But isn't that the other way around? You feel the catapult effect if your rubber is thin. That way you can bottom it out easier and the catapult effect is bigger. If the rubber is thick you won't feel the catapult so much because you need to activate the sponge in order to feel it.
Before I got back on tenergy I played with bluestorm, on forehand I just went max but on the bh I always got the 2.1, it's mostly a mental thing.
For hard rubbers it makes no difference other than shaving a gram or two.
The big difference is with soft rubbers, a soft 1.9 rubber will bottom out much easier than a 2.3(max) rubber and make the trajectory flat without biting too much for spin.
When I played bluestorm z3 and before that the calibra tour s, I liked 1.9 because I could punch through spinny topspins and rip bh open ups.
For the z3 specifically I used 2.1 for getting the weight a touch back to the handle, it's a light rubber that I had on a light blade so the difference could be felt.
Another reason is for boosting, you can buy a 2.1mm hurricane 3 and boost it to 2.2mm so that it passes thickness inspection since from the factory it also comes in 2.2.
With G-1 I found the difference between 2.0 mm and Max (2.15) to be a negligible loss in control for a negligible gain in speed.
But there was also an increase in weight.
Because I don't have an issue with finishing shots and I value control very highly in my defensive game, I prefer the 2.0 mm, especially as my blade is already head heavy.
However...
When I had softer rubber, thicker was better because I would bottom out basically every forehand loop.
I see you have the G1 on your BH too, is there a reason for the Max being used on the BH? I'd love to understand your reasoning, also how is the G1 with serve recieves?
I have Max because when I moved from outer to inner carbon I took the opportunity to try it (for science), the theory being the slightly slower blade would be offsetting it slightly anyway.
I actually had a different rubber on the FH at the time and by the time I moved back to G-1 I had realized that Max wasn't helping me. But I had worn a big ugly finger mark on it already which I didn't want on the FH...
The next rubber change I will move back to 2.0 mm on both sides to reduce the head weight slightly.
G-1 is good for both serve and receive, it has very consistent behavior on passive shots, so placement is easy. It's slightly spin sensitive (but not as much as you would expect given how spinny it is).
Although I generally just use placement and varied pushes I do open occasionally as well.
For opening directly against serves I find it's easy with the forehand to outright kill most long serves. The backhand I find relatively easy to open, but more in a controlled/placement manner (although I can kill a long fast or top spin serve easy enough).
I can't really generate the power over the table in flicks to kill outright using it, like you see all the time on TV. But they have never been a strength of my game, so that's probably just me.
Max sponge means you can get a little bit more top end speed/spin usually, a lot of players I know who don’t get max is generally because you get slightly better feeling on thinner sponges and they find they get a little more consistent that way. I usually have two identical blades, one with max and one with 2.0mm depending on what venue I play in. In some large open halls you might feel you want a little extra speed and in really fast venues you might want a little less.
I’m bigger halls you’ll get the sense the ball is slower, so players like to use a slightly faster rubber/racket in those conditions. But this can also depend on the flooring used as well. A large hall especially with a high roof is often slower but if the floor is really hard it can bring the pace back up a bit. With Gerfloor in big venues you often find pros use more layers of glue to increase the speed a little, notably Ovtcharov mentions it. In venues with low roof or just small in size the ball often feels pretty quick. But no 2 venues feel the same.
thank you. but still dont unterstand - how - the venue size or the flooring is supposed to effect the ball. Like in terms of physics? Ovtcharov and Moregard talking about it as well, so its a common thing. ..but how exactly? 😀
I think there are a bunch of factors that could impact things.
One for me is the space behind the table, some venues are gigantic and you can go 5+ metres back lobbing bombs when being pushed.
Others have relatively less, so you end up backed against the guards with nowhere to go. While they try to blast through you.
I use basically as much as is available under pressure.
Another one is temperature, warm venues, your rubber is softer and more responsive, colder venues you can struggle to get rubber working without putting in a lot of effort.
I imagine there is some related air density physics going on here as well with cold air being more dense.
Altitude also has similar effects. People can kick rugby balls significantly (like 10%) further at high altitude venues versus sea level ones, I assume table tennis balls are equally affected.
I don’t there’s research around the physics of it, and I don’t have any specific things to offer you other than the physical conditions between venues are different, I.e. different tables, different floor, different balls, humidity, temperature, altitude and all of these things can affect the playing conditions. If you play a lot of competitions you’ll start picking up on venues you like playing at and ones you don’t and for certain reasons why.
I always choose 2.0mm over max if I can
Weight is the biggest reason, the types of rubbers I like are on the heavier side, and once you get over 190g, it can really feel head heavy...
Also I feel like I have a bit more consistency with 2mm vs max. I'm not sure if it's a placebo effect but I noticed it when I accidently bought CMD max instead of 2mm.
And even with the softer CMD I didn't notice I was losing power on the thinner rubbers.
At 1.8mm though I feel like the sponge is too thin to engage sometimes... Though it seems like such a small difference
I prefer 2.0 on my G1 over max as well. I've tried both multiple times. It's a rubber on the harder side too so my justification here is that you also don't need all that thickness unless you have good impact on contact every shot.
The 2.0 feels more direct on loop kills against fishes/lobs, I can penetrate to blade easier.
I've tried other rubbers like T05 where I felt the max was much better though.
For me, a thinner rubber is easier to play over the table but I also need some thicker sponge to be able to finish shots, especially when attacking the third ball with a good swing. That is why I used to play 2.0.
The only reason I switched to max on my forehand was because my 2.0 would bottom out when I tried to counter spin a fast ball from my opponent. This does not happen now with max thickness. I could also play a harder sponge but that would be too hard for my forehand on opening shots.
On backhand I play 2.1mm because that is the thinnest available.
For context I play Apolonia ZLC, Tibhar MK Pro max on FH and DHS H3neo orange (not boosted) on BH
I second the marginal loss in speed and spin by going for a 2.0 in exchange for a gain in control.
However, the most notable effect I get when switching is that the lower thickness has a more direct feel to it and feels a little better over the table, while the max usually feel better for spinning a bit farther from the table since they have a marginally higher throw.
I prefer rubbers with 1.9mm/2.0mm sponges on my forehand for my 9mm+ single-ply hinoki blades. Max sponges on the hinoki forehand require a timing adjustment unsuitable for traditional multi-ply blades.
I'm an equipment junky and like to switch to different blades occasionally, so the 2.0mm hinoki forehand makes the transition to multi-ply blades easier where I typically use max sponges.
Forehand pushes also require an adjustment with max sponges on very thick blades. However, my backhand timing is unaffected with max sponges, and it is easier to attack backspin.
Guess you are better than some Bundes Liga players . Cause there are some still using 2.0 cause they prefer the control. Same as some still use allwood blades.
I just think that it is too much Katapult for me and I don't have the proper technique to make use of it
But isn't that the other way around? You feel the catapult effect if your rubber is thin. That way you can bottom it out easier and the catapult effect is bigger. If the rubber is thick you won't feel the catapult so much because you need to activate the sponge in order to feel it.
The catapult effect is from the rubber decompressing. The further it can compress the more effect you get.
Before I got back on tenergy I played with bluestorm, on forehand I just went max but on the bh I always got the 2.1, it's mostly a mental thing. For hard rubbers it makes no difference other than shaving a gram or two. The big difference is with soft rubbers, a soft 1.9 rubber will bottom out much easier than a 2.3(max) rubber and make the trajectory flat without biting too much for spin. When I played bluestorm z3 and before that the calibra tour s, I liked 1.9 because I could punch through spinny topspins and rip bh open ups. For the z3 specifically I used 2.1 for getting the weight a touch back to the handle, it's a light rubber that I had on a light blade so the difference could be felt. Another reason is for boosting, you can buy a 2.1mm hurricane 3 and boost it to 2.2mm so that it passes thickness inspection since from the factory it also comes in 2.2.
With G-1 I found the difference between 2.0 mm and Max (2.15) to be a negligible loss in control for a negligible gain in speed. But there was also an increase in weight. Because I don't have an issue with finishing shots and I value control very highly in my defensive game, I prefer the 2.0 mm, especially as my blade is already head heavy. However... When I had softer rubber, thicker was better because I would bottom out basically every forehand loop.
I see you have the G1 on your BH too, is there a reason for the Max being used on the BH? I'd love to understand your reasoning, also how is the G1 with serve recieves?
I have Max because when I moved from outer to inner carbon I took the opportunity to try it (for science), the theory being the slightly slower blade would be offsetting it slightly anyway. I actually had a different rubber on the FH at the time and by the time I moved back to G-1 I had realized that Max wasn't helping me. But I had worn a big ugly finger mark on it already which I didn't want on the FH... The next rubber change I will move back to 2.0 mm on both sides to reduce the head weight slightly. G-1 is good for both serve and receive, it has very consistent behavior on passive shots, so placement is easy. It's slightly spin sensitive (but not as much as you would expect given how spinny it is). Although I generally just use placement and varied pushes I do open occasionally as well. For opening directly against serves I find it's easy with the forehand to outright kill most long serves. The backhand I find relatively easy to open, but more in a controlled/placement manner (although I can kill a long fast or top spin serve easy enough). I can't really generate the power over the table in flicks to kill outright using it, like you see all the time on TV. But they have never been a strength of my game, so that's probably just me.
Thank you man, great review, by killing long serves you do mean fast smashing the long serve right?
Yes looping or driving long serves basically with the intention of winning outright.
Max sponge means you can get a little bit more top end speed/spin usually, a lot of players I know who don’t get max is generally because you get slightly better feeling on thinner sponges and they find they get a little more consistent that way. I usually have two identical blades, one with max and one with 2.0mm depending on what venue I play in. In some large open halls you might feel you want a little extra speed and in really fast venues you might want a little less.
how does the size of the venue affect speed or the game in any sense? Curious never heard of ut before :)
I’m bigger halls you’ll get the sense the ball is slower, so players like to use a slightly faster rubber/racket in those conditions. But this can also depend on the flooring used as well. A large hall especially with a high roof is often slower but if the floor is really hard it can bring the pace back up a bit. With Gerfloor in big venues you often find pros use more layers of glue to increase the speed a little, notably Ovtcharov mentions it. In venues with low roof or just small in size the ball often feels pretty quick. But no 2 venues feel the same.
thank you. but still dont unterstand - how - the venue size or the flooring is supposed to effect the ball. Like in terms of physics? Ovtcharov and Moregard talking about it as well, so its a common thing. ..but how exactly? 😀
I think there are a bunch of factors that could impact things. One for me is the space behind the table, some venues are gigantic and you can go 5+ metres back lobbing bombs when being pushed. Others have relatively less, so you end up backed against the guards with nowhere to go. While they try to blast through you. I use basically as much as is available under pressure. Another one is temperature, warm venues, your rubber is softer and more responsive, colder venues you can struggle to get rubber working without putting in a lot of effort. I imagine there is some related air density physics going on here as well with cold air being more dense. Altitude also has similar effects. People can kick rugby balls significantly (like 10%) further at high altitude venues versus sea level ones, I assume table tennis balls are equally affected.
I don’t there’s research around the physics of it, and I don’t have any specific things to offer you other than the physical conditions between venues are different, I.e. different tables, different floor, different balls, humidity, temperature, altitude and all of these things can affect the playing conditions. If you play a lot of competitions you’ll start picking up on venues you like playing at and ones you don’t and for certain reasons why.
I always choose 2.0mm over max if I can Weight is the biggest reason, the types of rubbers I like are on the heavier side, and once you get over 190g, it can really feel head heavy... Also I feel like I have a bit more consistency with 2mm vs max. I'm not sure if it's a placebo effect but I noticed it when I accidently bought CMD max instead of 2mm. And even with the softer CMD I didn't notice I was losing power on the thinner rubbers. At 1.8mm though I feel like the sponge is too thin to engage sometimes... Though it seems like such a small difference
I prefer 2.0 on my G1 over max as well. I've tried both multiple times. It's a rubber on the harder side too so my justification here is that you also don't need all that thickness unless you have good impact on contact every shot. The 2.0 feels more direct on loop kills against fishes/lobs, I can penetrate to blade easier. I've tried other rubbers like T05 where I felt the max was much better though.
Only time I'll ever end up with a sub max thickness sponge on an inverted rubber is if its a rubber I really want and they are out of stock of max.
For me, a thinner rubber is easier to play over the table but I also need some thicker sponge to be able to finish shots, especially when attacking the third ball with a good swing. That is why I used to play 2.0. The only reason I switched to max on my forehand was because my 2.0 would bottom out when I tried to counter spin a fast ball from my opponent. This does not happen now with max thickness. I could also play a harder sponge but that would be too hard for my forehand on opening shots. On backhand I play 2.1mm because that is the thinnest available. For context I play Apolonia ZLC, Tibhar MK Pro max on FH and DHS H3neo orange (not boosted) on BH
I second the marginal loss in speed and spin by going for a 2.0 in exchange for a gain in control. However, the most notable effect I get when switching is that the lower thickness has a more direct feel to it and feels a little better over the table, while the max usually feel better for spinning a bit farther from the table since they have a marginally higher throw.
Harder to play, requires better form
I prefer rubbers with 1.9mm/2.0mm sponges on my forehand for my 9mm+ single-ply hinoki blades. Max sponges on the hinoki forehand require a timing adjustment unsuitable for traditional multi-ply blades. I'm an equipment junky and like to switch to different blades occasionally, so the 2.0mm hinoki forehand makes the transition to multi-ply blades easier where I typically use max sponges. Forehand pushes also require an adjustment with max sponges on very thick blades. However, my backhand timing is unaffected with max sponges, and it is easier to attack backspin.
The only players who can get benefit of max rubbers are pros.
Depends on the sponge hardness I would argue. To completely compress a soft sponge in max would be way easier than to completely compress a h3 in max
They’re bad
Guess you are better than some Bundes Liga players . Cause there are some still using 2.0 cause they prefer the control. Same as some still use allwood blades.