This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Member
Premise:
Up until today, I had only used European/Japanese style rubbers (i.e., mechanically grippy, some type of springy/"tensioned" sponge, etc). I steered clear of anything considered a classic/typical tacky Chinese rubber (i.e., hard sponge, tacky surface, etc) for over 10 years because there are an overwhelming proportion of absolutist opinions on the internet about how limited they are. I'm not talking about the provincial/national versions - just un-boosted, regular/commercial versions (i.e., DHS Hurricane 3). Here were some of the common cautionary statements I heard about those types of rubbers:
1. They are unrealistically slow and lack power in today's game
2. They take a long time for someone who has only used European/Japanese to get used to or require a specific/different form
3. They are poor for flat-hits, blocks, lobs
4. They are good on forehand, not so great on backhand
Actual Experience:
I put 2 sheets of 2.15mm, 39 degree hardness DHS Hurricane 3 (regular, commercial - NOT boosted or Neo) on a homemade Koto-Lutz Spruce-Kiri (3.9mm core) blade. Here are my thoughts on the above claims:
1. The overall, maximum speed and power I can put on the ball is comparable to my Limba-ALC-Lutz Spruce-Kiri blade with Nittaku Fastarc G-1 on both sides (H3 is only marginally slower, not this big gap between them I was led to expect). The power is incredibly linear, so low-speed hits are "duller" and "weaker" than any hit I've felt with tensor rubbers - this isn't a bad thing, as it really widens the range of speeds and touch properties. When I put power into my loops and drives, the ball speed was in the same general speed category as many of the newer tensor rubbers I've tried. I think many people describe the rubbers as under-powered because it does require you to put effort in. There is something really rewarding about playing this way with the H3 rubbers, perhaps because I felt like more of an active participant. Switching back to G-1 just to verify I wasn't crazy, I noticed that I had to do so much less work to get balls in the mid-range of speed, but I did feel disconnected like my body movements had less of an impact on the power of the shots. In summary, I thought the power of commercial H3 was more than sufficient and also very rewarding to "extract".
2. Like I mentioned above, this was literally my very first time hitting with tacky rubber. I found I did not need an adjustment period to play with H3, nor was there any truth (for me) in this supposed requirement of hitting with a "Chinese style loop". The caveat is perhaps, if there is any truth to a different technique required to use Chinese rubbers effectively, that I already embody that style? Many posts suggested that there is a lower throw angle and European/Japanese rubber users would need a lengthy adjustment period or they'll continuously put balls into the net or off the end of the table - I found I had even more control than expected and put the same amount of balls on the table as with any other rubber I've used. Unlike the magical/mythical form difference that many internet posts speak of, I think the only actual requirement is good form.
3. There are many posts talking about not using Chinese rubbers for flat-hitting, many of these posts giving the impression that a person somehow wouldn't be able to control the hits and keep them on the table. These posts often reference Chinese players twiddling the blade for smashes. For an athlete who needs to extract the maximum our of their equipment (i.e., professionals), this makes sense. In my personal experience, I found H3 to be just fine for flat-hitting. Perhaps my "classic drive shot" has too much top-spin, but I found I was able to drive the balls at high speeds with the same low error-rate as any tensor rubber. Blocks were great too, but I can see why some people might comment on them being less than ideal - either you have to put energy into the hit to engage the sponge on low speed balls from an opponent, or open the racket-face to compensate for the duller response at low speeds. When blocking high-speed shots from my opponent, the rubber was able to maintain that speed and return the ball at a high speed. With the hardness of my blade and the hardness of the H3 rubber/sponge, I found deep/high lobs to work quite well with good feeling and spin.
4. I read many posts advocating that people who did want to use commercial H3, should do so on their forehand if they have decent technique. Few posts seemed to advocate for players putting a hard, tacky Chinese rubber on a backhand (I realize this gets into the hornet's nest that is discussing "backhand versus forehand" rubbers, of which there is no substance to). Admittedly (shamelessly, I might add), I have a great backhand - lots of wrist and power in my stroke. I found H3 commercial to be an absolutely joy on my backhand. The feeling of the grip and tackiness of the rubber was haptically rewarding, and game-wise it manifested as great control with a ton of spin.
Summary:
In summary, and perhaps related to the dozen+ weekly posts concerning "what rubber/blade is best for me?", I think these rubbers (H3) are 95% as capable as any other decent rubber out there. With practice and familiarity, even a "cheap", "old" rubber like H3 commercial would work fine for the vast-majority of non-professional players. My take-away message for other players, in general, is: Don't buy into the hype about what something is or isn't good for - do your best to get unbiased information and then take the time to discover it for yourself.
Up until today, I had only used European/Japanese style rubbers (i.e., mechanically grippy, some type of springy/"tensioned" sponge, etc). I steered clear of anything considered a classic/typical tacky Chinese rubber (i.e., hard sponge, tacky surface, etc) for over 10 years because there are an overwhelming proportion of absolutist opinions on the internet about how limited they are. I'm not talking about the provincial/national versions - just un-boosted, regular/commercial versions (i.e., DHS Hurricane 3). Here were some of the common cautionary statements I heard about those types of rubbers:
1. They are unrealistically slow and lack power in today's game
2. They take a long time for someone who has only used European/Japanese to get used to or require a specific/different form
3. They are poor for flat-hits, blocks, lobs
4. They are good on forehand, not so great on backhand
Actual Experience:
I put 2 sheets of 2.15mm, 39 degree hardness DHS Hurricane 3 (regular, commercial - NOT boosted or Neo) on a homemade Koto-Lutz Spruce-Kiri (3.9mm core) blade. Here are my thoughts on the above claims:
1. The overall, maximum speed and power I can put on the ball is comparable to my Limba-ALC-Lutz Spruce-Kiri blade with Nittaku Fastarc G-1 on both sides (H3 is only marginally slower, not this big gap between them I was led to expect). The power is incredibly linear, so low-speed hits are "duller" and "weaker" than any hit I've felt with tensor rubbers - this isn't a bad thing, as it really widens the range of speeds and touch properties. When I put power into my loops and drives, the ball speed was in the same general speed category as many of the newer tensor rubbers I've tried. I think many people describe the rubbers as under-powered because it does require you to put effort in. There is something really rewarding about playing this way with the H3 rubbers, perhaps because I felt like more of an active participant. Switching back to G-1 just to verify I wasn't crazy, I noticed that I had to do so much less work to get balls in the mid-range of speed, but I did feel disconnected like my body movements had less of an impact on the power of the shots. In summary, I thought the power of commercial H3 was more than sufficient and also very rewarding to "extract".
2. Like I mentioned above, this was literally my very first time hitting with tacky rubber. I found I did not need an adjustment period to play with H3, nor was there any truth (for me) in this supposed requirement of hitting with a "Chinese style loop". The caveat is perhaps, if there is any truth to a different technique required to use Chinese rubbers effectively, that I already embody that style? Many posts suggested that there is a lower throw angle and European/Japanese rubber users would need a lengthy adjustment period or they'll continuously put balls into the net or off the end of the table - I found I had even more control than expected and put the same amount of balls on the table as with any other rubber I've used. Unlike the magical/mythical form difference that many internet posts speak of, I think the only actual requirement is good form.
3. There are many posts talking about not using Chinese rubbers for flat-hitting, many of these posts giving the impression that a person somehow wouldn't be able to control the hits and keep them on the table. These posts often reference Chinese players twiddling the blade for smashes. For an athlete who needs to extract the maximum our of their equipment (i.e., professionals), this makes sense. In my personal experience, I found H3 to be just fine for flat-hitting. Perhaps my "classic drive shot" has too much top-spin, but I found I was able to drive the balls at high speeds with the same low error-rate as any tensor rubber. Blocks were great too, but I can see why some people might comment on them being less than ideal - either you have to put energy into the hit to engage the sponge on low speed balls from an opponent, or open the racket-face to compensate for the duller response at low speeds. When blocking high-speed shots from my opponent, the rubber was able to maintain that speed and return the ball at a high speed. With the hardness of my blade and the hardness of the H3 rubber/sponge, I found deep/high lobs to work quite well with good feeling and spin.
4. I read many posts advocating that people who did want to use commercial H3, should do so on their forehand if they have decent technique. Few posts seemed to advocate for players putting a hard, tacky Chinese rubber on a backhand (I realize this gets into the hornet's nest that is discussing "backhand versus forehand" rubbers, of which there is no substance to). Admittedly (shamelessly, I might add), I have a great backhand - lots of wrist and power in my stroke. I found H3 commercial to be an absolutely joy on my backhand. The feeling of the grip and tackiness of the rubber was haptically rewarding, and game-wise it manifested as great control with a ton of spin.
Summary:
In summary, and perhaps related to the dozen+ weekly posts concerning "what rubber/blade is best for me?", I think these rubbers (H3) are 95% as capable as any other decent rubber out there. With practice and familiarity, even a "cheap", "old" rubber like H3 commercial would work fine for the vast-majority of non-professional players. My take-away message for other players, in general, is: Don't buy into the hype about what something is or isn't good for - do your best to get unbiased information and then take the time to discover it for yourself.