1,9 2.1 Rubber thickness

hazzaa96 · Dec 30, 2017

Hi all i was just wondering is there a massive difference between the 2 rubber thicknesses in terms of speed and control. I am currently using T05fx on my backhand in a 2.1 thickness which i like but feel like i could do with a bit more control sometimes but without losing a lot of speed.

THanks for any replies in advance

NextLevel · Dec 30, 2017

hazzaa96 said:
Hi all i was just wondering is there a massive difference between the 2 rubber thicknesses in terms of speed and control. I am currently using T05fx on my backhand in a 2.1 thickness which i like but feel like i could do with a bit more control sometimes but without losing a lot of speed.

THanks for any replies in advance

Depends on the individual but Yes, there is enough of a difference to care but it really depends on how deep your contact is. The more you brush and the harder the sponge, the less of a difference it makes.

yogi_bear · Dec 30, 2017

The thicker sponge allows you to dig the ball deeper resulting to more spin and speed but it also requires skill.

UpSideDownCarl · Dec 30, 2017

A question: What about trying a rubber that is similar but a little easier to control on BH; one with a little less catapult and just as much spin? Like Evolution FX-S or even EL-S.

That might help differently than going thinner. If your FH is good with T05 but your BH is having trouble controlling T05FX, one of those rubbers will produce similar qualities of spin and speed but the sponge having a little less catapult may help you with your control. I also find the Evolution rubbers a little less reactive to incoming spin than the Tenergy rubbers. But maybe that is just me.

Suga D · Dec 30, 2017

I wouldn't agree 100% and I think it's rather a matter of taste.
There are quite a few pro players using T05 in 1.9 on the BH. From my information even some players of the Korean women's National team use that sponge thickness too.

Maybe this thread can bring more clarity.
https://www.tabletennisdaily.com/forum/showthread.php?13102-Pro-s-Rubber-Sponge-Thickness

I definitely wouldn't recommend it for FH but for BH i don't see much of a problem.
The thing is rubbers in 1.9 tend to 'bottom out' easier on full swings, but this is quite unlikely on the BH-side and i haven't met anyone who managed to bottom out tenergy with BH yet.
On the other hand if you want to stick to BTY you could also try out Rozena and see if you prefer it, since it's a little more insensitive to spin.

UpSideDownCarl · Dec 30, 2017

I don’t see a problem with 1.9 either. And perhaps a change in thickness is all that is needed. But if the issue is control, a rubber that is easier to control may be worth looking into: Regardless of thickness.

Sent from The Subterranean Workshop by Telepathy

Tony's Table Tennis · Dec 30, 2017

2.1mm is more speed
1.9mm is more control

Spin is depending on your level - ie you could get more spin out of 1.9mm because you can't land the ball on the table with 2.1mm

I agree that max is always better for tensor, due to more area for ball getting grip deeper by the high tech tensor sponge - but that is only depending on if the player are able to utilize the equipment fully.
ie if you can use 1.9mm at 70% then it is better than 2.1mm at 50%

Plus based on OP details - Timo Boll Spirit is not a slow blade

hazzaa96 · Dec 31, 2017

Thanks for the responses guys. i have forgot to update my equipment setup i am using the viscaria now with same rubbers. Carl now that you mention it i havent really thought about using other rubbers only tenergies that is why i was thinking of getting a 1.9 thickness for better control on chops, blocking etc without trying to use much speed. But if you guys can suggest any other rubbers that are similar with a little more control and reasonable speed that would be great.

brokenball · Dec 31, 2017

There isn't a massive difference between 1.9 and 2.1 mm. There is a difference. I play pretty close to the table so there isn't a big advantage to having thicker rubbers. Thicker rubbers are better for playing back from the table.

An interesting fact. The ball speed drops by about 50% in about 5 meters. If you play back from the table the speed of the ball drops significantly by the time it lands on the table.

NextLevel · Dec 31, 2017

Tony's Table Tennis said:
2.1mm is more speed
1.9mm is more control

Spin is depending on your level - ie you could get more spin out of 1.9mm because you can't land the ball on the table with 2.1mm

I agree that max is always better for tensor, due to more area for ball getting grip deeper by the high tech tensor sponge - but that is only depending on if the player are able to utilize the equipment fully.
ie if you can use 1.9mm at 70% then it is better than 2.1mm at 50%

Plus based on OP details - Timo Boll Spirit is not a slow blade

You could also argue that speed is dependent on level - you can get more speed out of 1.9mm because you don't have the skill to swing fast with 2.1mm and land the ball on the table.

For me in general, 1.9mm is more for people who don't usually counterloop *if the sponge is soft*. If the sponge is hard, usually, some people like me prefer the lower weight and the possibility of feeling more wood on the pushes. But with soft sponge, for me, going to 1.9mm is just a way of losing the whole point of using soft sponge. But this is my opinion.

And I agree, one must have a pretty strong forehand to use a fast blade like Timo Boll Spirit and have backhand issues.

Tony's Table Tennis · Dec 31, 2017

A very well respected Swedish equipment expert once told me that he doesn't understand why low level players are going with max rubbers
He said he has seen data that shows (even with tensor) that thinner sponge suite players with less skills better.
Our chat came to a conclusion that max is better mentally

this expert is someone who can just walk into CNT, so by no mean just a general public member

yogi_bear · Dec 31, 2017

Tony, as what i have been saying. Most players cannot maximize the use of a max sponge especially with a very fast carbon blade

yoass · Dec 31, 2017

yogi_bear said:
Tony, as what i have been saying. Most players cannot maximize the use of a max sponge especially with a very fast carbon blade

I will humbly confess to a limited level of play, and feel very confident in my choice for 1.9mm even on FH.

I’ve played 2.1 and tried the ulramax of last year’s thin-topped, thick-sponged generation — and stuck to 1.9mm. I feel I can hit full-stroke, full-power, and when I do the spins my opponent manage to put their bat against more often than not don’t even come near to the table edge.

hazzaa96 · Dec 31, 2017

Thanks guys so from what i have read, im torn between going with a 1.9 T05fx or just a slower more controllable rubber in a 2.1

UpSideDownCarl · Dec 31, 2017

hazzaa96 said:
Thanks guys so from what i have read, im torn between going with a 1.9 T05fx or just a slower more controllable rubber in a 2.1

Not exactly. The FXS and ELS are pretty comparable in spin and speed. They just are easier to control since the sponge does not have as much catapult and the topsheet is different.

But part of the reason I suggested something different is that Tenergy is a pretty expensive rubber to buy, particularly if your BH can’t control it.

However, the Vega Intro, which is a little slower, a little less spin and easier to control, might be a good choice and would fall into the category you described.

Sent from The Subterranean Workshop by Telepathy

Lightzy · Jan 1, 2018

Also depends on sponge softness. I don't know how soft the 05fx is but if it's a really soft sponge it's probably not a great idea to use a thin one. Stuff like blocking might become entirely uncontrollable.

I use an extremely soft BH rubber and it comes at 2.2, for example.

Edit: If you're considering a different rubber (though the 05fx is superb), the xiom vega pro is probably one of the best there is.

Wetwork_Orange · Jan 2, 2018

hazzaa96 said:
Thanks for the responses guys. i have forgot to update my equipment setup i am using the viscaria now with same rubbers. Carl now that you mention it i havent really thought about using other rubbers only tenergies that is why i was thinking of getting a 1.9 thickness for better control on chops, blocking etc without trying to use much speed. But if you guys can suggest any other rubbers that are similar with a little more control and reasonable speed that would be great.

Hazza, besides my current set up, i ran a Viscaria with MXP on FH and Rakza 7 for BH. Both max. I tried out Rakza 7 1.9 thickness for BH and it made quite a difference, balls when long a lot less and slightly better feel. There were no changes in my techniques, merely a thinner sponge.

Ndragon · Jan 2, 2018

I have a question on the difference between 2.1 and 1.9.
Speaking purely for FH as an example, you have a good technique down. Opening Loop, Close to table loop, mid distance loop, loop to loop.
How would the MM of sponge change the outcome of the exact same shot of each of the above?

yoass · Jan 2, 2018

Ndragon said:
I have a question on the difference between 2.1 and 1.9.
Speaking purely for FH as an example, you have a good technique down. Opening Loop, Close to table loop, mid distance loop, loop to loop.
How would the MM of sponge change the outcome of the exact same shot of each of the above?

I've used the same rubber in 2.1 on FH and 1.9 on BH for a long time. There is a difference, but it's a slight one, so subtle even that an inadvertent twiddle might go unnoticed.

The 2.1 in my experience has a slightly higher dwell, slightly higher throw, slightly higher speed (and perhaps a slightly flatter arc, but if so that's very, very slightly so) when spinning, and a slightly more error-prone direct hit and slightly less oomph on aggressive punch blocks. I suspect the way you're hitting it makes a larger difference than the sponge thickness.

That being said, I now use 1.9 on FH and feel more unimpeded, slightly more confident in making full strokes, unimpeded.

1,9 2.1 Rubber thickness

Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Member

Member

Well-Known Member

Similar threads