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.