This is a different beast to the rest of the Evo range.  The sponge is different - smaller-pored, and without the booster smell which was so obvious on the original Evolutions and Bluefire Ms.  It's obviously still a hard sponge though.  The topsheet is monstrously grippy when you run a finger down it, and reasonably stiff.  It feels like the grippiest ESN topsheet I've ever experienced.  For comparison, I have a sheet of Omega V Asia here which has a far softer topsheet, less grip to the finger, and feels softer than MX-S overall despite having a harder sponge.  I guess it's going to be very stable.

Once on the blade, MX-S has a hard, definite feel when bouncing a ball, with a dull "thock" sound.  It feels fairly fast without feeling overly bouncy.  The spin test is the headline news though - massive.  Small wrist movement = big reaction on the following bounce.

Full-size pics are available https://picasaweb.google.com/108579723250927437374/General" rel="nofollow - here .

I gave it the full 3 hour treatment last night with Stiga's 40+ seamed ball.  It wasn't long enough for a full review because it was more of a coaching session and I didn't play a wide enough range of strokes in the depth I want.  I'll be back with a more formal review next week, so I'll just give some rambling comments for now.

MX-S was on the FH side of my regular Samsonov Pure Wood blade, and on my backup Pure Woods I had Big Dipper and Tenzone Ultra (BH rubbers on all 3 are Airoc M).

I was slightly disappointed for the first 10 minutes.  During the initial loop-counterhit warm-up MX-S didn't feel particularly "special" at all (meaning that no overriding quality jumped out at me).  It was incredibly stable and easy to use, the arc was medium and nothing dramatic happened.  At this point the only thing that jumped out at me was how easy the counterhit was, even against heavy loop.  For comparison, I had a higher arc with both BD and TZU on the backup blades, but counterhits and blocks were more difficult.

I then switched to a serve, push long, loop against backspin, block, loop/drive against block, free exercise.  This is where MX-S made a lot more sense.  

On the serve, you notice a real lack of bounce.  This helps to keep serves short and tight, and also encourages you to add a lot more wrist action, which in turn results in big spin.  This is an excellent rubber for serving, and all the associated other short game bits.

Then the long push comes in, and you loop against backspin.  I'm not overstating things here when I say that this is the easiest rubber for lifting backspin that I've ever tried.  It absolutely eats pushes and chops alive.  I usually have to warm up my backspin-lifting strokes for a few minutes to get my bat angles adjusted after a counterhit warm-up, but not this time.  I genuinely didn't miss a single one during the exercise.

And then the loop/drive against block, which revealed another interesting point.  Driving the ball is very easy with MX-S, but it is noticeably slower than hard ESN rubbers from previous generations (MX-P and M1 are the obvious touchstones).  You have to generate some power yourself on basic drives or you can offer up an easy ball.  There were times when I stepped around to use FH from the BH wing and I ran out of room to get a full stroke in.  The drive produced was a bit weak, and the court was obviously totally opened up.  You need to be fully committed to get the rewards in this scenario.  However, looping the ball against block is easy and very effective.  In fact, taking a more Chinese approach and loop-driving more often than not was the most efficient and consistent approach for me in general during the session.

I stuck with this exercise (and slight variations in placement) for a full hour.  I felt that it was giving me a good insight into how MX-S was working.  After that we did some matchplay...

The qualities I'd seen during the exercises stayed true during the match.  Short game was truly great, counter hits and blocks excellent.  The FH flick isn't my best shot (needs work), but MX-S seemed good here too, although the lack of extreme arc did mean that I needed to get to the peak of the bounce - there wasn't a lot of leeway if the ball dropped.  The main points worth talking about were during open play.  Basic topspin drives had a medium arc, and the arc then doesn't change much when you start to load the ball up with topspin.  With this comes the ability to disguise the level of topspin to some degree - the arc doesn't give the game away.  Adding wrist to a loop brings heavy spin with ease.  

Positives?  Solidity and control - it's very easy to use, predictable, low catapult and linear.  Good (but not wild) pace.  High spin potential.  Zero feeling of slippage with 40+.  Super easy to vary spin, depth and placement during loop-loop play.  Autopilot when lifting backspin.

Downsides?  The medium arc isn't forgiving of positional problems, so recovery strokes on the run aren't as easy as some rubbers.  And it isn't the fastest rubber around, which makes drives a little weaker (although that will be related to my blade choice to some degree - a faster blade will make this less obvious).  I'm nitpicking here though.

It's on my usual Pure Wood for now.  I'll give it a bash on the adidas hypertouch next week for comparison's sake.

I'm not so sure, but you never know.  I've had a great season with BD, but it was a celluloid season.  Perversely, I'm liking it less with the recent plastic training I've been doing, and I seem to play a lot better with an old favorite of mine - Tenzone Ultra.  My blade could be having an influence here, but I really like it and I'm reluctant to change.  I'm on the cusp of switching to TZU, but if MX-S gives more grip with no great compromise in other areas then I may reconsider.  The main issues for me are stability and outright speed.  I found MX-P to be very stable, but a bit too fast for my needs, which leads us nicely into MX-S.

But honestly - the grip on MX-S is really something else.  I did my usual spin test and the ball (celluloid - just laying around in my study) flew off almost at a right-angle.

• much smaller pored than the other Evolution-series
• extremely grippy topsheet

Here some pictures to compare MX-S (2,1 black) with FX-P (1,7 red)

my pictures together with your review = a nice thread. 

And you are far more sarcastic!  I'm sure that TT-playing border collie from earlier in the week could give me a close game.

Not really.  Grip S Euro is a chinese rubber - a rebadged Haifu Blue Whale II (or slight variation of).  That said, MX-S's grip is really high so transitioning to it from a chinese rubber is very possible.

I've just updated the review with some initial ramblings.  I'm hesitant to start the comparisons with so few hours on the table.  Also, it's becoming hard to directly compare from memory because I last used T05 and Baracuda with celluloid, and I've only used MX-S with plastic so far.

If I had to vaguely wave my hands around at this stage I would say that MX-S does have the levels of grip you'd associate with these two, but the topsheet is stiffer and harder.  Also, MX-S's sponge isn't as lively as T05 or Baracuda either.  This makes MX-S a lot easier to use while retaining high spin potential.

Speed is around the T05 level, a bit faster than Baracuda.

I understand people will want a comparison with T05.  At this stage, MX-S is a slower, spinnier variation on MX-P - I can say that with confidence at this point.  For those people who thought that MX-P was a good alternative to T05 - I think that MX-S is closer in many ways and is well worth a go.  But it still doesn't have the low-effort grab of T05.  Of course, this makes MX-S much easier to use...

I've seen it at Bribhar, Dandoy, tt-shop.net, and best price at the mo is with Outshine Sports - £30 free shipping from HK http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Tibhar-Evolution-MX-S-Table-Tennis-Rubber-/271833428115?hash=item3f4a88f093" rel="nofollow - here

I have a good source for MX-P at the moment for 34euros + shipping, so I'm hoping that MX-S will appear on the list there soon.  And there's always tibi, who pops up with Tibhar stock every so often (as long as you buy 2 sheets, obviously).

Before everyone gets carried away, there is one thing which nags at me with MX-S and that's the throw.  With the same blade, I get a higher throw with Tenzone Ultra, which surprised me.  I'm still thinking about that, and I might do some experimentation on monday night with MX-S and TZU A/B's on the same blades - Pure Wood and Hypertouch.  I want to get the comparison as direct as possible.  It bothers me because I've always thought of TZU as a medium throw rubber itself, and for MX-S to be lower is a surprise.  I want to rule out as much weirdness as possible before committing to a full review.

But apart from that, I'm really optimistic about this one.

So, from what I've read so far, it seems that MX-S is not just a less boosted MX-P but it has a different topsheet (with shorter, wider pimples) as well?

This is going to be one of the big issues for a lot of players when adapting to the new ball.  If you're already using a high-spin, big grip rubber with cell, where do you go with plastic?  Pretty much everything on the market will still feel...something less when you switch.  MX-S feels like the highest grip ESN I've ever used, but it still doesn't fully bridge the gap you feel when you move to plastic.  It's just the best ESN I've tried so far.

I haven't used any rubber yet which makes playing with plastic feel like cell (and nothing ever will, IMO), but I have had a whole bunch of other niggly issues - slippage being one.  You can solve that with a tacky rubber, but that's not for everyone.  MX-S solves it by being scary grippy, so that's a plus point.

Ultimately, to be fully efficient with the plastic ball at the moment (based on how it plays now), get busy driving.  High-arc loops need to be really high quality to avoid giving the opponent an easy counter or smash - it's just too easy to hit through the ball now.  They aren't obsolete shots by any means, but if you drop a high loop short then you will be punished more regularly than before (when perhaps the big spin of your shot would get you out of jail).  There's a player in my club who I could pressurise by mixing up big, high loops with flatter drives.  Now he absolutely nails the loops, and laughs about it after because it's so much easier.

So perhaps the trend for equipment is to combine high spin with a lower arc, in anticipation of this being an emerging style/requirement.  I would usually say that a lower arc reduces your target window and lowers consistency, but there's something about MX-S in particular I see - a consistently tighter arc from any distance.  Even when engaged in loop-loop from 2 metres away the ball doesn't go really high, but it always seems to land.  The lack of aggressive elastic snap from the rubber simplifies your stroke selection and there are no surprises.  Just solid shots from everywhere. 

Yup, it's a different sponge too - not just an unboosted MX-P sponge.  This reminds me of Donic's slight abuse of the Bluefire line where they introduced JP02 and JP01 Turbo, even though they had a totally different sponge type to JP03 and JP01 (or Joola with Rhyzm-P, which had very little to do with the original Rhyzms).  Fair enough that Tibhar feel that this is still an Evolution rubber in some way (and it does share some characteristics), but MX-S has arrived there by different means than simply taking MX-P and slightly adjusting it.  They've taken the currently-available ESN gear and come up with MX-S.  

The main difference between MX-S and the original -P range is the lack of catapult.  Combined with the massive grip, you're encouraged to just keep swinging harder and increasing your own wrist snap to load the ball up.  You don't have to worry (or care) so much about sending the ball long.  This rubber wants you to play a full, proper stroke and rewards you with warm hugs and biscuits if you mess up.  It's highly forgiving.

EL-S and FX-S might restore some of the catapult feel, if they ever appear.

Yes, I suppose so!  Obviously, without the tack.  But the linear power delivery and high grip does point towards that.  Maybe this is why I've taken to it so quickly.

It's fast enough for mortal needs, especially on a faster blade than mine.  Unlike MX-P it doesn't have that factory TRF booster smell, so it could be a good candidate for tinkering.  Pros would probably boost it, I guess.

But it's faster than a H3Neo as-is, for example.

Yes, this is definitely a worry.  I will be putting it on the Hypertouch next week for sure.  Digging through my composites I also have a Waldner Senso Carbon, Calix 2 (and a few other Nexy blades), and an old battered Viscaria on hand, so if anyone wants me to try a specific blade then please pipe up!

Can you do a comparison with Big Dipper?  I'm considering a switch - I love tack, but it slows the ball down.

Didn't notice that...

Can you please compare MX-S with MX-P.

Positives?  Solidity and control - it's very easy to use, predictable, low catapult and linear.  Good (but not wild) pace.  High spin potential.  Zero feeling of slippage with 40+.  Super easy to vary spin, depth and placement during loop-loop play.  Autopilot when lifting backspin.

Downsides?  The medium arc isn't forgiving of positional problems, so recovery strokes on the run aren't as easy as some rubbers.  And it isn't the fastest rubber around, which makes drives a little weaker (although that will be related to my blade choice to some degree - a faster blade will make this less obvious).  I'm nitpicking here though.

Since the 40+ ball spins at a slower rate then the 40C its likely to stay on the table a bit longer then the old ball and has the potential for more revolutions on the table with a  rubber that is slower, gripper and has a lower throw angle say vs a rubber that has a higher throw angles and faster then the slower gripper low throw rubber.  

MX-S has higher grip, less bouncy, a bit slower overall, lower throw.

I used it for a while at a tournament at the weekend.  I wasn't happy with how I played at all, but why that happened is a mixture of many things.

One thing I will say is that MX-S seems to be a rubber which requires a specific approach to play.  Having spend a season using Big Dipper, it seems that my FH stroke has gone back to being very brushy.  So I found that I was happy with MX-S while up at the table and taking the ball early, but when forced out of position or away I struggled to get the ball arc high enough to keep the rally going.  But this could easily be caused by blade choice (too slow) and the brushy stroke thing.  I really want to try it on a few different blades now, which I will hopefully start to do tonight.

today i tested the mxs and compared with the mxp on the same blade both in black max and both on FH

RH elp red max

sponge is not so porose like mxp and elp and is much harder but the topsheet is much softer

it remember me a h3

it plays totally different in comparison with the mxp, it has lower trampoline effect, higher arc, lower speed, more spin but is not easy to play with

needs good footwork and needs good technique.

Don't be misled - it's still a euro rubber.  It does have some of the hard Chinese characteristics - linear, low-bounce, super grip.  It requires good positioning and a committed stroke.

But it's a lot faster and (crucially) not tacky.  It's more like a super-solid and reliable ESN rubber than a H3 copy.  It just shares some basic properties.

My training night was cancelled this week, so I don't have anything new to report.  carmelomaf's post above sounds right to me.  You need good, clean technique to get the most out of MX-S - I struggled with it when under pressure, despite it feeling awesome when training

Something similar I've been using recently is Omega V Asia which I find less demanding to use when out of position (although it isn't as linear and suffers a bit in the short game and when blocking in comparison).

This is a comparison I really wanted to make after one more session.  I actually slapped BD on my spare Hypertouch to allow a direct comparison, but the session was cancelled.

In general terms, both rubbers feel like hybrids in their own way, but end up being really different.  BD is the classic Chinese tacky experience, but with a more euro flavour coming from the sponge and thin, elastic topsheet.  MX-S starts off as a general ESN rubber, but the harder (grippy) topsheet and unboosted sponge makes everything feel very linear, solid and low-bounce.  So BD feels "a bit" euro and MX-S feels "a bit" chinese, but end up being different rather than meeting in the middle somewhere.

Honestly - I don't think MX-S is going to be my thing.  Better players than I with more textbook technique will no doubt love it.  With BD I get a feeling that I can stay in a rally, even if I'm on the edge of what I can do in terms of movement and stroke.  I can drive low or brush to send the ball high.  With MX-S I feel like I can drive or counter anything, lift any backspin, but I have to be right in position to do it.  When I'm on the stretch, a brushy shot results in good spin but no arc or lift.  EL-S or FX-S might work more for me, if they ever appear.

I also get a vague feeling that a tacky topsheet on an MX-S sponge would be something wonderful to behold, and then we would be in the right area for a comparison with BD.  But then BD would hammer it on price, so...

http://mytabletennis.net/Forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=67391&PN=2#868447" rel="nofollow - http://mytabletennis.net/Forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=67391&PN=2#868447

Someone said the same thing about Rasant PowerGrip as well.  It seems that ESN has one generation of rubbers like this.

Definitely possible.  This tempts me to try Rakza X Soft, but I bet the new Acuda P1/2/3 range is similar too (Donic mentions the lower arc in their marketing blurb), so I might wait for Tibi to get stock in May and try P2 and P3.

 

MX-S is not bouncy in the world of tensor. But I bet it will get better after some use. In fact it is not the least bouncy modern rubber for the new ball. The Nittaku Alhelg is more dead when new. It is true that the modern tensor or similars are getting certain degree of restraint in catapult to favour short game. But when you put in your own power they will all go like rocket. So more gear is always better than fast alone.  

 

RX is similar in hardness but bounce a tad higher than MX-S. And it feels softer and livelier in play. Both Andro Powergrip and Grip packs more punch. Certainly above all the rubbers mentioned above.  

Put it on the Hypertouch.  Massive difference.  My Pure Wood is obviously a slower blade, but this was still a bit of a shock.  I've moved lots of rubbers between these two blades and I've never had a difference this noticeable before.  MX-S was a LOT faster, while still remaining medium-low throw and very linear.

Then switched it to a Waldner Senso Carbon, where it was a touch slower than the Hypertouch, and thankfully a bit higher throw.  It remains a laser-sharp tool though, and I think you have to accept that this rubber suits a particular lowish-arc style of play.

If anyone ever doubts the effect a blade can have on playing characteristics, this is the rubber to show them how wrong that is.  I wouldn't say it's blade-sensitive as such, but it definitely pushes the blade properties right to the front.  I don't have a 7-ply all wood unfortunately.  I bet it would be a crushing weapon on a clipper.

The one place where I definitely disagree with Andy is on the boosting.  I smelt a heavy dose of booster on my sheet like MX-P.  I'm also 95% sure that this rubber and Rasant Grip come from the same family.

I'm going to take Andy's suggestion seriously and try it one of my Force Pro Black Editions.  See how that goes.

Until then, from Tibhar Family I think only Aurus will suit you.

That surprises me.  The booster smell I recall is the one you find on the original Bluefire M range, which is also on the original Evolutions (and Joola MAXX, and a few others of course).  MX-S just smells of rubber to me, like Tenzone Ultra, Rhyzm, Tibhar Q and so on.  I don't discount the possibility that my sense of smell has been destroyed by years of constant colds and flus kindly brought home by my plague-bearing children though.

So many people love the Force Pro Black Edition - I have tried my best to understand that blade but I cannot. This blade is a perfect candidate for the Beast Mode modification.  Will probably weigh 800g after, but at least the balance will make sense.

I put MX-S back on my current blade and will play with that for a while.  Damn Force Pro Black wasted my whole training day...

That said, MX-S is very spinny... I just don't get the throw/arc.

I feel the same way.  During training I feel like a titan.  During actual match play I can't keep on top of the ball enough to be effective.

Maybe this is one of those rubbers which suits drive-based players with quick feet.  High-level juniors and the like.  It would certainly sort out any grip issues a current Rhyzm user would be experiencing, for example.  I think vic_the_cleaner would love it.

MX-S is very different from MX-P etc.  I tried Rasant Grip and it's pretty similar IMO.  I never tried PowerGrip but I would be surprised if it was that different - maybe slightly higher or lower throw, who knows, but still similar.

What is bothering me about MX-S now is that the throw messes with how I think about my safety/backspin loops so I have to fix aspects of my technique on my forehand side.  It's like the rubber is exposing all my technical stroke deficiencies.  Which is a good thing, I guess.

I am going to stick with it for a bit because I think that it has exposed a lot of things that I need to fix on my forehand.  But it's purely developmental - I think few players would feel very comfortable with this rubber with all the pressure it places on the timing in your game.  Therefore, other than the immense spin, I have to not recommend this rubber to people looking for a good rubber to use to play a comfortable game unless they have really good timing and technique on whichever side they want to use it.

If MX-S does not work for you and if you're looking for a MX-P like rubber (similar hardness, grip level & topsheet type) but slower but with a lot more control, I recommend Rakza X. Slightly slower than Tenergy 05 and a shade less spinny but this rubber is today's Mark V in control. With the new tensors selling in low 30s nowadays (post-discounts), their prices have become very competitive with DHS.

this is exactly why i just bought 2 sheets of this. i want to exaggerate my bad strokes and my good strokes so i can work on the bad ones and mx-s will rewards me or punish me according to my timing and technique!

Marketing rubbish IMO.  It's 100% ESN-made.  The best you can say is that it was made with some input from experts in the Japanese manufacturing industry - topsheet specs, pimple geometry, that kind of thing.  Victas have tried a similar thing in recent times with their "German-Japanese Cooperation" blurb, but these are NOT Japanese topsheets stuck on to German sponges IMO.  Perhaps you could describe them as ESN rubbers which are made to emulate a Japanese feel.  If so, the Victas rubbers are more successful.

Totally agree.  It's not for me though.  I had an absolute blast with H8 tonight, so MX-S gets the ebay elbow treatment.

I suppose I'll have to get a sheet and try it.

In the glue days I used Tibhar Rapid X-Press: hard sponge, extremely grippy topsheet and low/medium throw.  Ever since gluing went illegal I have been trying to find something similar with minimal luck.  I have retrained myself to use T80 on the BH, but on the FH, when pushed, I still automatically revert to my original stroke that is a lot more vertical than modern high throw rubbers like.

Xiom Tau does not do too well with that stroke.  None of the Tenergies do.  Victas VS-402 is not bad, but MX-S sounds like it might do the trick.

ILya

 

Table tennis truly knows no country...

 

If you had told me 12 months ago that this is where I would end up, I would have laughed in your face.  And yet here we are.  There is a strange symmetry to this - 22 years ago my first "proper" setup was a Tibhar Rapid Carbon with 729-FX on both sides.  The new DHS rubbers are a nice surprise, and the slight tack of these two in particular helps me a lot when moving between cell and plastic.  It helps a bit when I've got less than adequate position or timing (which is most of the time tbf).

with a boosted MX-S, would it feel more like MX-P ?

Thanks for the comments.  How long have you been using MX-S?  Have you played with it competitively?
 

I did a lot of work on rebuilding my forehand while I used Big Dipper so I was eager to go back to an European rubber and the EJ in me said to not start with T05, which is where I expect to end up anyway.   I think at this point, I'm sticking with it more with MX-S because I think that the forehand issues it revealed need to be worked on and that as I get better at them, they will all transfer over to T05 easily.  But I seriously doubt I could have switched from T05 to MX-S.  I compared MX-S on my BH to P7 (my BH is my stronger side) and while MX-S produced the heavier spin, P7 repeatedly produced the higher throw and trajectory.  T05 would be like P7 with more spin.

So I just find it interesting that someone actually could use MX-S and consider switching and I want to see where you end up on the long term.

It spins better as you drive harder and it can be very precise on drives.  It's when you brush lightly that the issues show up.

I saw you have some experience with the Adidas P7 - 

Could you directly compare MX-S to P7 as a FH rubber? In my country, this season was played with the celluloid (old) ball, but as from next season it will be plastic... I am thinking sticking to P7 should still give me good spin because it's one of the spinniest rubbers out there - but I am not sure because my experience with the new ball is limited. I have seen you made references to the P7 - and some players told me that MX-S is like Rasant Grip - verrrryyy spinny, good rubber, controllable - but a lot less forgiving than P7.

Another question - if the MX-S is soooo grippy, does this also make it sooo much more touchy vs very spinny slow shots? 

Rakza 7 is rather grippy and for this reason vs a slow spinny loop it's really sensitive... more than P7 for some reason - with P7 you can opt to drive through the ball if needed. 

One thing confuses me about what is being said about the MX-S ... many people are saying the throw is considerably lower than P7 or T05, however it is said to be the best 3rd ball attack (especially vs backspin) rubber at the moment... Wouldn't you need the relative high throw as well as lots of spin and a degree of forgiveness to make a "best 3rd ball" rubber? I mean if it lifts back spin so effortlessly - and consistently, then the throw cannot be that low... if it were medium-low throw, then the instances where you hit the next in match play would increase... 

the most important factor for me in a FH rubber is the 3rd ball vs heavy underspin (because I serve HEAVY underspin with little deception to get a predictable 3rd ball) 

From you description it seems to really fit the bill but then again the throw is worrying me in that I might be less consistent even though the result will be more deadly...

this happened to me when I tried Nittaku H3 boosted.... basically the 3rd ball is better than the P7 when it lands - but there is a 5% difference in the amount than make it over the net because P7 is more forgiving - with H3 to get the "high throw" of H3 you must contact perfectly... I am getting the feeling MX-S is more the H3 boosted type than the T05 type (in fact you rightly pointed out that MX-S is not a T05 substitute and is very different also to the P7)