OOAK Table Tennis Forum :: Comparison of Anti rubbers

Hi,

I'm looking for an anti wich is good for chopping far away from table as a classic defender and wich is good for attacking ball close to the table. Sponge should be very soft.
What would you offer? Donic Anti classic or Nittaku best anti? What is the differenc between these 2 rubbers?
Thank you.
Csaba

Hi Kess,

Thank you for your answer. Then I choose Nittaku. I have tried Tibhar Ellen Def and OFF too. Both of them suited for me, but they made my racket very heavy and it was impossible to take off from the blade.
Csaba

I am thinking to test a classical anti, I am thinking about yasaka power anti for example. It's really hard to find comment of good level player using this kind of rubber in P ball era.
Is it still interesting rubbers? For what kind of play (compared to pips or flanti)? Is it possible to play them at fairly good level? What kind of blade suit well ?

Yann00 wrote:

Yasaka Anti Power might be a bit too fast for a beginner. You are better off with a Nittaku Best Anti. I can't compare it to pimples, as I have never played with pimples. I think it is safe to say that these antis and pimples are not so effective above a certain level, as the stronger leagues and the better players will just adapt right away to your odd style of play. These rubbers are only good against players who doesn't understand the mechanism of it or don't have sufficient strokes. As for blades, it is usually said you are better of with a stiffer and hard blade, but I'm tempted to believe it is false. I play with a relatively flexible and soft 5-ply allwood blade and I get decent reversal. Of course, it highly depends on the anti itself. DMS antis are not so blade-sensitive opposed to the Neubauer antis.

Yann00 wrote:

GregorTT425 wrote:

Yann00 wrote:

Thanks for your precise and clear answer.
I am playing for many years but never with any anti. My best ranking was while I was playing with gdt ox (with the cball).
However, I understand that it is really hard to bring very high level due to the lack of spin and ball curve. But, I believe (no experience) that it could be very efficient because it is possible to play on hit, block, ball placement with those rubber at the condition to stay aggressive due to better rate speed/control, isn't it?

Author:	Kees [ 09 Nov 2014, 20:48 ]
Post subject:	Re: Comparison of Anti rubbers
Bocsa wrote: Hi, I'm looking for an anti wich is good for chopping far away from table as a classic defender and wich is good for attacking ball close to the table. Sponge should be very soft. What would you offer? Donic Anti classic or Nittaku best anti? What is the differenc between these 2 rubbers? Thank you. Csaba Tibhar Ellen Defensive is my own favorite. Slow, enough grip to make your own (back)spin, not enough to be bothered by incoming spin, high control, nicely priced as well. It needs a blade with some speed or some weight if it is to be used for attack. On really slow blades I think it is too slow to be used more than say three meters away from the table, but just about perfect for a mix of defense and attack from mid-distance. Donic Anti Classic is a very neutral kind of anti, not (very) sensitive to incoming spin, but not capable of making significant spin itself. It also quite fast for an anti. Good for attack (without much disruption, though) or for passive defense on a slow blade away for the table; less good if you want to vary your chops. Nittaku Best Anti is faster than Tibhar Ellen Defensive, but for the rest rather similar. Better for attack with speed, even if it is a bit slower than the Donic Anti Classic. Another good one is Stiga Energy Absorber. It is a kind of cross between the Tibhar and the Nittaku as concerns speed and spin, feels harder, but offers good possibilities for spin-variation in your chops, and is rather disruptive when used to attack with. You might consider using one of the slower antis on an ALL frame (or ALL-). It has to have great control but its extra speed will offer better possibilities for a varied defensive game. Classic ALL frames are best for anti, as a rule. Stiga Classic Allround, or Stiga Allround WRB, or Yasaka Sweden Classic, etc.

Author:	Bocsa [ 10 Nov 2014, 02:09 ]
Post subject:	Re: Comparison of Anti rubbers
Hi Kess, Thank you for your answer. Then I choose Nittaku. I have tried Tibhar Ellen Def and OFF too. Both of them suited for me, but they made my racket very heavy and it was impossible to take off from the blade. Csaba

Author:	Kees [ 10 Nov 2014, 02:56 ]
Post subject:	Re: Comparison of Anti rubbers
Bocsa wrote: Hi Kess, Thank you for your answer. Then I choose Nittaku. I have tried Tibhar Ellen Def and OFF too. Both of them suited for me, but they made my racket very heavy and it was impossible to take off from the blade. Csaba Yes, but taking off the Tibhar anti is doable when you glue with rubber glue. Water glue is disastrous... As for the weight, the Nittaku is available in 1.3 mm, which is the most light-weight and the most suitable for long-distance defence. But Juic Neo Anti is even more light-weight, very soft as well, and suitable for defense as well as attack.

Author:	AA [ 01 Feb 2017, 20:36 ]
Post subject:	Re: Comparison of Anti rubbers
oversight of classic antis (not the frictionless ones) grippy -> non grippy rather grippy for anti 804 stiga energy absorber armstrong attack new anti rather frictionless tibhar ellen donic anti classic yasaka anti power slightly more frictionless nittaku best anti juic neo anti butterfly super anti donic alligator

Author:	Tenergy05fx [ 31 Dec 2017, 05:11 ]
Post subject:	Re: Comparison of Anti rubbers
Has anybody tried anti on the Chen Weixing blade ? I really like this blade and Hoping to put Best anti or Juic Neo anti on it. I Will be playing Classic defense with some anti attacks...

OOAK Table Tennis Forum https://ooakforum.com/

Comparison of Anti rubbers https://ooakforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=12988	Page 4 of 4

Author:	peterpong [ 31 Dec 2017, 07:12 ]
Post subject:	Re: Comparison of Anti rubbers
I have experience with best anti and neo.neo is faster .i use a defplay and attack with the anti and also do lots of chopping and blocking.i have used best anti in 1.8 and neo in 2mm.the chen blade should be fine but i would also try the defplay to compare.i was also speaking to someone the other day who uses a chen defender.for more control i would go with the defplay or grubba pro-the throw angle on the defplay is low with best anti and cant really be attacked easily.

Author:	Yann00 [ 14 Nov 2023, 06:19 ]
Post subject:	Re: Comparison of Anti rubbers
I am thinking to test a classical anti, I am thinking about yasaka power anti for example. It's really hard to find comment of good level player using this kind of rubber in P ball era. Is it still interesting rubbers? For what kind of play (compared to pips or flanti)? Is it possible to play them at fairly good level? What kind of blade suit well ?

Author:	GregorTT425 [ 15 Nov 2023, 07:34 ]
Post subject:	Re: Comparison of Anti rubbers
Yann00 wrote: I am thinking to test a classical anti, I am thinking about yasaka power anti for example. It's really hard to find comment of good level player using this kind of rubber in P ball era. Is it still interesting rubbers? For what kind of play (compared to pips or flanti)? Is it possible to play them at fairly good level? What kind of blade suit well ? Yasaka Anti Power might be a bit too fast for a beginner. You are better off with a Nittaku Best Anti. I can't compare it to pimples, as I have never played with pimples. I think it is safe to say that these antis and pimples are not so effective above a certain level, as the stronger leagues and the better players will just adapt right away to your odd style of play. These rubbers are only good against players who doesn't understand the mechanism of it or don't have sufficient strokes. As for blades, it is usually said you are better of with a stiffer and hard blade, but I'm tempted to believe it is false. I play with a relatively flexible and soft 5-ply allwood blade and I get decent reversal. Of course, it highly depends on the anti itself. DMS antis are not so blade-sensitive opposed to the Neubauer antis.

Author:	Yann00 [ 22 Nov 2023, 07:29 ]
Post subject:	Re: Comparison of Anti rubbers
GregorTT425 wrote: Yann00 wrote: I am thinking to test a classical anti, I am thinking about yasaka power anti for example. It's really hard to find comment of good level player using this kind of rubber in P ball era. Is it still interesting rubbers? For what kind of play (compared to pips or flanti)? Is it possible to play them at fairly good level? What kind of blade suit well ? Yasaka Anti Power might be a bit too fast for a beginner. You are better off with a Nittaku Best Anti. I can't compare it to pimples, as I have never played with pimples. I think it is safe to say that these antis and pimples are not so effective above a certain level, as the stronger leagues and the better players will just adapt right away to your odd style of play. These rubbers are only good against players who doesn't understand the mechanism of it or don't have sufficient strokes. As for blades, it is usually said you are better of with a stiffer and hard blade, but I'm tempted to believe it is false. I play with a relatively flexible and soft 5-ply allwood blade and I get decent reversal. Of course, it highly depends on the anti itself. DMS antis are not so blade-sensitive opposed to the Neubauer antis.

Author:	Yann00 [ 22 Nov 2023, 07:31 ]
Post subject:	Re: Comparison of Anti rubbers
GregorTT425 wrote: Yann00 wrote: I am thinking to test a classical anti, I am thinking about yasaka power anti for example. It's really hard to find comment of good level player using this kind of rubber in P ball era. Is it still interesting rubbers? For what kind of play (compared to pips or flanti)? Is it possible to play them at fairly good level? What kind of blade suit well ? Yasaka Anti Power might be a bit too fast for a beginner. You are better off with a Nittaku Best Anti. I can't compare it to pimples, as I have never played with pimples. I think it is safe to say that these antis and pimples are not so effective above a certain level, as the stronger leagues and the better players will just adapt right away to your odd style of play. These rubbers are only good against players who doesn't understand the mechanism of it or don't have sufficient strokes. As for blades, it is usually said you are better of with a stiffer and hard blade, but I'm tempted to believe it is false. I play with a relatively flexible and soft 5-ply allwood blade and I get decent reversal. Of course, it highly depends on the anti itself. DMS antis are not so blade-sensitive opposed to the Neubauer antis. Thanks for your precise and clear answer. I am playing for many years but never with any anti. My best ranking was while I was playing with gdt ox (with the cball). However, I understand that it is really hard to bring very high level due to the lack of spin and ball curve. But, I believe (no experience) that it could be very efficient because it is possible to play on hit, block, ball placement with those rubber at the condition to stay aggressive due to better rate speed/control, isn't it?

Author:	GregorTT425 [ 22 Nov 2023, 07:48 ]
Post subject:	Re: Comparison of Anti rubbers
Yann00 wrote: GregorTT425 wrote: Yann00 wrote: I am thinking to test a classical anti, I am thinking about yasaka power anti for example. It's really hard to find comment of good level player using this kind of rubber in P ball era. Is it still interesting rubbers? For what kind of play (compared to pips or flanti)? Is it possible to play them at fairly good level? What kind of blade suit well ? Yasaka Anti Power might be a bit too fast for a beginner. You are better off with a Nittaku Best Anti. I can't compare it to pimples, as I have never played with pimples. I think it is safe to say that these antis and pimples are not so effective above a certain level, as the stronger leagues and the better players will just adapt right away to your odd style of play. These rubbers are only good against players who doesn't understand the mechanism of it or don't have sufficient strokes. As for blades, it is usually said you are better of with a stiffer and hard blade, but I'm tempted to believe it is false. I play with a relatively flexible and soft 5-ply allwood blade and I get decent reversal. Of course, it highly depends on the anti itself. DMS antis are not so blade-sensitive opposed to the Neubauer antis. Thanks for your precise and clear answer. I am playing for many years but never with any anti. My best ranking was while I was playing with gdt ox (with the cball). However, I understand that it is really hard to bring very high level due to the lack of spin and ball curve. But, I believe (no experience) that it could be very efficient because it is possible to play on hit, block, ball placement with those rubber at the condition to stay aggressive due to better rate speed/control, isn't it? You are welcome! With no experience you might indeed be thinking it can't be so hard to win at the higher levels with antispin. However, I have to disilluse you, as the antispin is not the most effective way to play in higher leagues. In the lower, amateurish leauges it might come in handy, but against the more experienced players who train intensitvely several times a week, it's not a game changer. If you meet against an active player who attacks first or takes over the rally, you'll become passive because you are reduced to keep on defending with your anti. All the odd styles and rubbers have their weaknesses and strenghts. In my case, some weaknesses disappeared, but new ones came. I'm actually planning leaving it and return to the double-inverted. I might be a bit too quick and active for the anti, I only gotta train my backhand more, as my forehand is okay(ish). Whenever you have questions, you can always ask me! Good luck!

Page 4 of 4	All times are UTC + 9:30 hours
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/