Tibhar Evolution EL-S and FX-S

NextLevel said:

Those are great questions. 2.0 MX-P weights the same as 2.1 T05. So maybe I could get more spin using MX-P max. Must try this sometime if I can handle the weight .

It's a bit of a throw and backspin attack thing. While T05 shoots out the ball more, there are those times when you feel absolutely lazy and just need the rubber to work for you. T05(or Tenergy in general) does that well. Other rubbers do it okay, but T05 does it well.

Click to expand...

you say you think theres a chance you could get more spin with mx-p MAX. Seamiller once told me that he doesn't believe you get more spin with thicker sponge, he says all you get out of it is speed. do you disagree with this? Some of the spinniest loops i've ever felt are from players that refuse to use max sponge, but their reasoning had nothing to do with spin or speed, it was about the added control they felt they had with thinner sponge.

im very curious about what you think about sponge thickness effect on spin, because i've heard a lot of conflicting views. And the "engineer" players do make compelling arguments that the thicker sponge should add spin.

tt89player said:

The FX-S will be harder. And the topsheets of EL-S and FX-S will be different to MX-S topsheet.
Hardness (sponge): MX-S > MX-P> EL-S> EL-P> FX-S> FX-P
4 different Topsheets:
MX-P = FX-P
MX-S
EL-P
EL-S = FX-S

Click to expand...

so will fx-s topsheet have the fx-p sponge?

Shuki said:

you say you think theres a chance you could get more spin with mx-p MAX. Seamiller once told me that he doesn't believe you get more spin with thicker sponge, he says all you get out of it is speed. do you disagree with this? Some of the spinniest loops i've ever felt are from players that refuse to use max sponge, but their reasoning had nothing to do with spin or speed, it was about the added control they felt they had with thinner sponge.

im very curious about what you think about sponge thickness effect on spin, because i've heard a lot of conflicting views. And the "engineer" players do make compelling arguments that the thicker sponge should add spin.

Click to expand...

Thicker sponge just allows you to get more spin on harder shots. It's really about the bottoming out effect - you have more sponge before you get too deeply into the wood with thicker sponge. But on thinner brush shots, the spin is about the same and the control of the thinner sponge may help. I tend to brush the ball fairly hard so I am a bit torn on this one. I tend to prefer the thinner sponge because of (arthritis and) weight. There is also less rebound so there is more control and potentially more spin - but when you loop hard, you take more risks with thinner sponge. But I play close to the table and hit hard enough shots regardless that I have ways to go before I think it becomes a huge deal, though I would have to try max to get an idea of what I am missing if anything.

does bottoming out happen more often with thicker sponge? it happens to me quite a bit as someone who does their blocks very passively. I use grip with thinner sponge and am a heavy brusher, for my drives and more solid blocks i've felt the thinner sponge has helped more than anything thicker could ever do. Especially for when I'm not in place to make a solid stroke.

I'd love to hear your comparison of the two when they're both brand new, and will gladly send you an mx-p 2.0 for free so you have both when they're new to test the differences.

Shuki said:

does bottoming out happen more often with thicker sponge? it happens to me quite a bit as someone who does their blocks very passively. I use grip with thinner sponge and am a heavy brusher, for my drives and more solid blocks i've felt the thinner sponge has helped more than anything thicker could ever do. Especially for when I'm not in place to make a solid stroke.

I'd love to hear your comparison of the two when they're both brand new, and will gladly send you an mx-p 2.0 for free so you have both when they're new to test the differences.

Click to expand...

It depends on whether you flat block and whether you spin block and whether you use the extra sponge to make your block better. For someone like Dan Seemiller, he argues that thinner sponge and slower blades make his block with T05 better. He plays very close to the table though. My guess is that better players who spin counter and block a bit further back will appreciate the max sponge. I have also heard another good player tell me (not as good as Seemiller though) that he always wants the extra sponge to be able to use for more spin and control, and that he will take more sponge and a slower blade over less sponge and a faster blade.

NextLevel said:

It depends on whether you flat block and whether you spin block and whether you use the extra sponge to make your block better. For someone like Dan Seemiller, he argues that thinner sponge and slower blades make his block with T05 better. He plays very close to the table though. My guess is that better players who spin counter and block a bit further back will appreciate the max sponge. I have also heard another good player tell me (not as good as Seemiller though) that he always wants the extra sponge to be able to use for more spin and control, and that he will take more sponge and a slower blade over less sponge and a faster blade.

Click to expand...

very interesting, a very strong player, Clifford Copley (Irl) who has the strongest shots i've ever felt prefers an all+, off- all wood blade with thinner sponge. He has more spin then ANY player i've played and was a top 20 player in the USA during the 70s.

Then I find what you said about seemiller playing close to the table very interesting. My coach does almost all our drills close to the table and says once your can play close to the table, playing far is easy. But at a training camp seemiller was hosting he kept telling me I need to back off the table a lot farther. I later found this was because my coach and he saw my playing style a little differently. I loop underspin easily which i do close to the table and danny wanted me to back up for another loop which would be a topspin loop. My coach saw me as someone who could open up easy and then wanted me to do a close to the table drive or shot instead of a second loop.

I've never been able to decide if my coach likes this style because it's how she was taught in china when she played and in general women play closer to the table, or she genuinely saw my style like this.

I find it interesting how two high level players could teach such different things but both be correct.

NextLevel said:

It depends on whether you flat block and whether you spin block

Click to expand...

I vary both of these. My biggest strength is my touch, as I choke up pretty high on the racket, touch is easier for me than it should be. I can play almost equally as well without wrapping my fingers around the handle and just playing with the two main fingers. This way of holding the racket started when i took something my coach said too seriously. She always talked about finger pressure on different parts of each stroke. she then said "you should still be able to play without holding the handle" which i took too seriously and started playing like that to develop my finger pressure. It's actually caused me to have a "cocked wrist" on forehand strokes which she doesnt like and i have an unorthodox way of shakehand holding the blade. I'll upload a video of how I hold it later.



anyway, sorry for hijacking the thread, ill open a new one with the video!

edit: heres the video http://www.tabletennisdaily.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?12257-My-unorthodox-Shakehand-hold

I loop underspin easily which i do close to the table and danny wanted me to back up for another loop which would be a topspin loop. My coach saw me as someone who could open up easy and then wanted me to do a close to the table drive or shot instead of a second loop.

Click to expand...

Sorry for hijacking the thread, but it is such a tempting question for me, as I'm facing this dilemma all the time. I eventually decided to back off a little so I can loop safer. Trying to drive the 5th ball close to the table caused too much timing errors, I feel like I'm not ready for it yet. Maybe I will make a comeback later, though. What is the other's opinion?

Ilia Minkin said:

Sorry for hijacking the thread, but it is such a tempting question for me, as I'm facing this dilemma all the time. I eventually decided to back off a little so I can loop safer. Trying to drive the 5th ball close to the table caused too much timing errors, I feel like I'm not ready for it yet. Maybe I will make a comeback later, though. What is the other's opinion?

Click to expand...

the other opinion was seemillers, which wanted me to open up with my loop and then back up for the follow up to do another loop against the topspin. I was very uncomfortable backing up as far as he'd like for me to but one thing he said about looping topspin was "the ball is going to make it to you, theres no reason for you to be close to the table, also when looping topspin you can loop it at any point, the rise or the fall, it doesnt matter"

Shuki said:

theres no reason for you to be close to the table, also when looping topspin you can loop it at any point, the rise or the fall, it doesnt matter"

Click to expand...

Well, the reason to stay close is to cut your opponent's time to respond. But it is a trade-off since you cut your own time as well. BTW, what is the name and location of the training camp you visited? Are there any upcoming ones?

Ilia Minkin said:

Well, the reason to stay close is to cut your opponent's time to respond. But it is a trade-off since you cut your own time as well. BTW, what is the name and location of the training camp you visited? Are there any upcoming ones?

Click to expand...

the training camp was at seemiller's facility in south bend, indiana. I'm not sure if you can sign up for them. We have a local player here in kansas who organized it with danny, as they played together as kids and about 8 of us went up there.

tt89player said:

No, both topsheet and sponge are different. The FX-S sponge will be harder.

Click to expand...

Sounds interesting.

Interesting start to the year.
I'm already enjoying the FXP so looking forward to what the FXS will offer.
Maybe a good combo with FXP.

Subscribed.

tt89player said:

Haha, yeah sorry for the low resolution pic. I didn´t work to upload the real one ;-)

I try to get one of the testing rubbers, but I doubt to get one, ever since the Evolution rubbers are the most famous Tensor rubbers.
The rubbers will be on the new LARC List beginning April 2016. And will be released latest early summer (but there is no official date yet)
An If someone doubts me, I have no problem with that :-D

Click to expand...

Let them doubt on, English national champs just been played and number 1 seed and winner Paul Drinkhall has evolution FX-S on his shirt i final. A tibhar sponsored player, is he advertising a fake hmmm, surely not lol

tt89player said:

No, both topsheet and sponge are different. The FX-S sponge will be harder.

Click to expand...

So I guess it will be about 42.5? Because FX-P is 40

scoops said:

Let them doubt on, English national champs just been played and number 1 seed and winner Paul Drinkhall has evolution FX-S on his shirt i final. A tibhar sponsored player, is he advertising a fake hmmm, surely not lol

Click to expand...

Okay, I was wrong, I admit it. I'm not doubting on, don't worry!
FX-S does sound intriguing seeing as FX-P was too soft for my liking and EL-P was uncomfortable.
Although, I wouldn't mind either of them at the moment.

So basically are they trying to create an MX-S style super spinny rubber but with varying sponge hardness? I've been using the MX-S and I've been told I could do to go down a notch in sponge hardness. So EL-S could be my rubber. Providing they feel relatively similar to play with as the MX-S. I hope they don't play completely differently.