BH and FH Rubbers

Basmundo said:

This is a genuine question raised because I simply need to know the answer. It is recommended by some coaches that, for a typical bat setup for the modern game, the BH rubber should typically be some 2 or 3 degrees softer than the FH rubber. I have also seen it recommended that, because of the lower power of a typical backhand shot compared with the FH, the BH rubber needs to be faster to compensate. I cannot see how these two requirements can be achieved.

A popular set up for example that is often seen would be T05 on the FH and T05FX on the BH. This follows rule 1. giving the differentiation in hardness but it does not meet rule 2. in terms of increased speed for the BH rubber.

I realise that a lot of this is down to personal preference, and that many will say that you can play with and get used to anything, but I would like to understand the general thinking from those with a greater knowledge please.

Click to expand...

It isn't so much lower power as consistency given a swing speed. You aren't going to be able to get as much power and consistency on the backhand as the forehand because the strike zone for the stroke is much smaller and harder to adjust to the ball. Therefore using a softer rubber to compensate so that you can make safe shots even when the ball is not in your optimal zone may be preferable to using a harder rubber.

It is also easier to punch the ball fast with a relatively softer rubber. Harder rubbers tend to create more arc and spin while a softer rubber allows the ball to be pushed out relatively straight and some players prefer to punch more on the backhand rather than loop when countering topspin. Also opening against backspin can be safer with a softer rubber. All of these considerations are why many players prefer softer sponge or topsheet on the backhand.

Players who use the same hardness on both sides or close to it are usually players who just prefer to keep the same feel on both sides. It is rarely a case where they really believe that the same rubber is ideal for both sides.

Basmundo said:

A popular set up for example that is often seen would be T05 on the FH and T05FX on the BH. This follows rule 1. giving the differentiation in hardness but it does not meet rule 2. in terms of increased speed for the BH rubber.

Click to expand...

It actually does meet rule 2.

Sure they write its faster. But there is a big difference between maximum reachable speed levels in top conditions or a simple couterhit when you are slighly out of position. For my hands a t05fx is just fast and boucy. The t05 is so hard that it feels slower when not hit as hard. For the top end my techniqe is not developed enough.
What my coach has told me is that he advises all player a slightly harder rubber on forehand because with the longer swing more power can be generated. With the harder sponge less power is lost on hard hits.

Basmundo said:

Interesting! According to Butterfly, and most suppliers, T05FX is slower than T05. Can you explain please?

Click to expand...

You will get more speed by fully activate the sponge. A softer sponge is easier to fully compress and is therefore sometime faster for your backhand. And if you have a more powerful forehand you could get more speed by choosing a harder rubber that you still can compress.

Basmundo said:

So would it be usual to have a thinner sponge on the backhand as the power is lower? IE. 1.9mm of softer rubber on the backhand with 2.1mm of harder rubber on the FH or is it always best to use the thicker version?

Click to expand...

Do you loop more or punch more on the backhand?

For looping, thicker is faster in all cases. Read Tiefenbacher's articles on tangential elasticity on ITTF Education.

For more direct shots, thicker is bouncier on low impact, but thinner is faster when smashing.

Basmundo said:

Hello Lasta. Always good to have your input. Thank you.
My backhand consists of a combination of: push return, block/punch against topspin and flick, brush loop or loop drive when possible. I think that, from your comments, thicker would be better for me.
Thanks for pointing me in the direction of the ITTF Education website. I was unaware of its existence and I can see that there is plenty of reading available there.

Click to expand...

Yes, its a gold mine of technical information. Really does offer an objective perspective on all the hocus pocus we see on the forums. The technique and training articles are great too, maybe even more worth reading.

Basmundo said:

Interesting! According to Butterfly, and most suppliers, T05FX is slower than T05. Can you explain please?

Click to expand...

Butterfly actually lists both at 13 in speed, and rightly so. Given the same velocity, T05FX, due to its lower launch angle, should have a greater horizontal component than T05 and thus would travel across the table in shorter time.

This thread is still on TTD.

https://www.tabletennisdaily.com/fo...verted-setup-works-explanation-by-Stefan-Feth

It references this post from a high level player and coach:

https://butterflyonline.com/ask-the...mdaS-sz8z9UQoQcYvOpHx5byxhkdjX3C-hK1Nf6bxgY2E

Ultimately, more sponge allows you to hit the ball harder with more spin. Same for harder sponge. But people get the speed thing wrong.

Basmundo said:

So as I don't necessarily have a super powerful pro-like backhand topspin drive or punch, would it be logical to choose T05FX at 1.9mm rather than 2.1mm to enjoy slightly more control, or is it too much of a contrast to reduce both the thickness and the hardness compared with 2.1mm T05 on the forehand.

Click to expand...

It is really a matter of experiment, T05FX is soft, but is not the kind of rubber people used to call soft. That said the plastic ball has changed a lot of things. Below is my opinion, but it is only for me.

If I used FX though, I would use it in 2.1mm to be honest. I tend to use harder sponges in thinner because of the weight and the difficulty of compression. The risk of bottoming out on punches and hard shots with the backhand is a bit much with a thin soft sponge and would not fit the game of most traditional loopers on the backhand.

Basmundo said:

Interesting. So it might possibly be more logical to have 1.9mm T05 on the forehand and 2.1mm T05FX on the backhand?

Click to expand...

Yes. For a certain player it might.

Basmundo said:

Interesting. So it might possibly be more logical to have 1.9mm T05 on the forehand and 2.1mm T05FX on the backhand?

Click to expand...

I´ve been through similar ideas that you have. Trying harder and softer sponges at different thicknesses. My most recent setups are very close to your wonderings. The first one, was a Korbel with T05 at 1,9 mm for both backhand and forehand. I was pleased with that setup, but after 6 months when it was time for new rubbers I thought of some adjustments. I bought another Korbel and this time I bought T05 max for forehand and T05fx max for backhand. I really liked this setup too. Even more, I think. However, during a practice my training partner asked me at the end of the session why I was playing with my old setup again? I looked at the blade and realized that I had played with my old blade without knowing and feeling any difference.
Then another 6 months later D09c was released, and I was eager to try it out. I preferred my newer setup with T05fx max, but chose to put it on my older setup to replace an older rubber but also for the idea of not have too much of a hardness difference on backhand and forehand. So now I´m back at T05 1,9 mm for my backhand and now that feels great.
TLDR I don´t think it will make that big of a difference whether you choose 1,9 or 2,1, fx, or regular T05 for your backhand.
However, for my forehand I think those rubbers make bigger difference. I have earlier played with T05fx on forehand and never liked that.