Cheap alternative to D05?

[folie]

Curious, how many rubbers have you broken attacking half long balls? Chipping the edge of the racket is very normal and is hobby hazard, but over time, you just accept that some balls you can't attack and you are okay with losing the point or pushing. But if you have broken a lot, then sure, get something cheaper but I don't think this is the kind of thing that should be influencing what rubber you choose to play with. And as an aside, I think looping half long balls is easier with tacky rubber but that is not important here.

None, it's just a mental block cuz the thing's so expensive. I see a ball go half long, I more often than not hesitate and half ass my attack.

 

[M.Hoang]

The bad news is that it is largely a waste of time to look for something that plays like Spring Sponge.

The good news is that a lot of rubbers play well with the new plastic ball. ESN has produced a lot of new generation stuff to play with the plastic ball and many of its historical offerings do a good job as well.

From the ESN first Tenergy-like generation, I like Fastarc G-1 and C-1, but Genius, Hexer, Baracuda, Xplode, Eakza 7 and Vega Pro all have fans. And they are fairly cheap usually, they won't get you Dignics 05 effect, but you can use good technique with most of them and get very good results at levels below the top.

The next generation of ESN rubbers I am a bit less familiar with but I liked those as well. I mostly played Evolution MX-S because I don't like stuff that is boosted and loses its speed after a few months - I prefer stable performance rather than great performance followed by a big drop off. So I didn't really like the Rasants and Bluefires and even Evolution MX-P.

Most top level rubbers from ESN today, the Rasanters and the Dynarz and K3s, the issue is really whether you are ready to change after a period because of the way the booster wears off. But they all respond well to advanced technique. None of them are so much cheaper than Dignics that they fit your criteria. If you can't spend something in the realm of $40 or £40 on a rubber or more realistically $55 or £55, you have to manage the performance of the rubber yourself. Most of the newest ones are more targeted at being like Dignics 09c. But there are usually Dignics 05 analogs as well. But none are extremely cheap. And while one will have to adjust if changing equipment, it isn't a crazy or special adjustment, just lots of training hours to get used to the equipment.

I use a hard sponge, soft topsheet rubber right now from 2018 I believe called Golden Tango from Joola. It is a slower Dignics 09c to me, and I think Joola has a more boosted hybrid version (which if you have understood my rantings so far, I have no interest in). The main reason I use the rubber is that I know a USATT 2400 player who uses it on his forehand and I have a lot of experience using harder and tacky rubbers on my backhand (you need bigger swings but there are tradeoffs in pushing and control). It costs me about $36-$40 per sheet. I use it on reasonably fast carbon blades.

My main point in all this is that if you can't spend £45 on Glayzer, just get something that a player you like plays with and get used to it. I think we have USATT 2400+ using Fastarc C1 If Sarah Jalli's profile is correct, I make this point to say that once you know a player at a respectable level is using equipment to play the way you want to play, then you can tell the equipment will not be the main barrier to your development. I used Fastarc C1 until very recently with no regrets. One could definitely use G1 as well.

Of course ignore all this if you are at a really strong level already. But for me, while money is not a problem for me per se, I just prefer something I know a good player uses and whose performance doesnt change a lot throughout the life cycle of the rubber.

Finally Dignics 05 lasts a long time. If you buy and use a sheet, you could use it for up to a year. Maybe even more. You just have to put the racket in a case, clean it with distilled water and avoid leaving it out in hot weather. There is a good case to be made that most amateurs who want to use Dignics would get more value actually using it than testing tubbers that don't play like it. But the upfront cost affects their decision making adversely.

I will save this comment. So much knowledge at here. I seem have played with all of rubber brand and finding the cheapest but also the best...

 

[JJ Ng]

None, it's just a mental block cuz the thing's so expensive. I see a ball go half long, I more often than not hesitate and half ass my attack.

Why not get a used Tenergy 05 or Dignics 05 from a clubmate for reduced price? Somebody at the club gotta has a worn out Tenergy or Dignics that you can get for cheap or they like you, maybe get it for free?

Also my club coach does have some used Tenergy and Dignics once in a while. I think some players put it on and do not like it so they return the rubber to the club coach. I honestly don't know if the players get all their money back or were charged a "restocking" fee.

I think buying a rubber brand new and then returning it to the seller after cutting it onto your blade and all is poor form but apparently some people do do that. And if I ask my club coach I can get a sheet for some discount.

 

[NextLevel]

None, it's just a mental block cuz the thing's so expensive. I see a ball go half long, I more often than not hesitate and half ass my attack.

Okay. Good luck with the rubber search and while I don't think it will solve your problem, I hope it does.

 

[JJ Ng]

The bad news is that it is largely a waste of time to look for something that plays like Spring Sponge.

The good news is that a lot of rubbers play well with the new plastic ball. ESN has produced a lot of new generation stuff to play with the plastic ball and many of its historical offerings do a good job as well.

From the ESN first Tenergy-like generation, I like Fastarc G-1 and C-1, but Genius, Hexer, Baracuda, Xplode, Eakza 7 and Vega Pro all have fans. And they are fairly cheap usually, they won't get you Dignics 05 effect, but you can use good technique with most of them and get very good results at levels below the top.

The next generation of ESN rubbers I am a bit less familiar with but I liked those as well. I mostly played Evolution MX-S because I don't like stuff that is boosted and loses its speed after a few months - I prefer stable performance rather than great performance followed by a big drop off. So I didn't really like the Rasants and Bluefires and even Evolution MX-P.

Most top level rubbers from ESN today, the Rasanters and the Dynarz and K3s, the issue is really whether you are ready to change after a period because of the way the booster wears off. But they all respond well to advanced technique. None of them are so much cheaper than Dignics that they fit your criteria. If you can't spend something in the realm of $40 or £40 on a rubber or more realistically $55 or £55, you have to manage the performance of the rubber yourself. Most of the newest ones are more targeted at being like Dignics 09c. But there are usually Dignics 05 analogs as well. But none are extremely cheap. And while one will have to adjust if changing equipment, it isn't a crazy or special adjustment, just lots of training hours to get used to the equipment.

I use a hard sponge, soft topsheet rubber right now from 2018 I believe called Golden Tango from Joola. It is a slower Dignics 09c to me, and I think Joola has a more boosted hybrid version (which if you have understood my rantings so far, I have no interest in). The main reason I use the rubber is that I know a USATT 2400 player who uses it on his forehand and I have a lot of experience using harder and tacky rubbers on my backhand (you need bigger swings but there are tradeoffs in pushing and control). It costs me about $36-$40 per sheet. I use it on reasonably fast carbon blades.

My main point in all this is that if you can't spend £45 on Glayzer, just get something that a player you like plays with and get used to it. I think we have USATT 2400+ using Fastarc C1 If Sarah Jalli's profile is correct, I make this point to say that once you know a player at a respectable level is using equipment to play the way you want to play, then you can tell the equipment will not be the main barrier to your development. I used Fastarc C1 until very recently with no regrets. One could definitely use G1 as well.

Of course ignore all this if you are at a really strong level already. But for me, while money is not a problem for me per se, I just prefer something I know a good player uses and whose performance doesnt change a lot throughout the life cycle of the rubber.

Finally Dignics 05 lasts a long time. If you buy and use a sheet, you could use it for up to a year. Maybe even more. You just have to put the racket in a case, clean it with distilled water and avoid leaving it out in hot weather. There is a good case to be made that most amateurs who want to use Dignics would get more value actually using it than testing tubbers that don't play like it. But the upfront cost affects their decision making adversely.

MX-P has a drop off in performance after a while but MX-S doesn't? I am not questioning you but I am really curious.

I used to have a sheet of MX-P on a wood blade before it got stolen. I have a sheet of MX-S lying around because the sponge is a bit hard for me so it is just sitting there. I am currently trying to install FX-D and see it goes on my backhand side.

I like C-1 and Rakza 7 soft. On another thread, I did mention that eventually I would like to upgrade from 2.0mm of Rakza 7 soft to max sponge. But after that, I don't know. With the right blade, coupled with Rakza 7 soft max or Xiom Asia max sponge, I feel that I can generate a lot of power. I really cannot see myself necessarily needing to upgrade to 47 or 53 ESN degree on my backhand side. I think at some point, you have to trade in some control for extra max speed, and looking at how my backhand progressing so far, I just don't know there is a need to go for harder sponge on the BH side. Max speed comes from my FH side. I just don't see with my playing style, I will need max speed from the BH side.

 

[NextLevel]

MX-P has a drop off in performance after a while but MX-S doesn't? I am not questioning you but I am really curious.

I used to have a sheet of MX-P on a wood blade before it got stolen. I have a sheet of MX-S lying around because the sponge is a bit hard for me so it is just sitting there. I am currently trying to install FX-D and see it goes on my backhand side.

I like C-1 and Rakza 7 soft. On another thread, I did mention that eventually I would like to upgrade from 2.0mm of Rakza 7 soft to max sponge. But after that, I don't know. With the right blade, coupled with Rakza 7 soft max or Xiom Asia max sponge, I feel that I can generate a lot of power. I really cannot see myself necessarily needing to upgrade to 47 or 53 ESN degree on my backhand side. I think at some point, you have to trade in some control for extra max speed, and looking at how my backhand progressing so far, I just don't know there is a need to go for harder sponge on the BH side. Max speed comes from my FH side. I just don't see with my playing style, I will need max speed from the BH side.

I suspect ESN has a variety of "boosting" processes and some are tied to products/chemicals with different life spans. Evolution MX-P had a sweet swell similar to Dandoy Bioboost and you got the same effect as Andro Rasanter or Donic Bluefire (especially M2), where this sweet smell was very pronounced when the rubber was new and things like the rubber shrinking after a while were very obvious and pronounced. The rubber would play like a dream during this period as fast as spinny. MX-S didn't smell the same way and I didn't get significant shrinkage for it nor any significant change in performance other than the loss of grip as rubbers age, which is normal - it might have happened in small amounts, and I am not saying there was zero degradation, but it definitely was a different animal from MX-P - very different animal. I think one of the selling points of the -D evolution series (which I have never used before for full transparency) was that whatever boosted them was more durable than the -P series. But in general, if I know a rubber is going to degrade very significantly during its life, I am not a fan - I would rather start with the degraded rubber.

Personally, upgrading stuff is largely a waste of time unless you know precisely what the upgrade is giving you that you currently cannot do with what you currently use, and it is almost always tied to playing style and distance from the table. Usually there are tradeoffs and the biggest X-factor is training time. If I had to upgrade right now, the only direction to really go in is something like D09c on both sides, but I have already been there. It's really all in the training hours at this point. As long as you can identify a player who plays the way you want to play and is using or was using what you currently use, the upgrades are mostly just giving you better ways of beating players you can already beat. But if you upgrade and it enables you to beat someone you couldn't beat before, that is a real upgrade. But that is almost always a function of both the upgrade and lots of training hours to flow into the upgrade.

 

[UpSideDownCarl]

I just want to practice attacking half-long balls without risking my nice setup. It's to get past that mental block where I'm afraid of attacking them or half-ass my shots/butcher my technique.

Are you using the technique where someone rolls the ball towards the end of the table and you loop it as it gets to the edge of the table so you have the stroke measured to take the shot with the ball about to hit the table? If not, it would be worth training it that way since the issue with half long balls is having the stroke measured to the table so you swing and the racket comes close but it and your hand don't slam the table: this is also why those half long balls are also called "hand breakers."

Regardless of how you are training to loop half long balls, just get any cheap racket for that, because, the only issue is having the table measured so you don't slam the racket or your hand. If you can have the stroke measured so you loop that ball that is close to double bounce or would possibly have the second bounce on or very near the white line, without hitting racket or hand, then you can just go right back to using your regular racket for the rest of training since, in doing that work on half long balls, as long as you get that measured, it does not matter if the ball goes on with the cheap racket. You are just making the stroke, contacting the ball, and having the table measured properly so your racket passes the end about an inch or so above the edge of the table.

Hopefully that makes sense and hopefully it is also helpful. For the training where you get it ingrained in muscle memory so you don't mess up your hand or your racket or rubber, you need to make good contact with the ball. But the shot does not need to land on the table. When that is in muscle memory and the shot comes up in a match, it will be like any other loop with your regular racket.

 

[NextLevel]

Are you using the technique where someone rolls the ball towards the end of the table and you loop it as it gets to the edge of the table so you have the stroke measured to take the shot with the ball about to hit the table? If not, it would be worth training it that way since the issue with half long balls is having the stroke measured to the table so you swing and the racket comes close but it and your hand don't slam the table: this is also why those half long balls are also called "hand breakers."

Regardless of how you are training to loop half long balls, just get any cheap racket for that, because, the only issue is having the table measured so you don't slam the racket or your hand. If you can have the stroke measured so you loop that ball that is close to double bounce or would possibly have the second bounce on or very near the white line, without hitting racket or hand, then you can just go right back to using your regular racket for the rest of training since, in doing that work on half long balls, as long as you get that measured, it does not matter if the ball goes on with the cheap racket. You are just making the stroke, contacting the ball, and having the table measured properly so your racket passes the end about an inch or so above the edge of the table.

While I am not a fan of expensive rubber per se, I will say that the amount of error you need to make to rip a rubber during training is significant. I have had shots where I looped half long balls and harmed the edges of my blade and rubber and that is normal. If you don't want that to happen, don't loop half long balls. But if you are destroying the rubber or the blade significantly, that is a result of being unlucky or way too ambitious, I can't remember an attempt to loop a half long ball that out my rubber out of commission. Damaged the edges yes. Tore the rubber outright, no. That usually happens close to the corners and while possible, it requires a certain level of stubbornness. The most important thing is to not try to come over the table from below the table. You either let the ball come and meet it when it comes off or you start at table height and play over/around the ball. But don't get to start below the table and then try to loop thr ball when it stays short, just push or take the L and lose the point.

 

[folie]

Okay. Good luck with the rubber search and while I don't think it will solve your problem, I hope it does.

If training specifically to overcome that doesn't solve my problem, then idk what does.

 

[UpSideDownCarl]

While I am not a fan of expensive rubber per se, I will say that the amount of error you need to make to rip a rubber during training is significant. I have had shots where I looped half long balls and harmed the edges of my blade and rubber and that is normal. If you don't want that to happen, don't loop half long balls. But if you are destroying the rubber or the blade significantly, that is a result of being unlucky or way too ambitious, I can't remember an attempt to loop a half long ball that out my rubber out of commission. Damaged the edges yes. Tore the rubber outright, no. That usually happens close to the corners and while possible, it requires a certain level of stubbornness. The most important thing is to not try to come over the table from below the table. You either let the ball come and meet it when it comes off or you start at table height and play over/around the ball. But don't get to start below the table and then try to loop thr ball when it stays short, just push or take the L and lose the point.

Yep. But Mike Landers did do that training with me where he was rolling the ball from the net off the table and I was trying to loop the ball as it was rolling, just before it went off the end of the table. His recommendation for that particular training was to use any cheap racket that you didn't mind destroying until you had the plane of the stroke down so you knew with confidence, you weren't going to hit the table.

I do remember, years ago, I had just put a set of T05 on, I was at Smash_Fan's old office (2011) and a friend of ours wanted to play a match but did not have his racket there. He convinced me to lend him my racket. I honestly have no idea how he did it; but he hit the table and the red T05 had a 4cm tear from the tip, at an angle towards the center of the blade face. But you are right. He must have caught the corner being stupid. If it was his racket, I would not remember it. If I did it, I would know how it happened. But it did happen.

 

[jammmail]

I personally cant see the point in training with one setup then playing with another, even if they are meant to be similar. Surely you would be better off waiting till your Dignics is wearing out then move it to your spare setup using the fresh on on the main setup.

 

[kindof99]

To train for half long ball, I think any setup will work. You just need a light grip on the ball to create friction to make it over the net. Fast wrist action is the key.

 

[vossi39]

My proposal would be a DHS Hurrincane 9 Blue Sponge. Similar hardnesss, works without tuning, cheap and not tacky, but grippy surface. Superior to Vega Intro at the same price.

 

[ander999]

Gewo Nexxus EL 48 SuperSelect / 48 EL Pro

 

[NextLevel]

Yep. But Mike Landers did do that training with me where he was rolling the ball from the net off the table and I was trying to loop the ball as it was rolling, just before it went off the end of the table. His recommendation for that particular training was to use any cheap racket that you didn't mind destroying until you had the plane of the stroke down so you knew with confidence, you weren't going to hit the table.

I do remember, years ago, I had just put a set of T05 on, I was at Smash_Fan's old office (2011) and a friend of ours wanted to play a match but did not have his racket there. He convinced me to lend him my racket. I honestly have no idea how he did it; but he hit the table and the red T05 had a 4cm tear from the tip, at an angle towards the center of the blade face. But you are right. He must have caught the corner being stupid. If it was his racket, I would not remember it. If I did it, I would know how it happened. But it did happen.

Yeah, destroying the racket is possible, but it is not a common thing. I suspect if you asked that friend whether he had done that to a racket before, he would have said no (he could be lying of course, but I suspect he would be telling the truth). Dinging a racket is usually far more common, and that is legitimately part of the learning process IMO.

In any case, OP has gotten recommendations. Let's see where it takes him.

 

[UpSideDownCarl]

Yeah, destroying the racket is possible, but it is not a common thing. I suspect if you asked that friend whether he had done that to a racket before, he would have said no (he could be lying of course, but I suspect he would be telling the truth). Dinging a racket is usually far more common, and that is legitimately part of the learning process IMO.

In any case, OP has gotten recommendations. Let's see where it takes him.

Yep. Agree with all this and you are 100% correct that the guy who borrowed my racket had never done that before and I would be he has never done it since. Just with my racket....

 

[UpSideDownCarl]

But it is worth mentioning, Mike Landers' recommendation to me, for the -- roll the ball off the table, loop it -- practice for working on looping half long balls was to use any cheap racket till I had the trajectory of the stroke sorted so I wouldn't hit the table. I think his main reasoning was confidence and not worrying about hitting the table and messing up my main setup rather than the real threat.

And the idea that you might destroy your main setup could impede someone's attempts to learn the skill......so....

 

[NextLevel]

But it is worth mentioning, Mike Landers' recommendation to me, for the -- roll the ball off the table, loop it -- practice for working on looping half long balls was to use any cheap racket till I had the trajectory of the stroke sorted so I wouldn't hit the table. I think his main reasoning was confidence and not worrying about hitting the table and messing up my main setup rather than the real threat.

And the idea that you might destroy your main setup could impede someone's attempts to learn the skill......so....

I hear you. I have my objections to this, but sometimes, objections based on personal experience are just bias, not objective evidence. And since you have provided an example of one high level player/coach who subscribed to this approach, I really just have to accept your informed perspective and move on. That's the way limited evidence works.

 

[UpSideDownCarl]

I hear you. I have my objections to this, but sometimes, objections based on personal experience are just bias, not objective evidence. And since you have provided an example of one high level player/coach who subscribed to this approach, I really just have to accept your informed perspective and move on. That's the way limited evidence works.

And, as with all things, it is only one of many approaches. It is possible that the reason for the direction, to me, had to do with something he saw in my level at the time; rather than something else. So....context, as always, is important. And none of us has seen the play of the OP.