How did you find it?

How does it play compared to 2.1?

I am thinking about putting 1.9 on balsa carbo 64 bh and 05 fh

I normally play with max

looping capability etc?

Is that noticeably different with 1.9?

 

There is no point in using 1.9.

 

If you want less spin and speed just go to another rubber.  I agree with almost everything said on this post.  It's like why would you use Bryce in 1.3?  Don't expect the speed ratings to have any meaning!

 

2.1 on all wood is mushy.

 

Although I think 64 might be nice as driving and punching solely rubber at 1.9, but I would still go to bryce speed or fx for these purposes first.

 

Also agree there is no weight difference between 1.9 and 2.1 for 05 because I believe the topsheet is very heavy and full of pips.

 

 

 

 

Please give Ovtcharov a call. I don't think he knows.

 

bozbrisvegas wrote:   2.1 on all wood is mushy.

  

 

What a statement.

 

Seems like I could go either way from the advice offered. Maybe I just need to bite the bullet and try one or the other.

Thanks for the advice guys.

 Maybe you are in a bad mood to be writing such personal replies to me today? Take it out of context and everything is easy to pick apart.  

 

Companies spend so much money on research to develop minute improvements in speed and spin and pass this cost onto us.  Instead of taking on this cost there is already a technology called: Maximum thickness the rubber can be.

there is no point in using 1.9 in such an expensive, heavy, spinny and fast rubber, when you can get the same performance from almost any other brand.  If you havent experimented with this ask ovcharov doesnt he use donic?

I think you should call Ovcharov and find out from him personally if he uses tenergy 1.9 on his backhand and then show us the proof that he does.

Because the topic is 1.9 in tenergy if you didnt read the post title.

 

When you say "what a statement" I also think "what a statement". It is a waste of space if you cant say anything. 

    I am not the first nor last person to have said that something feels mushy.  If you don't understand English maybe I could put into a thesis.  "In my opinion, and as many other have stated, the amount of dwell in 05 is increased past the point of having an advantage, when coupled with a blade which also has a high degree of dwell......"

 

I would agree with other posts that 1.9 tenergy is better on a wood blade because that increases the spin to a comfortable level for looping the ball onto the table.  Where the 2.1 can do it on a carbon blade with more speed. 

Personally speaking: I love the most amount of spin you can get but then find this becomes hard to deal with when the other player has amazingly spinny serves.  Also too mushy is harder to just smack the ball. 

 

your research is so in depth and well researched.  You have gone through 2 sheets. Oh my god! I have also gone through 2 sheets of 05 1.9 and have weighed every sheet of 2.1 in 05 and 64 which is about 15 sheets.  There are differences of 3 grams in the same thickness and same brand.

 

You might as well use 64 because its 3 grams lighter and less spin.  Or bryce fx because its 5 grams lighter $15 cheaper and has less spin.

 

Have I offended you in the past IAMI?  Or is it that you have never read anything about how much of an experimenter I am with tenergy in particular?

 

I will make a decision tomorrow and will let you all know how I get on.

 

At the moment I am thinking about 1.9 64 on bachand which I am thinking should send my blocks back fast, allow controlled pushes and give me the spin I want for backhand serves.

 

I am torn between 1.9 and 2.1 05 on FH. But I think I will go for 1.9 because BCX5 is a soft blade. I like to flat hit to finish a point, and posts so far don't seem to indicate that I won't lose much on the loop. This is how I have made sense of all your helpful posts. Does it make sense to you?

 

Any final thoughts on the serve in particular or in general appreciated, and as I say I will let you all know how it plays.

 

The main problem is that using two sheets of 2.1 thickness feel head-heavy whatever blade you stick with.

 

 

 

Rubbers ordered

I decided on 1.9 64 backhand

and 1.9 05 forehand

I'll let you know how it goes

 

 

 

Weights as follows

Tenergy 05 1.9 uncut 68g

Tenergy 64 1.9 uncut 52g

not sure about those weights

Just weighed something else and it didn't seem right

Will check

Neverthess the difference between 05 and 64 is quite stark

 

 

Balsa carbo X5

1.9 05 Tenergy

 

and it comes to 184 grams

 

I started with O5 on the forehand and 64 on the backhand

Within half an hour I had reversed them and loved the outome.

 

64 on the forehand gave me lethal loop drives which seemed to land on the table right from the start. My block was crisp and fast. Pushes stayed low and I could flat hit accurately with power. Best rubbers I have tried on my forehand. 1.9 played really nicely on the balsa carbo X5. It really balanced.

 

On the backhand I was worried that the high throw 05 would limit my block but it was fine. All stayed on the table, but not as fast or as crisp as the 64. I like the hard rubber for a controlled back hand block. With a closed bat angle it gave me a reliable backhand loop.

So all in all I was happy with the decision to go with 1.9.

 

I might try 2.1 in the 64 at some point in the future, but 1.9 on both sides seems to work well for the balsacarbo X5. Spot on Loopmeister. Thanks to everyone for your help.

 

I'm not sure I agree with this. The 1.9 (especially on the 64) has given me the best looping of any rubber I've tried, but it also allows me to smash with power and accuracy. While I haven't tried the 2.1, I suspect it might make the flat hit less consistent.

OK I have now used this for about a month.

I have found the balsacarbo x5 with Tenergy 1.9 is a great combination for close to the table players

It is light, crisp on the flat hits and spinny for the loops

Overthetable loops on the forehand 05 are exceptionally spinny and the pick up is exceptional.

Pushes and digs have great control on this blade

Smashes and loop drives are very fast. With 1.9 I don't have any problem with smashing with the 05

Blocking and driving with 64 on the backhand is again great.

Serving with either is great

The only weakness I have found so far is passive blocking with the 05 which can spin up very easily if you can't get a very horizontal blade.  If you can get a counter hit in you are fine.

So all in all a combination I would recommend

I will certainly be sticking with it for a while

 

So now I have 64 on BH and 05 on forehand again

The main reasons for this is that this way round I get a much faster linear block on the backhand, and better control with the backhand for the short game.

While the 64 seemed easier to open with on the forehand, after some practise I seem to have got the consistency now with 05 on the forehand. This is giving me much spinnier opening loops. Everyone I played against said that these were harder to play and less predicable than the 64 loops which were faster but more predictable.

I would be tempted to try 2.1 05 on my forehand, but at the moment I am getting more spin than I have ever had before but still able to flat hit crisply to finish the point, and still able to block effectively on the FH.

This is a crucial point, because I am a good blocker and I am just about managing to get the angles to block with 05 on the 1.9 and I am concerned that the throw will just be too high with 2.1. That leaves you with a problem if you are under pressure. So the tradeoffs might keep me with 1.9. This may also have something to do with the blade. I wil post again if I do try 2.1 later in the season.

 

I have stuck with 1.9 05 on the forehand and 1.9 64 on the backhand

This seems to be working very well.

I am getting more spin on both sides than I ever have before.

The 64 gives a much more direct stroke and allows a fast block on the backhand although I have noticed that sometimes the block just drops into the net, and I haven't figured out why yet. I played last night and it didn't happen at all!

The 05 has been brilliant for over the table 3rd or 5th ball high spin loop  to set up a  loopdrive or smash. I think the 1.9 allows me to exercise that kill more effectively. I am not sure if 2.1 on the X5 would do that, but I will try it at some point.

I am also finding a lot of control with pushes which stay low with practise.

I don't know what spin I could get out of 2.1, but my shots are way more spinny than they were before. So 1.9 might be a really good balance for both spin and flat hitting.  Weight is also really balanced. So I will definately stick with this set up for next season although I may try 2.1 on the forehand at some point.