I agree @NextLevel , and see the quote I put at the beginning of my blog to specify what I mean by amateurs here:
I have always done some form of hit brushing, maybe more brushing than hitting when the celluloid ball was around, but then I refined my contact using a bunch of ESN rubbers, most notably MX-S and Omega V Asia. I had never heard of activating the sponge. All I did was hit the ball and see what it did. I used Big Dipper, I used Tenergy, maybe my coaches worked to get better shots with feedback, maybe I unconsciously mirrored the good players around me, they could maybe tell me things I never understood and I am misremembering. In the end though, my point is that one can always think that the rubber is bottoming out too early, or too late or too hard or too soft etc. I learned to hit the ball with H3, I learned to hit the ball with Juic 999 Turbo, I learned to hit the ball with Tenergy, I learned to hit the ball with Joola Rhyzm, Fastarc G1 etc. I just hit the ball and figured out what it did, I never thought about sponge activation. I might suck for this reason, but I am just pointing this out in case someone is intimidated by what is being claimed and thinks that this sponge activation thing is a big deal and that not doing it is the kiss of death.
Oh, I now see the rest of it. There is a lot of research that shows beyond reasonable doubt that man is a social animal that that very often, people form groups around even the most trivial things and these groups tend to persist across multiple issues (without prejudice to cause). You might be aware of the research already and know it is not just a child thing. In this case, many of our (mine and @ThePongCommenter ) views around some issues are similar probably because we speak to and hang around more players who do these things at a very strong level especially in the US than most. So whether the ideas cause the behavior to seem cliquey or it is just that we have aligned on many issues, that is for you to determine. We didn't agree on quite a few things though, but that is another story. But if for some reason in high school, you felt the jocks did you dirty, that is unfortunate.
But such players can use H3 right?
I don't think I ever said there is room for the opinion that when discussing two rubbers that are far more similar than they are different (09c and H3N), it is possible that one could be a "strict and fair teacher" and even beneficial to "force people into good technique" while the other can "lead to bad habits" when discussing the exact same relative shortcomings of the two rubbers.
I have always felt that D09c is a rather linear rubber and that is the overwhelming consensus that I've heard about it in discussions with people ranging from USATT 1300 to 2800. Some people like the linearity and relative "deadness" compared to non-hybrids/tackys and some don't. IMO throw angle is something that is easily compensated for, usually subconsciously, even by lower to intermediate level players, so not a dealbreaker in the context of ability to improve in table tennis.@NextLevel, great minds think alike, throw angle, non-linearity with passive play, and price are indeed the main arguments against it.
With H3N you get a much more balanced throw (specially for FH where the body makes the arch, so no need for extra throw), plus you always know what you get out of it, and the price makes it much better.
But also remember that I said on my blogpost that it's a fantastic rubber and that I enjoyed it om BH at times, so I think I have offered enough good counter arguments so people can compare
So you mean that most people even amateurs can do what Fan did, flip their bats over using both rubbers, and still play reasonably well? Fan is a world champion, I don't know, this might not be as straightforward as you think... at least Victor thinks so....
Not sure I understand this point @NextLevel , do you mean my trying 09c on FH as well as on BH?
OK so if I am understanding right, you are saying that even though both are similar rubbers (and I would say both are high throw angle rubbers), H3N's is low enough that it won't cause mistakes that can't be easily fixed with minor racket angle changes, but 09c's isn't (for FH usage). I don't really think that 09c's catapult is drastically much more than a boosted H3's, probably a little bit more but again nothing that can't be easily adapted to even by intermediates, but maybe that is a separate issue...Since the topic is around why H3N yes, and 09c no, let me explain in simple terms my opinion, which by the way, if you read both posts, you will see I have explained it there, but I will summarise it no problem
The answer is that the way you frame the topic is incorrect, and if you look at the posts you will see that I specifically mention that H3N is not for everybody and there are clear negative points about it.
In todays 09c post you will see the same from the other side (as I like H3N more than D09c), that D09c has a lot of positive points.
So in essence, both rubbers are indeed similar, and both can and cannot be used by amateurs, but it is my opinion that:
- For the forehand, D09c has too much throw angle, price and catapult, which I have seen in others (and experienced myself for a year on 3 different rackets) going wrong for the reasons specified already. However, this is controversial, full of nuances and admits many different opinions. Just the same as Timo never using H3N and Ma Long never using D09c. Different perspectives, I share one of them from my perspective and experience.
- For the backhand, I found D09c more suitable, and enjoyed it, I even won a tournament with it this January, but, it is my opinion that it is too difficult to reap its full benefits for the price it has, that it forces errors that are not needed and that for passive/defensive play, specially on BH where the stroke is limited by the body, there are much better options. Again, a perspective on the topic, and the reason why Wang Chuqin and Fan Zhendong use different BH things.
So as always, nothing is in the extremes, there is always space in between for different views on the matter which is good for others reading this, so they can make up their own mind with the full picture
I'm saying that Fan Zhendong could do it (maybe his D09c were really H3 in disguise so he is a bad example) so it might not apply to our everyday amateurs. My main point is that just about everyone I know, whether they enjoy it or not, that can play decently with boosted H3 on forehand can play decently with 09c on forehand. I know they perform differently in subtle ways, but still not clear any of them are meaningful to a learning amateur if you think they can use H3 to learn. Usually, price is the discriminator, not properties.
If it is anything... I have always been consistent in saying that I was or never am good enough to use T05, D05, 09C, Glyzer... they all are for loop drivers or counter hitter or hitter... which I am not and my current equipment does that task(s) just fine and is superior by far in opening shots... so you never see me play those rubbers ever... not as much percentage as my current and old stuff.I think that opinion is valid @Der_Echte and as I have mentioned other times, children under training of coaches and good practice can learn with anything and on anything. The same works for adults but it takes a bit more time, children are like sponges that absorb anything.
That aside, I think its also sensible not to change, I follow the same philosophy but viceversa, I cannot play with tensors
And last thing on this point is that the problem I see the most is with beginners and and low/medium intermediates who fall in the trap of buying premium equipmemt to solve for their technique problems. In the last months, I have helped a bit more than 40 people with their gear, and I saw this issue very often, D09c was a part of it in many ocassions, and in every case of those, they played better without it.
But as I always emphasize, the beauty of this sport is in the diversity of perspectives and opinions, many paths lead to the same goal, this is why the title of my post says 'My opinion and My truth', not 'the truth' and I knew it would be controversial
Thanks for your opinion as always!
Would you be able to compare Dignics 09c to Hurricane 3 Neo 37°? I'm going to be using it on my backhand in a few weeks when my order gets here and would like to get an idea since H3N 37° has been my go-to for BH.Since the topic is around why H3N yes, and 09c no, let me explain in simple terms my opinion, which by the way, if you read both posts, you will see I have explained it there, but I will summarise it no problem
The answer is that the way you frame the topic is incorrect, and if you look at the posts you will see that I specifically mention that H3N is not for everybody and there are clear negative points about it.
In todays 09c post you will see the same from the other side (as I like H3N more than D09c), that D09c has a lot of positive points.
So in essence, both rubbers are indeed similar, and both can and cannot be used by amateurs, but it is my opinion that:
- For the forehand, D09c has too much throw angle, price and catapult, which I have seen in others (and experienced myself for a year on 3 different rackets) going wrong for the reasons specified already. However, this is controversial, full of nuances and admits many different opinions. Just the same as Timo never using H3N and Ma Long never using D09c. Different perspectives, I share one of them from my perspective and experience.
- For the backhand, I found D09c more suitable, and enjoyed it, I even won a tournament with it this January, but, it is my opinion that it is too difficult to reap its full benefits for the price it has, that it forces errors that are not needed and that for passive/defensive play, specially on BH where the stroke is limited by the body, there are much better options. Again, a perspective on the topic, and the reason why Wang Chuqin and Fan Zhendong use different BH things.
So as always, nothing is in the extremes, there is always space in between for different views on the matter which is good for others reading this, so they can make up their own mind with the full picture
It is so interesting to me that in serious TT circles H3N is commonly regarded as probably the least forgiving/most demanding rubber on the market but somehow on the forums the consensus seems to be so different. I've tried seeing all angles of the other argument but still struggle to grasp it...
Thanks for the clarification. I am unconvinced that D09c is not a reasonable possibility for coaching intermediate amateurs simply because H3 is and can be. The main issue is price. And of course how one intends to develop the player. In fact, I think the price of Butterfly rubbers very often affects the discussion of who should use them.Yes I agree, I can play 09c on FH all fine, but I didn't like it, and so can anybody that plays H3N indeed. And as I have said many times, not every amateur should do H3N, I have clearly stated why not and why yes (with a word of caution if yes)
As an example, Andy (not his real chinese name), one of our best almost national amateurs, played for his whole life H3 on his penhold taksim. Recently it broke and he bought a D09c and has been playing since with it.
However, because I often train with him, he is not happy. He says he doesn't like how bouncy it is for TPB blocks, and that he has to close the racket more so he misses more and has less feeling. He also indeed complained about the price but also about less tack. He does enjoy the extra power on certain shots and that he does not need to boost. As always, tradeoffs.
But Andy is way above USATT 1800, more like 2200-2300 so he is not the main audience Im addressing with my blogpost.
In any case, to summarise, yes they are both similar, but in my opinion, for most of those who play H3N on FH, and there are many of those in this forum, I do not recommend 09c. They can play it, but won't enjoy it. For people who play tensors and are used to those, I dont think is worth changing to 09c unless they are prepared to adjust, just like with H3N.
For the backhand it makes more sense to use 09c in my opinion and school og thought, but I do not recommend it for most (note, not all) amateurs under the conditions I specified before due to the fact that a cheaper, easier to use and more forgiving rubber is going to be the better in most cases.
So this is my perspective and what I explained in the post. I knew it would be controversial and many would disagree, that's fine, I think its good for others to see the disagreements, plus I enjoy a good verbal discussion as you know from previous times where we differ.
I do hope that now the opinions and perspectivea have been enough clarified
