Rubber thickness for FH and BH

vik2000 · Jan 3, 2019

What are the thickness of everyone's FH and BH rubber?

I feel like I've been biased to choose thicker rubber but I also feel like this really isn't necessary and might even be worse for me. For example, when you try to do some research on tenergy 05, you will come across comments like "there is no point in using T05 unless you go with max thickness."

I'm currently using Fastarc G1 and Rakza 7 for my FH and BH, both in 2.0mm. I have several reasons why maybe going for thinner rubbers will be better for me, at least for my BH. The first reason is the amount of weight reduction you get from thinner rubbers. Most of my blades weigh 85-90g so weight reduction can only be achieved from rubbers. Second, my backhand is no way as strong to utilize such thick rubber. I often win points with my BH from the spin I generate from flicks. For this reason, I think a thinner rubber like 1.8mm will be more than sufficient, while allowing weight reduction. I might even try softer rubber too for further weight reduction.

On FH, I'm a bit on the fence. I can be fairly powerful with my FH but I still have a feeling that I won't sacrifice much power from going to 1.8-1.9mm while benefiting from weight reduction.

So folks, what are your thoughts? Are people generally biased to use thick rubbers at the detriment of their performance?

Lightzy · Jan 3, 2019

They're right about T05 to an extent because it's a relatively soft sponged rubber and very commonly used by people who can actually make great use of it, so it makes sense in that context.

The rule basically is the stronger you are physically, the thicker the rubber you should use. Technique is very important for generating power, but ultimately it only goes so far, and I do not believe it goes far enough to make sense of max thickness rubbers without the kind of muscle power/whole body coordination that pro players have.
That's how I see it anyway.

If you feel you're getting good results with 1.9 thickness on your very hard rubbers that you use then what's the problem?

yogi_bear · Jan 3, 2019

Why not increase your strength instead using weights?

Lula · Jan 3, 2019

So the problem is that the racket is to heavy? Why is that a problem? Getting injuried? I agree with yogi that it would proably help if you work out more.

I also think it is easier to reduce the weight by changing to a light blade. Do not know if the rubber thickness make any big difference.

Takkyu_wa_inochi · Jan 3, 2019

I don’t understand all this fuss about the weight of rackets. I’m rather thin and obviously lacking muscle strength but I have no problem with my rather heavy setup. A heavy TT racket is like 200g only and a TT ball is like 5g? 10g ?

Nothing compared to tennis for example

If you get tired hitting the TT ball there is much more chance that it comes from a bad technique and more precisely lack of being relaxed rather than a lack of strength

You need only to firm just a (little) bit your muscles at the time of impact with the ball.

Just my 0.02.

Richie · Jan 3, 2019

Looking back I should probably have used slightly thinner rubbers over the last couple of years. Right now I'm using T05 2.1 and rakza 7 for my BH in 2.0.

I'm getting new sheets tomorrow and tempted to go for max on rakza 7 but if I'm really honest with myself I wouldn't utilize the max thickness in most games or when it really matters. The speed is enough without those extra mm, if they even make that much of a difference. My FH is a lot more powerful so there I can justify going for 2.1, I'm still not sure whether thinner would be better. Psychologically it does feel better to go for 2.1 on my FH and I know no different so I do think it's unwise to switch at the moment.

It depends on your level of course, but if you at least have a good understanding of what good technique is and what to work towards and you practice a lot then I don't see a good reason to get less than 2.0 mm thickness.

Generally speaking I think people are biased towards using thicker rubbers. Generally people are probably using setups that are too fast for them and will likely slow their development (if they're looking to develop). I was using tenergy too early in my development and I don't think it was optimal for me at the time.. and might still not be optimal. But as I've used it so long and developed a lot the last year I'm too reluctant to change.

At the end of the day I think it's the time, effort and thought you put in at the table that will make the difference, not a few millimeters in rubber thickness here and there (but I guess we all know that), we just want whats optimal for us. It's just very difficult to know unless you've tried it for yourself. If you want a lighter setup I would first of all (if possible) try other peoples and see how you get on with it.

Lightzy · Jan 3, 2019

Richie said:
Looking back I should probably have used slightly thinner rubbers over the last couple of years. Right now I'm using T05 2.1 and rakza 7 for my BH in 2.0.

I'm getting new sheets tomorrow and tempted to go for max on rakza 7 but if I'm really honest with myself I wouldn't utilize the max thickness in most games or when it really matters. The speed is enough without those extra mm, if they even make that much of a difference. My FH is a lot more powerful so there I can justify going for 2.1, I'm still not sure whether thinner would be better. Psychologically it does feel better to go for 2.1 on my FH and I know no different so I do think it's unwise to switch at the moment.

It depends on your level of course, but if you at least have a good understanding of what good technique is and what to work towards and you practice a lot then I don't see a good reason to get less than 2.0 mm thickness.

Generally speaking I think people are biased towards using thicker rubbers. Generally people are probably using setups that are too fast for them and will likely slow their development (if they're looking to develop). I was using tenergy too early in my development and I don't think it was optimal for me at the time.. and might still not be optimal. But as I've used it so long and developed a lot the last year I'm too reluctant to change.

At the end of the day I think it's the time, effort and thought you put in at the table that will make the difference, not a few millimeters in rubber thickness here and there (but I guess we all know that), we just want whats optimal for us. It's just very difficult to know unless you've tried it for yourself. If you want a lighter setup I would first of all (if possible) try other peoples and see how you get on with it.

Somewhat off topic, but how long do you get these tenergies to last?

Richie · Jan 3, 2019

Lightzy said:
Somewhat off topic, but how long do you get these tenergies to last?

I try to change as infrequently as I can. Before I changed once a year. This year I changed every 6 months, while others around me that practice less than me have changed their rubbers three times since I last changed mine lol.. partly because they EJ. It's going to be interesting to see how much of a difference it'll feel after a few weeks of practice this time as I do think I hit much harder than half a year ago.. and practice much more. I think us amateurs can use tenergy for quite a long time even with a lot of practice and wear and tear on the rubber. It's not like the rubber is completely dead.. but it's not lively enough anymore so I think a new sheet is needed.

vik2000 · Jan 3, 2019

This isn't exactly about strength. Honestly, looking at all the table tennis players, I'm pretty certain I can lift much heavier, but many powerful shots in table tennis are derived from technique vs. strength. I think there's some merit to a lighter blade. For example, flick uses wrist strength which many people don't exactly train.

Just want to see what people are using out there. I've seen too many people using thick rubbers only to fail at touch shots and often overshooting the table when looping/driving. I sometimes feel like thinner rubbers might allow me to control the game better without much sacrifice in power/spin.

If pros are using 2.1-2.2mm thickness, and our technique is FAR behind theirs, I don't see how we can extract the same amount of benefit from using rubbers as thick as the pros are using.

mart1nandersson · Jan 3, 2019

I use Stiga Mantra on my backhand. I initially played with 2.1mm but then by accident came across a 1.7mm sheet (a friend won it in a competition). The weight difference is just a few grams uncut but they play completely different. The thin sponge really suits my playing style (mainly blocking / punching with my BH) and I can even execute the odd BH loop in match play which was not the case with 2.1mm.

yogi_bear · Jan 3, 2019

If 1.9 rubbers are slower than you can compensate poeer by having a bigger swing.

Lightzy · Jan 3, 2019

Takkyu_wa_inochi said:
I don’t understand all this fuss about the weight of rackets. I’m rather thin and obviously lacking muscle strength but I have no problem with my rather heavy setup. A heavy TT racket is like 200g only and a TT ball is like 5g? 10g ?

Nothing compared to tennis for example

If you get tired hitting the TT ball there is much more chance that it comes from a bad technique and more precisely lack of being relaxed rather than a lack of strength

You need only to firm just a (little) bit your muscles at the time of impact with the ball.

Just my 0.02.

This is all true for low levels, but to get to a higher level you must have a lot of physical strength. Very fast and strong legs, very strong upper body, both fast twitch and slow muscles exercised a lot, a lot of core strength, a lot of strength overall since all those muscles support each other too.
Where we train there's a gym next door and the pros basically live between the gym and the club. It's really cool to see, how a guy would go in from the gym all sweating, eat some chicken/rice from a plastic box, then do a training session, then rest a bit, back to the gym etc.

That said, I don't think they were talking about the weight of the racket but more about what thickness rubber will give you best results for your shots, and this, I think, depends much on physical strength.

Der_Echte · Jan 4, 2019

I play max sponge always as more sponge gives me more spin/control for the kind of shots I do.

Still, one could still learn to spin with 2.0 sponge while having better control on flatter shots when they are growing strokes.

Sedis · Jan 4, 2019

After a lot of trial and error I've ended up using slightly thinner rubbers (1.9/2.0mm) on my forehand and 2.1mm/max on my backhand.
I assume this works for me due to the bigger forehand stroke.

Like many people I also use a harder rubber on my forehand.

Simas · Jan 4, 2019

Takkyu_wa_inochi said:
I don’t understand all this fuss about the weight of rackets. I’m rather thin and obviously lacking muscle strength but I have no problem with my rather heavy setup. A heavy TT racket is like 200g only and a TT ball is like 5g? 10g ?

Nothing compared to tennis for example

If you get tired hitting the TT ball there is much more chance that it comes from a bad technique and more precisely lack of being relaxed rather than a lack of strength

You need only to firm just a (little) bit your muscles at the time of impact with the ball.

Just my 0.02.

Couldn't agree more. I have a very light setup. Mine is 173 grams. But not because I can't lift 30grams more. The weights we are talking here are minuscule. It's the matter of preference but not the matter of strength.

Lightzy said:
This is all true for low levels, but to get to a higher level you must have a lot of physical strength. Very fast and strong legs, very strong upper body, both fast twitch and slow muscles exercised a lot, a lot of core strength, a lot of strength overall since all those muscles support each other too.
Where we train there's a gym next door and the pros basically live between the gym and the club. It's really cool to see, how a guy would go in from the gym all sweating, eat some chicken/rice from a plastic box, then do a training session, then rest a bit, back to the gym etc.

That said, I don't think they were talking about the weight of the racket but more about what thickness rubber will give you best results for your shots, and this, I think, depends much on physical strength.

Allow me to disagree here. You don't need any strength for table tennis. This is not swimming, crosstraining, wrestling, certainly not lifting, or strongman competition. You need some endurance, some explosive power and agility. Certainly not strength. In fact, strength is equal to mass, and mass is the opposite of agility.

Lightzy · Jan 4, 2019

Simas said:
Allow me to disagree here. You don't need any strength for table tennis. This is not swimming, crosstraining, wrestling, certainly not lifting, or strongman competition. You need some endurance, some explosive power and agility. Certainly not strength. In fact, strength is equal to mass, and mass is the opposite of agility.

There are just too many examples of pros having all chiseled adonis bodies and lifting weights and beasting at the gym for this to be true. I know a few personally also and like I said, they basically live between the gym and the practice hall.
Also just now in the Michael Maze interview with Dan, Michael told him directly how important it is to have physical strength, beast legs and upper body strength.

The muscles all support one another. You can't really be quick, stable and strong if you don't have them all trained

vik2000 · Jan 4, 2019

Agree with Lightzy. Agility and explosive power without strength is pointless. You don't need to be jacked up like some gym rats on roid at a gym because obviously the agility and explosiveness you lose from being in such a shape more than offset your strength. However, you definitely need to be intentional in strength training with more focus on areas that will enable your explosiveness. Just because typical professional table tennis players look slim doesn't mean they don't have some serious dense muscles built in. Also, look at all their legs, especially the quads.

I believe one key reason us average folks can't develop their powerful strokes is because we generally don't have the time for dedicated strength training and doing exercises that will improve our explosive swing. Just look at what FZD does when his opponent loop drive into his forehand. He's capable of quickly drive the ball back with such an explosive power.

Simas · Jan 5, 2019

Lightzy said:
There are just too many examples of pros having all chiseled adonis bodies and lifting weights and beasting at the gym for this to be true.

chiseled bodies come from low body fat %.

Lightzy said:
I know a few personally also and like I said, they basically live between the gym and the practice hall.

Yups, I know one guy too. That's me

Now I spent a little bit more time in a gym than in TT hall (had elbow tendonitis some time ago, so I am trying not to overdose TT. And that's hard

)

vik2000 said:
You don't need to be jacked up like some gym rats on roid at a gym because obviously the agility and explosiveness you lose from being in such a shape more than offset your strength.

Yes, exactly. You will lose agility and explosiveness.
I think we all here have the same thing in mind, but our definition of "strength" doesn't match 100%. When I refer to strength I mean heavy lifting, at least 1.5xbodyweight squats, heavy bench pressing, power training and so on. and you don't need that for TT.

vik2000 said:
...with more focus on areas that will enable your explosiveness.

yes, that's key to what we are talking. If you strength train you do very very heavy low rep lifts and eat lots and lots of anything that moves, grows or you can find (strength trainers), or lift medium heavy medium reps and count calories (body builders), or do plyometric exercises (weighted jumps and so on..) and some lifting to get explosive (athletes)

langel · Jan 5, 2019

I think that Martial Arts are very good to combine with TT, esepecially kyokushin, for they are developing strength, speed of reaction, stance and stability.
For footwork - some dancing like this:

vik2000 · Jan 5, 2019

The thing is, you said word by word "You don't need any strength for table tennis".

That's not exactly a misalignment in the definition of strength because clearly strength training is part of the routine for TT and many of us lack this sort of exercise due to time constraints. If I have 6 hours only for TT, I don't want to sacrifice that time for gym. Also, I'm fairly certain professional TT players can easily squat 1.5x their weight. I can do 2x my weight and my legs aren't even as big as some of theirs.

Rubber thickness for FH and BH

Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Member

Active Member

Member

Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Member

Similar threads