure is kept rather low, with average to wide pimples, which are relatively narrow in position. Nevertheless, the rubber mixture is comparatively flexible. The rubber surface is very grippy.

The sponge has a hardness of 42.5°. The pores are somewhat finer than on the HPG. In the squeeze test, this appears very flexible overall.

My rubber (red 2.1mm) weighs 93.61g. Without packaging, the uncut rubber comes to 64.38g. Cut to Stiga’s standard size, 43.20g remain on the racket.

Playing characteristics of andro Hexer Powergrip SFX

While countering, the andro Hexer Powergrip SFX shows itself very playable. A good sound and high catapult are present in all strokes. The catapult development can be dosed well, although a large portion is present in quite passive strokes.

In general, feeling and control dominate the action. The basic speed of the HPG SFX can be considered in the medium range. Overall, however, slightly faster than previous spin-strong medium-soft rubbers, but lower than those with thinner topsheet and MAX+ sponges.

Topspin, Speed & Half Distance

As already mentioned, the andro Hexer Powergrip SFX is very spin-friendly. The great strength are soft topspins, which serve as preparation for the open rally. Especially when I’m late and I let the balls drop far, I can skillfully apply the strokes. Overall, the trajectory of the ball on these shots is in the medium to medium-high range, but very short.

Another strength are loops, which are played more from the wrist. You can wrap the ball well. The catapult and the grippy rubber surface create a good mixture of spin and control. Especially on the backhand side the faster attacks can be prepared well. Also longer rallies can be played safely.
When speed is increased, the catapult initially has a good effect on the strokes. From a medium stroke hardness on, the sponge hits its limits. The andro Hexer Powergrip SFX is more effective in long and smooth stroke movements, while the maximum speed is in the lower to medium range.

Nevertheless, I was able to keep up surprisingly well with counter loops. The HPG SFX is safe to play with a lot of spin on long rallies. The dynamic development is also sufficient for the half-distance. So if you like to play along instead of taking the full initiative yourself, you can score by a spin-heavy and persistent play.

Comparisons

Compared to the spin-strong soft rubbers, the andro Hexer Powergrip SFX ranks as a variant with a high catapult-effect. In contrast to a Butterfly Tenergy 05 FX, Donic Baracuda Big Slam or Donic Bluefire M3, the topsheet is also comparatively soft. This leads to more control, but also to the fact that these mentioned rubbers have more impact at the initial ball contact and ultimately a bit more spin.

I think the Tibhar Evolution FX-S is the best alternative. This one has slightly more dynamic and less catapult, but is closer to HPG SFX in overall hardness because the topsheet is a little more flexible than T05 FX and co.

The strong catapult reminds me of that of the rubbers with thinner topsheet. In general, the Hexer Powergrip SFX has similarities with rubbers like the JOOLA Rhyzer 43, andro Rasanter R42, Donic Bluestorm Z3 or Xiom Omega VII Euro. However, the SFX is slower and has a higher spin arc.

Service & Return

I was able to generate a good amount of spin on serves. It’s very noticeable how easy it is. I always had a nice feeling, especially on sidespin serves. Placement is good, although not as accurate as with harder rubbers.

On returns, the andro Hexer Powergrip SFX forgives a lot of easy mistakes. The ball dips nicely into the rubber and can be controlled well. The sponge balances out the incoming spin, which is why I wouldn’t call it a spin-sensitive rubber. However, a good spin can be generated playing actively. Overall, the spin level is high on backspins.

For flips and openings above the table, the rate and the wrapping of the ball is in the focus. The trajectory is sufficient to set up nice banana flips or open effectively with spin strokes over the table on slightly higher balls. Direct flips are a weak point because the direct impact is missing.

Blocking, Shooting & High Defense

I personally consider the andro Hexer Powergrip SFX as ideal for blocking. I like how the rubber grips the ball and at the same time returns it safely with its high catapult. The forgiving effect of catapult, overall feeling and moderate pace makes the rubber perfect for a passive backhand side. Only the Hexer Duro is a more balanced and forgiving when I look at all andro rubbers. The Rasanter V42, or even the R37, on the other hand, I just consider as spongy.

With more active blocks, speed can be built up in a well-dosed manner, which, in combination with placement and ball security, can bring opponents into distress. However, the rubber also reaches its limits with very hard blocks.

In the shooting game, the catapult dominates over the dynamics. That’s why it’s possible to play safely, but not with much force. That doesn’t surprise me at all. Those who fall back defensively will experience a reliable, controllable rubber that needs to be played somewhat actively to get the perfect length for high defense. Counterattacks are spinny, but rather harmless.

Conclusion on andro Hexer Powergrip SFX

With the andro Hexer Powergrip SFX, a rubber has been developed that expands the rubber market with a spinny, catapult soft version. The great strengths of the rubber are in the topspin opening, in loops from the wrist and in the blocking game. Therefore, the rubber is ideal for a secure spin game or can be used on the passive backhand side.

Furthermore, the rubber joins the TOP softies around T05 FX, Evolution FX-S or Bluefire M3, but gives one a more catapult-heavy, softer and more forgiving alternative. In addition, the rubber is slower than the rubbers with thinner topsheet.

If you want to switch from an andro Hexer Duro to a spin-strong but still controlled rubber, you can also consider the HPG SFX. It is just ultimately the question of whether the slightly better attacking qualities justify a change, because the Duro is just so harmonious and well-balanced.

The post andro Hexer Powergrip SFX 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.

Together with a new concept, a new logo and a revised product range a sleeping giant has awakened. This can only be good for all table tennis players, especially when another brand offers the best possible products. What sounds like advertising here is my personal opinion. All too often in the past I have repeatedly wondered about JOOLA’s approach and product selection. Now I have to believe that everything will be better

JOOLA DYNARYZ as new leading rubber series

With a premium price of 59,90€ JOOLA now offers its new TOP products to the market. These should surpase the former flagship series, the JOOLA RHYZER rubbers. I will compare the JOOLA DYNARYZ ACC mainly with the JOOLA RHYZER 48, but I will also make comparisons with other TOP MAX+ rubbers like Aurus Prime or Bluestorm Z1.

Technical features of JOOLA DYNARYZ ACC

What was immediately noticeable when unpacking was the strong smell of factory tuning. This reminded me strongly of the Tibhar Evolution rubbers. As expected, the topsheet ist grippy, of high quality and up to date with the latest ESN Tensor generation. The pimple structure was chosen very short. According to the pressure test the topsheet is not too soft.

The sponge has a fine to medium pore structure. When pressed in firmly, the rubber still appears to be elastic. The weight of DYNARYZ ACC with packaging is 105,75g (red MAX+). The uncut rubber weighs 69.80g. Cut to Stiga standard size, it is still 46.14g, which is in the lower third of comparable 47.5° rubbers.

Playing characteristics of JOOLA DYNARYZ ACC

With a lot of anticipation I went to the table. When countering, the DYNARYZ ACC has a high basic speed and a powerful catapult. When striking harder and faster a nice sound is achieved. In addition, on frontal hits the rubber develops a high dynamic. The basic control is orderly, because the rubber does not immediately explode.

Topspins, winners & Half-distance

Topspinplay is the great strength of JOOLA DYNARYZ ACC. With soft topspins you get a noticeable feedback and good ball feeling. The rubber tends to be designed more for speed than for spin, but still develops very good rotation, especially on the opening topspin. The ball flight curve is medium high on slow topspins.

Close to the table hard, fast hits and winners develope lots of dynamic and can be played precise. I was able to open the rallies safely as well as to finish them fast.

From half distance the full power of the rubber comes into play. If you don’t score directly on the first attack, JOOLA DYNARYZ ACC feels most comfortable from half distance. In counter topspins duels the rubber grips the incoming ball very directly and without compromise. In topspin-topspin rallies the opponent can be dominated with power. The focus is now clearly on speed and dynamics.

Comparisons

Compared to RHYZER 48, the DYNARYZ ACC shows more directness, power and dynamics. The rubber is also harder. The rotation level is relatively similar. But the ACC is not as variable. Basically one can speak of a harder power-update.

Compared to Aurus Prime, the DYNARYZ ACC is a bit more catapult on soft strokes and forgives more mistakes. On the other hand, the topspeed and maximum spin peaks of Aurus Prime are missing. The most similar rubber to the JOOLA DYNARYZ ACC is the Bluestorm Z1, but I would say that the ACC has a bit more dynamic on winners. Whether this is due to a stronger factory tuning or a technological advancement I can’t say.

If I compare the DYNARYZ AGR with the ACC, the AGR is much harder and more uncompromising (50° sponge). But all in all I think the ACC is the more recommendable surface, because more table tennis players will meet the requirements of the ACC. The AGR is really only something when absolute, unconditional power table tennis is played from the first stroke to the last rally and at the same time the high surface hardness can be handled.

Service & Return

I was able to create a lot of spin on serves. Especially wrapping the ball with a lot of wrist movement worked well. I always produced the desired spin variation. Exact placement is also possible. I had rarely played a bad serve. All in all, serving was intuitive and problem-free.

On returns the rubber takes a good portion of spin. But too much leading to problems with control. There is a lot of feel for the ball in the short game. But with the Max+ sponge you need a good technique and timing, because the rubber reacts very strongly if you do not do it right.

I liked active flips very much. Especially the more direct Banana Flip suited the JOOLA DYNARYZ ACC very well. Direct, hard flips are also very playable.

Blocking, shooting & High strokes

In the blocking game the active blocks are clearly preferable. Blocked balls have a very good length when hit early and cause big problems for the opponent.

Passive blocks provide a good feeling for the ball. Nevertheless, I could not use the blocks as effectively. The reason for this was probably a mixture of rotation sensitivity and catapult, which just didn’t seem so harmonious.

JOOLA DYNARYZ ACC is a feast for the eyes when shooting. With power and dynamics the opponents could be pushed far away from the table. Playing high strokes the ACC develops a well controllable ball feel, which allowed me to place almost all balls close to the baseline without making mistakes. For counter attacks there is more than enough power and spin.

Conclusion on JOOLA DYNARYZ ACC

JOOLA DYNARYZ ACC is a consequent further development of RHYZER 48 and joins the ranks of the better rubbers with MAX+ sponge. The rubber develops its great strengths in topspin play. The dominant speed and dynamics are combined with a good portion of spin. Especially from half distance during longer rallies and with counter topspin rallies the opponents can be dominated. As the icing on the cake there is also a good sound to hear.

I would recommend JOOLA DYNARYZ ACC for players who are looking for a rubber with high dynamics and good performance. This is especially true for former RHYZER players who want an upgrade for their game.

With the DYNARYZ rubbers, JOOLA steps into the competition with other brands. The 60€ price tag doesn’t shock me anymore. andro Rasanter R53, Xiom Omega VII Tour or even the Butterfly Dignics rubbers are only a few examples for the high prices of the rubber novelties. But I am still curious how the market will react. Because there are also other examples like the Xiom Vega X for the price of just 38,90€.

It does not have to be the most expensive rubber. It simply has to fit. And with the JOOLA DYNARYZ ACC I can imagine that for some types of players, despite the high price.

The post JOOLA DYNARYZ ACC appeared first on TT-SPIN.COM - Table Tennis Reviews.

Basically, harder rubbers are more demanding to play. At the same time, a hard rubber always has the advantage, if the player has the appropriate technique and the necessary arm movement, of having high speed and rotation potential.

When JOOLA launches its new flagship rubber series, the harder DYNARYZ AGR is automatically in the spotlight. The competition is quickly identified. The andro Rasanter R50 is one such candidate, as is the Donic Bluestorm Z1 Turbo, which I recently reviewed.

But above all, the JOOLA Rhyzer Pro 50 should not be missing, as it also has a 50° hard sponge. The pimple structure is similar. But what are the differences? Can the AGR really become the new flagship among JOOLA rubbers?

Technical attributes of JOOLA DYNARYZ AGR

The topsheet of the AGR is similar to that of the ACC. We have a grippy, thin upper rubber whose pimples are wide and short. The sponge has the same fine to medium-sized pores. The harder sponge (50°) makes the overall rubber feel much harder. While it was still possible to press the ACC completely through, this is no longer possible with such a hardness. In addition, the same smell of factory tuning is omnipresent.

In addition, the JOOLA DYNARYZ AGR is no lightweight. With packaging, the rubber shows a proud weight of 110.75g on the scales. The rubber (red Max+) brings along 74.22g uncut. Cut to Stiga’s standard size, 49.37g still remain on the racket.

Playing characteristics of JOOLA DYNARYZ AGR

The enormous power that resides in the JOOLA DYNARYZ AGR is clearly noticeable from the very first strokes. The rubber conveys a direct feel. The basic speed is very high. Despite the high degree of hardness, a clear catapult effect appears on direct strokes. While the DYNARYZ ACC still conveyed a benevolent feel for the ball, which concealed some mistakes, with the AGR you don’t get away with an unclean stroke technique.

Since I played the rubber during the first practice session only towards the end, when I was already quite unfocused and tired, it became very clear to me that every stroke has to be executed very cleanly. Otherwise, a mistake follows another mistake. Fortunately, I review rubbers more often than once. At the second practice, I was very motivated and in a good mood. This allowed me to see the full potential of the JOOLA DYNARYZ AGR.

Topspin, finishing strokes & overall spin

With the topspin opening, you have to be careful to hit the ball early and move it forward quickly. The power that the rubber develops during first attacking spins is impressive. If you want to loop softly and slowly, the complete wrapping and pacing has to be done with your own arm and wrist movement. The rubber has an extreme, medium flat and long arc. The perfect window is very small despite executing with the appropriate technique.

In principle, every stroke is to be seen as a finishing stroke. The best combination I used in my tests was to prepare the rally with the backhand (ACC) with a lot of spin and then aim to finish the point with the forehand. I felt like I only got one or two blocked balls back after I charged through with the forehand.

When it comes to rotation, I honestly can’t say if I got the maximum out of it. To me, it felt like there was more I could do. But the fast attacking strokes have so much power and velocity that I don’t think it matters how much spin you could ultimately achieve. With my technique, there was less spin in than with the DYNARYZ ACC.

Counter loops & half-distance play

I didn’t play many counter loops in a lot of rallies. The rallies were too short for that. During practice, it became apparent that with the JOOLA DYNARYZ AGR it’s more appropriate to finish the rally early than to loop around from half-distance for a long time.

Further away from the table, I didn’t like the rubber. The arc was too flat for my variable topspin game. Especially when I had to take the ball very late, the AGR seemed too inflexible to produce a dangerous spin ball. On the other hand, when I took a step forward, I could immediately overpower my opponents and win the rallies.

Comparisons

DYNARYZ AGR has very good dynamics from close to the table, but it has the same problems that were already present with the Rasanter R50, Bluestorm Z1 Turbo or JOOLA Rhyzer Pro 50. Without an after-treatment by rubber tuners, these rubbers have a lot of power, but are too inflexible as a whole. Especially when you really can’t accelerate directly during the rally.

Compared to the Rhyzer Pro 50, there is a bit more speed and dynamics. I think the hardness is about the same. I like the AGR a bit more, especially on the final stroke. On the other hand, I was able to get a little higher arc on my loops with the Rhyzer Pro 50.

Service & return

Serving was quite solid. Compared to the ACC, I lacked the lightness and the nice feel for the ball. However, I was able to produce the same amount of spin on perfectly executed serves. The harder sponge gave me a more accurate feel for the placement.

On the return, I noticed that personally, the rubber doesn’t suit me at all. I just need a little feedback. Even if it’s just a little bit. I’m always amazed of the differences a slightly harder sponge makes. The only situations I liked were when the opponent played pure underspin very short. The short strokes could be placed directly behind the net. On sidespin or other kind of serves, I made a lot of easy mistakes or made it to easy for my opponents.

The ultimative stroke, which I can do the worst, was the direct forehand flip. Those things really exploded. My banana flips were only good when I hit the ball very shallow. When I brushed through the ball fuller, my banana flips were too harmless.

Blocking & shooting

The active blocking game went quite well. The hard, direct feel and the potential to always be able to work against the ball are impressive. With passive blocks, before I’ve fully felt the ball, it’s already jumping back into the net or over the table. Especially with softer topspins, passively holding the racket against the ball is not a good idea. The JOOLA DYNARYZ AGR enormously spin-sensitive and takes an enormous amount of rotation in such situations.

In the shooting game, I was able to dominate my opponents well. Unfortunately, I also have to say here that it hardly ever came to that in game situations, since I either made the point or a mistake beforehand ;-). The high defense was not much fun. When I compare it to the ACC, the AGR just seems like a wooden board on this kind of play. Counterattacks from a distance require more brute force than spin.

Conclusion on JOOLA DYNARYZ AGR

The JOOLA DYNARYZ AGR is a very demanding table tennis rubber. As a true powerhouse, the fast topspin opening and the final stroke are the showpieces. It becomes more difficult when looking for ball feel. Furthermore, the AGR hardly forgives mistakes and demands that you take full initiative with every stroke.

Compared to the Rhyzer Pro 50, the JOOLA DYNARYZ AGR is faster and has even more power. More rotation is unfortunately not available. At least not with my playing skills.

I would recommend the rubber for uncompromising attacking players who want to dominate their opponents with fast loops and hard-hitting final strokes. In addition, they should play close to the table. Long rallies should be avoided and are not necessary.

Among the DYNARYZ rubbers, I personally find the ACC better, as it plays more coherently. With the AGR, I consistently had the feeling that the rubber literally cries out to be tuned even softer to bring a little more flexibility into play.

The post JOOLA DYNARYZ AGR appeared first on TT-SPIN.COM - Table Tennis Reviews.

I’d like to say in advance that the JOOLA Golden Tango is not only harder than the GTPS, but has little to do with the playing characteristics of its softer version. The normal Golden Tango is based on typical Chinese hybrid rubbers. Another example for such rubbers would be Xiom Vega China.

Instead, Golden Tango PS features a tensor rubber with a hard sponge and very sticky top sheet. Similar to Donic BlueGrip R1 & V1, as well as the Tibhar Hybrid K1 Euro, the rubber was modified from a typical tensor rubber. The playing feel is not as extremely hard and undynamic as with many Chinese rubbers.

These unique playing characteristics make these tests interesting. I could already see this on the Tibhar Hybrid K1 Euro, which was tested at the same time. But also the Donic BlueGrip rubbers have these characteristics.

The primary goal of this test is to show the differences to the other rubbers , build with the same concept. Of course, JOOLA Golden Tango PS is the pioneer of this rubber concept and is particularly in my focus. That’s why I’m going to take a close look at the special features.

Technical features of JOOLA Golden Tango PS

The very sticky rubber surface is conspicuous. This reminds me of the sticky Chinese classics. However, the rubber material is much more elastic than Chinese rubbers are.

The pimple structure of the Golden Tango PS is comparable to the pimple structures of the Hybrid K1 and BlueGrip R1. The differences lie in a different topsheet material and possibly a different kind of built-in factory tuning.

The sponge of the rubber is medium pored. Overall, this rubber appears softer than the indicated 50° (EUR) hardness.

As with other table tennis rubbers, a pink sponge was used. However, the color doesn’t represent its characteristics. I have already read in some forums that this is the sponge of the Rhyzer rubber series. I can’t confirm this.

Play characteristics of JOOLA Golden Tango PS

When warming up with counter play, it is obvious how flexible and soft JOOLA Golden Tango PS is designed for a rubber with a 50° hard sponge. I always had a very good ball control. Incoming balls are literally socked up by the sticky-flexible topsheet. With that you can play the ball back very safely.

The basic speed of this rubber is high, but not extremely fast. In addition, the GTPS has a good portion of catapult. This makes it generally possible to play fast balls with little effort. However the overall hardness and demanding characteristics must be considered as well to get a full picture.

Opening topspin & counter loops

The safe topspin opening is the great strength of the JOOLA Golden Tango PS. Especially on my backhand side the rubber supported my dangerous, spin-heavy topspins answering the opponents backspins. The rotation level is very high. This lead to some balls being blocked over the table by my opponents.

Furthermore you can act fast and direct, although the power is not as high as with Butterfly Dignics 05 or Donic BlueGrip V1, for example.

For counter topspins the GTPS is controllable, fast and dynamic. It didn’t matter if I was involved in counter topspins at the table or from half distance. The spin of the topsheet dominates over the power of the sponge regarding the overall feel of GTPS.

Second effort & comparisons

The the second and third attacks are particularly safe. The combination of rotation, speed & high power, as well as the dynamic of the rubber, allows a good mixture of placement and variability.

Compared to Tibhar Hybrid K1 Euro, Donic BlueGrip V1 and Donic BlueGrip R1, the JOOLA Golden Tango PS is the softest and most controlled version. The rotation level is similar to that of the Hybrid K1. However, HK1 is faster than GTPS. When it comes to catapult effect, Golden Tango PS is the leader.

I really liked the combination of K1 on my forehand and GTPS on my backhand side. This allowed me to play with a lot of spin on both sides. On my forehand with the focus on my winners. In the backhand side with safe, rotation-strong opening spins and controlled blocking.

Half distance & longer rallies

In the game from half distance Golden Tango PS is not bad. The rubber develops a good, sufficient dynamic. While I like the spin and the ball flight curve, I would like even more power. The Donic BlueGrip R1 is better suited for playing from distance, as it simply puts more pressure on the opponent.

Long rallies are another strength of this rubber. Especially for spin players like me it is important to dominate from all positions with rotation and not being forced to play always with excessive speed. The rubber definitely has the potential to be a good solution for variable topspin players if you can handle the overall hardness.

And I never had the feeling of losing control, despite the high basic tempo. The rubber is generally spin-sensitive and therefore predestined for one’s own mistakes. But with a reasonably good movement to the ball it compensates this weakness. In general, Golden Tango PS is also controllable for players in the lower leagues, but not for beginners.

Block & Control

What I already liked about the Hybrid K1 Euro goes even better with the JOOLA Golden Tango PS. In the blocking game, the combination of catapult, hardness and sticky, elastic topsheet is almost legendary. Blocked balls from all positions, early or late, on the plate or further away, succeed with a high rate.

Active blocks can be set quickly and flat. In addition, I was able to place it very precisely.

Due to the catapult, passive blocks are also a strength of the rubber. Soft and sensitive, spinning as well as fast shots of the opponent can be played back.

What I like all in all is the very high ball control. Such a thing is untypical for a hard rubber like this one. When I compare this with a Dignics 05, Tibhar Evolution MX-P50 or even a Tenergy 05 Hard, the ball security is highly noticeable.

But with all the praise, it must be clear in what realtion I mean that. Even the Golden Tango PS is not a beginner’s table tennis rubber. But those who like to play hard rubbers and have problems with controlling such rubbers will love the GTPS. However, it must also be said that in connection with the control, the power can not keep up to others in this category.

Service & Returns

Serves can be played very spinny. In this discipline I’ve gotten more out the the Hybrid K1, although the spin level is generally the same. This is probably because the JOOLA Golden Tango PS is a bit slower, which makes slow shots easier to play with rotation, while losing a bit of the extremes.

I had the same feeling with backspins in the return game. You are able to return the serves spin-heavy, short and with a good ball placement. The rubber is extremely sensitive to spin if the racket angle is wrong. If I reacted to late, however, I had fewer problems.

Banana flips are really nice to play. It was so much fun that I wanted to play every return with my backhand banana at some point. With direct flips, and this is the only shot I felt that way, the rubber seemed spongy and inaccurate.

Shots & long defence

Due to the good dynamics and hardness of the rubber, fast shooting is possible without any problems. Unfortunately, the power is not as dominant as it is with a BlueGrip V1, for example.

In the long defence, the rubber was safe and easy to play. What was really interesting, however, was the extremely good suitability for backspins. I got really extreme backspin on the balls, which were hardly attackable. Of course I like something like that

Conclusion on the JOOLA Golden Tango PS

JOOLA Golden Tango PS is a very interesting rubber. The sticky top sheet, the existing catapult and the 50° power sponge provide a unique combination.

Especially on the backhand side, with spin-heavy opening spins and dangerous backspins, the rubber showed its strengths. Unfortunately this mix is at the expense of top speed, full power and dynamics.

Compared to the similarly designed rubbers tested at the same time, the GTPS is the most controlled, softest alternative with the most catapult effect.

The rubber is recommendable for players who are looking for a hard, spinny, but not too fast topspin rubber and want to play more variable. But the rubber can also be used for backspin-defence. Furthermore, the GTPS is not for beginners, but is still suitable for for most of the players.

The post JOOLA Golden Tango PS appeared first on TT-SPIN.COM - Table Tennis Reviews.