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.

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.

But one thing I don’t do anymore for a long time. Listening to the opinion of others in the forums or on Youtube before my own reviews are finished. This gives me an objective view of what I really think about the rubbers and blades.

It is not uncommon for my impressions to diverge compared to prominent Youtubers or even professional players. But I stand by what I write. And I think everyone who reads my reviews regularly at least understands why I come to one conclusion or another.

Anyway, Sven (or better known in the forums as the Svennie) pointed out to me that the Tibhar Evolution MX-D is already available. And indeed, thanks to TT-SHOP.com and Tibhar I have received a test rubber, which is now tested in detail.

Significance of Tibhar Evolution rubbers

When the first Tibhar Evolution rubbers appeared on the market at the end of 2012, the supremacy of the Butterfly Tenergy rubbers could be challenged for the very first time. The Tibhar Evolution MX-P played the leading role.

In terms of performance, the flagship of the Evolution-P series could absolutely keep up with the Tenergy 05, even though the pure playing characteristics are very different. But also the Tibhar Evolution EL-P, as well as the soft FX-P, could convince some players.

For me as a pure spin player, the Evolution-S rubbers are even more interesting. The Tibhar Evolution MX-S is trimmed for pure spin. A fast arm stroke and a lot of body movement is required to activate the full potential.

More suitable for the masses are the EL-S and FX-S. The focus on topspin performance supports the spin game well. The only drawback I see here is that the Tibhar Evolution EL-S is a bit softer than other TOP rubbers, which doesn’t suit everyone.

Most recently, a 50° sponge version of the MX-P rubber appeared, which I would describe as the only disappointment of the series. I will go into this more clearly in the context of the review.

What more can a MX-D offer?

According to the Tibhar brand, the Evolution MX-D was designed for maximum dynamics. If you follow the definition in the german dictionary, dynamic means the “… movement generated by forces…”. Synonyms are e.g. drive, energy, liveliness,… and many more.

In table tennis I understand dynamics as acceleration in active stroke movements. A rubber is the more dynamic, the more the own arm acceleration is paid tribute to. Non-dynamic rubbers tend to slow down the action and rely on the player to generate the acceleration completely with his own force.

I also find it decisive how the dynamics of a rubber develop. Softer rubbers in particular quickly reach their limits. This should not be the case with a rubber with a specified 50.3-52.3° sponge hardness. It is interesting to see how strongly the topsheet supports acceleration and, at the same time, dispenses with the power of the sponge.

There are rubbers that literally explode very early on and are therefore difficult to control. With the focus on maximum dynamics, this is a big concern.

So I wonder if and when the maximum dynamic of the rubber kicks in? How much speed & spin dynamics can the MX-D provide? Despite this, can the rubber also achieve maximum spin or is this rubber simply fast? And how does the MX-D compare to the other Evolutions? Are there any advantages compared to the rubbers with thinner topsheets? And what about the Dignics rubber series, which also feature harder sponges and more dynamics compared to the Tenergy rubbers? Can the Tibhar Evolution MX-D keep up?

Technical attributes of Tibhar Evolution MX-D

After unpacking, the Evolution-typical smell is immediately apparent. The topsheet of the MX-D seems to be very grippy. The color of the red rubber surface is slightly mat, but you can still see the pimples through.

The pimple arrangement is comparatively close together. The pimples themselves are of average width, but quite long. Overall, the topsheet of the rubber is elastic to semi-elastic.

The sponge has clearly visible pores, but they are rather fine to medium-sized. I would have estimated the sponge hardness at over 50° without manufacturer’s specifications. In the pressure test, the rubber seems slightly softer, which will make 50 ° rubbers from other manufacturers comparable.

The weight of the Evolution MX-D is set quite high. One of the testing rubbers (red 2.1-2.2mm) weighs 115.50g with packaging. The uncut rubber brings 76.30g to the display. When cut, this corresponds to 52.19g. The other test rubber weighed 49.93g when cut. Unfortunately, I could not weigh the rubber before cutting. In terms of playing characteristics, I can’t see any differences.

Playing characteristics of Tibhar Evolution MX-D

Countering with the Tibhar Evolution MX-D succeeds flawlessly. The rubber has a high basic speed and a direct impact, which is nevertheless pleasant due to the softer topsheet. The balls can be played precisely, straightforwardly and with a high consistency.

If the speed is increased, a constant dynamic development follows. The rubber starts with a very light, barely noticeable catapult and ends in an extremely high acceleration.

Looping, arc & suitability

The first topspin loops have everything you want from a modern attacking rubber. A lot of power, spin and a nice sound can be expected from the Evolution MX-D. A great strength of the rubber is that it fully develops its dynamics even in spin play. This allows strong backspin to be answered however you want. The rubber develops a lot of pressure on the opponents.

The arc is medium-high to high and wide. From all positions, the ball can be optimally taken along. It seems as if the topsheet grabs into the ball and right after that the dynamics of the sponge come through.

With the backhand, I can strike both with the wrist and with short arm acceleration, and there is a nice spin curve. Nevertheless, the rubber can be used even more effectively on the forehand side, where its power develops even more.

Finishing strokes, counter-loops & half-distance play

Especially final strokes after long rallies are a dream. If the opponent gets too short or too passive, the point can be won at any time. The Tibhar Evolution MX-D always has enough power and spin to be dangerous.

On counter topspins, the rubber is a machine. I don’t know any rubber that unfolds its final dynamics so well controllably. It works very well both at the table and from half-distance.

From half-distance, the Tibhar Evolution MX-D can be used with a lot of spin as well as with a lot of power. The rubber reacts optimally to how I want to shape the rally. Although the overall speed, it seems in active play as if you catch the ball for a short moment before a constant, well controllable acceleration then occurs.

Intermediate conclusion & Evolution comparison

Basically, the Tibhar Evolution MX-D represents what I’ve been wanting since speed-gluing ended. A rubber that has immense dynamics & power and combines that with a certain ease in playing. With the very low-catapult rubbers, on the one hand, this is somehow missing. Other tensors, on the other hand, unleash their power uncontrollably and simply too explosively.

Compared to the other Evolution rubbers, there is a lot to be said. Each rubber from this series, apart from the MX-P50, has its great strengths. The MX-P has that inimitable, exploding power. The MX-S has an extremely high spin potential. The EL-S offers variable to maximum spin variations. The EL-P has a toxic ball flight curve that is difficult to judge. The FX-S guarantees spin and control. The FX-P is powerful despite its soft sponge.

The strength of the MX-D, its constant but strong acceleration & dynamics, helps with all attacking strokes. This makes the rubber the best as a total package, although there are advantages for other rubbers in their respective areas.

Other alternatives

Unlike a Dignics 05, the Evolution MX-D has more control and stronger dynamics. In addition, the Butterfly rubber is more spin-sensitive and less forgiving. The MX-P50 should actually compete with the MX-D. However, sponge and topsheet do not harmonize nearly as well. Basically, the 50° sponge replaces the great explosive power and relies on the power of a harder sponge, but this basically robbs its strength with another obstacle.

A more far-fetched alternative to the Evolution MX-D is the andro Rasanter R48. This one I find better than many other rubbers with thin topsheet. Compared to the MX-D, the R48 has clearly higher catapult effect and develops its dynamics earlier, as well as more inconsistently. The trajectory is somewhat flatter. A little less rotation is present. But for those who want a smoother, more catapult-like alternative, the R48 has something to offer.

Finally, I would like to mention the Tibhar Aurus Prime, which I also like very much as an overall rubber. iT also has a high dynamic due to the thicker sponge. The Prime is more trimmed to spin and goes more in the direction of spin dynamics. I also find the MX-D a bit more controlled, which is mainly due to the feel of the ball.

Service & Return

The Tibhar Evolution MX-D is very spin-friendly on serve. Those who go for maximum spin will have to accept slight losses if they do not have an experienced service technique. The precision of the hard sponge requires a lot of wrist movement.

In short-short game, the rubber appears to be stable and constant. Very short, but also very long backspin pushes succeed well. When returning the serve, the ball can be wrapped well. The topsheet gives the player some time to compensate for mistakes. Overall, the MX-D requires a good technique, but at the same time it is not too spin-sensitive.

A lot of pressure can be generated on active flips. Too high serves are also cannon food. Banana flips go quite well, but become effective with more speed added than with pure spin.

Blocking, counter & shooting

In the blocking game, the Tibhar Evolution MX-D has high stability and good forward pressure. Especially active blocks or counter on slow topspins can be applied quickly and precisely. In the passive blocking game, a slight catapult comes through, which also makes touch blocks possible. Simply stalling is not recommended due to the rubber’s vita.

In the shooting game the MX-D is a grenade. Opponents can be shot down extremely fast and with high consistency. Switching to topspin rallies and breaking free from the opponent’s grip is possible at any time. High defense strokes also make a good figure. The rubber has a good touch and a perfect length in the strokes.

Conclusion on Tibhar Evolution MX-D

In my opinion, the Tibhar Evolution MX-D is the most complete attacking rubber on the market. The extremely constant, maximum dynamics help in every attacking situation. Extreme spin and tempo variations can be played. Counter topspins have power and are dangerous. In addition, the rubber grips every ball the way I want it as a player.

What’s also refreshing is that the MX-D is not the hundredth version of the same rubber, but provides a completely different concept. Finally, a harder sponge is used in a way that also has advantages for the players.

At the moment I’m testing the Harimoto ALC blade together with the Vega X. For spin players like me simply a god-like combination. Even though I am actually satisfied with it, I have now tested the MX-D for myself. Because the advantages of the rubber simply outweigh so much that I want to use this for my game. Therefore, I will get the rubber in 1.9-2.0mm and test it further on my forehand.

Is the MX-D really that good or are you exaggerating?

I asked myself this question a lot during my review sessions. The way it went was that I tried to talk myself out of it after the first testing. After all, a first impression doesn’t mean much. After the second test, I thought to myself, try the MX-D on a pure wooden blade after all, to soften the hype a bit (on a Viscaria, all rubbers are a grenade *smile*). It didn’t help….

Then I tried it with an innerlayer blade (Harimoto ALC) and I found the rubber there even better for myself. Finally, I did a final review today where I tested the MX-D exclusively. And I still come to the same conclusion.

Is there any weakness?

Yes, because I don’t think every player can cope with such a hard rubber, even if the rubber offers more control than you would expect. That’s why I see the Tibhar Evolution MX-D more on the forehand side. As a confirmed medium-hard player (47.5°), I didn’t have any major problems switching to it. The topsheet helps immensely and returns a really great touch.

The only drawback is the heavy weight. From 50g on it is just simply heavy. For me, I solve this by choosing the thinner sponge thickness. Normally 47g is then possible and okay for me.

In terms of durability, I have no concerns. The quality is in the similar range as the Evolution S series. A strong factory tuning was used. Basically, I recommend re-gluing an Evolution rubber after 3 months of play. This gives it a final extra boost. Rubber boostering is of course also possible, but only for training purposes

Evaluation & Final Words

In my overall rating, I give the Tibhar Evolution MX-D 95 points, which is the highest rating on my blog. Even the Butterfly Tenergy 05 received “only” 94 points.

However, this does not mean that other rubbers are “bad” or that only the MX-D is still recommended. The rating refers to my impressions and my expectations of a table tennis rubber. And that can be seen completely different. I put it into perspective because some people, especially in the table tennis forums, badmouth others just because they don’t see it the same way.

One reason I enjoy the characteristics of the Evolution MX-D so much is that it has given me personally so much fun to play with that I haven’t been able to experience in a long time. Since the speed-glue ban, we table tennis players have been struggling with low-catapult or over-catapult effects of rubbers.

Finally, there is a rubber that, like a speed-glued classic, has great dynamics and sound, but at the same time spreads this playful lightness. Don’t get me wrong. It’s not like it was back then. But it comes close.

Therefore, I can suggest any savvy offensive attacking player to give the MX-D a shot. Especially if you want to get to the point with spin- and speed-dyanmics using a mature stroke technique. As long as you play offensive oriented and like harder rubbers, there are no concerns about the level of play. But keep in mind that a slower rubber can also bring many advantages.

I hope you could get a good impression. Please forgive me for writing so much. But sometimes it has to be

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

MX-P is a true powerhouse among the table tennis rubbers and extremely fast. Although the playing characteristics differ greatly, the MX-P can keep up with the Tenergys from Butterfly when it comes to performance limits.

The same applies to Tibhar Evolution MX-S. You have to bring in more arm speed and body movement to activate this rubber. But then you will be rewarded by an extreme spin and an extraordinary precision in the attacking play.

Then why bring out an MX-P50? The answer is likely to be found when looking around the competition of the Tibhar brand.

Butterfly has recently launched Dignics 05, a harder successor to the bestseller Tenergy 05, which will bring more power for the plastic ball into the game with its 50° sponge. Before that, the Tenergy 05 received a hard version with a completely new playing style (54°).

With BlueGrip R1 and BlueGrip V1, both rubbers have a sticky topsheet, Donic provides another rubber series hitting the 50° sponge hardness mark. And Xiom has with Omega VII Asia and Omega VII Tour (->55°!!!) two absolute crowbars on offer.

The comparison with the new Tibhar Hybrid K1 should also be an interesting internally battle for the crown of hard table tennis rubbers.

Basic question on the subject: Are hard tensor rubbers with 50°+ sponge hardness the right way?

But who’s gonna play these hard rubbers? Until now, tt-rubbers with a hardness of 50°+ were found almost exclusively among Chinese manufacturers. Exceptions can be found with 50 degree rubbers, such as JOOLA Rhyzer Pro 50 or andro Rasanter R50, which work with thinner and softer topsheets.

The Chinese rubbers, as well as JOOLA Golden Tango, Golden Tango PS or Xiom Vega China, are hard, but at the same time low catapult rubbers with a good amount of controll. That’s why it doesn’t matter too much when you’re hitting the ball with a bad timing.

But tensor rubbers that forgive absolutely no mistakes and are also brute hard are not exactly solutions for the average table tennis player. Okay, okay- Some of you use boosters for tuning, which makes the rubbers softer and more elastic. I can well imagine that harder rubbers make more sense doing that. But otherwise?

I don’t want to open a debate about whether or who should play such hard rubbers at all. I’ll probably do my own article on it. But I am trying to understand why this is the answer to the plastic ball?  Not long ago manufacturers have thrown softer blades and catapult stronger rubbers onto the market. Are they not good enough?

I suppose one does it and everyone else will follow the same approach. All right, enough with this basic issue. For now. After all, my attention is about testing Tibhar Evolution MX-P50 ?

Technical features of the Tibhar Evolution MX-P50

Playing characteristics of the Tibhar Evolution MX-P50

Since it has the same top-sheet as MX-P, connected with a very hard and fine-pored sponge, it is not surprising that the feeling is much harder in comparison to each other. Due to the smaller pores, the sponge also does not appear particularly flexible, which pushes the felt hardness upwards.

Basic speed and characteristics

Tibhar Evolution MX-P50 has a very high basic speed and a hard, direct ball stroke feeling, which turns out to be very precise when playing with it. By that I don’t mean that all my counter strokes landed on the table. On the contrary. The rubber hardly forgives a wrong angle or a late stroke. But also rewards a correct technique.

I had to concentrate completely when I played. On the one hand you are not allowed to passively approach your strokes, and on the other, you have to hit the ball perfectly in terms of timing. Otherwise the ball sails into the net or over the table.

But if I paid attention to the details and perfect execution, I could play with pinpoint accuracy.

The speed of the rubber is enormous. If you stand correctly and open with a full arm movement, you will get fast, flat and precise topspins. If something is wrong, the ball lands in the net or some power is missing.

Unlike the normal MX-P, the MX-P50 isn’t particularly catapult-friendly in passive play. In addition MX-P50 has a lot of catapult and dynamics, but only during active movements and when the rubber is fully activated.

In comparison, the MX-P has a controlled and forgiving effect. That says it all ?

Opening topspin, counter loops and rotation level

I had problems with opening topspins on underspin. I like a very spinny first ball or I am very variable. But the Tibhar Evolution MX-P50 knows only one direction. And that goes fast and hard forward. End strokes, and actually every stroke is an end stroke, go wonderfully with the rubber. Opponents blocks can be simply overpowered. He has no chance when playing passively.

With counter loops it is possible to hit hard and precise. In general, similar to Dignics 05, the rubber has the ability to give back the energy of the opponent’s attack almost 1 to 1 with even more power of its own. So if you’re attack blatantly everything that moves, the Tibhar Evolution MX-P50 makes a lot of fun.

Unfortunately there is no variability for slower strokes or controlled placement in the attacking game. The rubber is designed to finish the point quickly. Otherwise, you make too many easy mistakes.

There’s not even that much spin to find. For example Dignics 05 is more spin-friendly. Also in comparison to Tibhar Evolution MX-P, the spin elasticity is missing to generate rotation without perfectly executed strokes. In general, the spin level is in the upper range, but not in the range of the top rubber as far as spin is concerned.

Service game and returns

In the service game, I had problems getting around the ball and creating spin. It feels like the ball is already bouncing away before the stroke movement is finished. Better said, the ball doesn’t dip deep enough into the surface. Furthermore, the topsheet is not spinny enough to compensate the hardness. So it can be that I’m just not good enough techniquewise or the combination doesn’t provide the desired amount of spin.

The ball placement works without any problems. I was also able to keep the ball very flat, which is especially with the plastic ball  more important to me than lots of spin with my service.

Returns succeed passively or actively, outstandingly. I like it when a rubber reacts passively with low catapult and precision. The opponents serve can then be played very flat and short. Although the MX-P50 reacts to large portion of rotation, the spin susceptibility only comes into its own when playing faster.

Active flips can be executed almost blindly. The ball hits the opponent’s baseline fast with good timing. I didn’t like banana flips, because the rubber doesn’t give the ball much arc.

Blocking and shooting game

A lot of own initiative can be actively taken in the blocking game. I was able to launch my counterattacks at any time. In the case of passive blocks, it is not advisable to simply wait. At least a suitable racket angle and some pressure must be applied to the ball. Otherwise, the balls sail all over the place.

The Tibhar Evolution MX-P50 is a force in the shooting game. Hard, fast, precise. That’s all I have to say. The rubber does not feel comfortable in the defence away the table. There is simply a lack of flexibility. Besides that, you’re almost forced to launch counterattacks. That’s what the DNA of the MX-P50 requires.

Conclusion on the Tibhar Evolution MX-P50

Tibhar Evolution MX-P50 is an uncompromising, fast attacking rubber that does not allow any mistakes. Counter-topspins and shots are the biggest strength. However, the flat arc and the extreme dynamics pay tribute in terms of control and flexibility. If I consider the normal MX-P to be forgiving in comparison, something can must wrong ?

I already had problems deciding on rubbers like D05 or T05 Hard for whom such a hard, dynamic rubber is suitable. Unfortunately, I came only across with players using boosters and others with a very high playing level.

Otherwise, when I look at the strengths and weaknesses of MX-P50, I don’t see many advantages for underclass players like me or versatile player types. I think I have to be realistic about that.

Ok, sure. I tested the rubber with 2.1-2.2mm. But let’s face it. What are you gonna do with a thin brick stone on your racket? Without a sticky top sheet? Without the intended dynamics of the thick power sponge? I don’t know, either. Still, it’s a possibility, of course. There are players among you who simply prefer hard rubbers and don’t want to play a soft catapult monster.

By the way, Tibhar also recognized this with the normal MX-P and released a 1.5mm version. In the end, however, I see better alternatives than a high-end rubber with an extremely thin sponge.

Soon you’ll hear about the MX-P50 again. And that as soon as I update the comparison test for all Evolution rubbers and also make a comparison between the new hard 50°-55° high-end rubbers. Let’s see if I know by then who I can recommend such a hard table tennis rubber. To Ma Long maybe ?

The post Tibhar Evolution MX-P50 appeared first on TT-SPIN.COM - Table Tennis Reviews.