OOAK Table Tennis Forum

Hello, I need some advice about my table tennis bat.

I have a andro super core cell carbon wood. FH : Tibhare evolution FX-P 1.7 and BH Tibhar evolution EL-P 1.7
I like the BH rubber, I like the medium hardness. It's very good for hitting the ball (especially because my technic is not so good). But the problem is, that it is a little bit to fast. I have tried with the evolution FX-P. It is a little bit better for speed but it is to soft.

I have found three other possibilities with the same hardness and a little less speed:
- Sinus Alpha
- Nimbus Delta s
- Aurus soft

Are those 3 rubbers a sollution ? Are they the same ? And witch is the best for me ?

Thanks.

Not familiar with the blade, but that might be the problem if it's too fast. What happens, exactly? Are your topspin drives going long? Also, 1.7mm sponge might be a little thin, it might cause you to miss the end of the table because you're not generating enough topspin.

For a beginner, I'd suggest this blade:

https://www.aliexpress.com/item/32864701460.html

Iskandar

I agree with Iskandar here. Very fast blade (by the comments online ; never tried it myself, I think) and less than max rubber. Both will contribute to fast bounce and shorter "dwell time".

If your "too fast" assessment is from topspin returns (drive/block) missing the table, you could even "go faster" (max thickness) to improve. More sponge means more speed, but also more spin. For faster strokes the added curve from spin may outweigh the increased speed and bring the ball down on the table.
If the problem is more with flat hits or pushes, increasing rubber thickness may be counterproductive.

The above is only a rough outline of common outcomes when changing rubber. Without seeing your technique it is difficult to say for sure ; you may get the opposite effect compared to the description. Ask a coach or experienced player to have a look at your game first, if possible.

True. I suppose if the flat hits are going long, he does need to change the stroke to put more topspin on the ball, though.

I think of rubber thinner than max as being for specialized purposes. Short pips blocking. Traditional chop defense (as opposed to modern chop defense, which involves a lot of long-distance looping). Balsa blades. Long pips. In the old days beginners were told to start with 1.5mm sponge, and even the top players rarely used anything thicker than 2.0mm. This was because the ball was 2mm smaller. Once the 40mm ball came in, even beginners could use max sponge because the bigger ball was slower, and you had a lot more control over it - in fact, most Chinese rubbers can ONLY be bought with max sponge for this reason. Now the ball is even bigger. I suspect if they increased the max thickness of rubber to, say, 4.2 or 4.4mm the top players could probably be able to use the full thickness (sponge 2.4-2.6mm with the same topsheets) without problems. Us hobbyists would probably want to stick with the current max.

Iskandar

Thank you very mutch for your response.

Im not as experienced as the others that responded, but here is my $.02. I feel like at 1.7mm you’re not really getting a feel for the rubber. These softer sponge rubbers are made to generate spin by letting the ball sink into the sponge and create some speed with the catapult effect. With that thin sponge your opponent’s topspin effect is minimal so that’s probably not the issue. If you’re hitting flat (which you’ll want to move away from eventually), you probably need a softer blade. If you’re topspinning and it’s going long, a thicker sponge will allow more spin but you’ll have to close the racquet angle as it will be more affected by opponent’s spin.