So is it symmetrical or asymmetrical? Looks cool though.

With a .007 mass bias (it wouldn't have a MB mark) and the way they talk about it, I'm going with a weak asymmetrical.

Heres a great comment about C300 and the hypershock:

I predict when this ball has been out for a while, people will determine it's not any better than current balls.

They must think their customer base is completely ignorant of the fundamentals of physics.

They are flat out lying in that video.

The ball that doesn't bounce, if that ingredient was in the core of the ball, the pin would bounce less not more.

There is no reason to make the cover stock more rigid so the impact energy gets transferred to the core, because the core isn't going to reflect that energy back out.

Just like the ball being dropped, the impact energy is transferred into the ball, but since it isn't reflected back to what it landed on, there is no force making the ball bounce up.

The ball is probably made of the same stuff as any other C300 ball.

All the new whiz bang ingredients are just parlor tricks to impress the gullible.

So C300 doesn't know physics and are liars.

https://youtu.be/3fi-DVl72B8

Thank you 

You bet

To me it sounds like back when they started using the hard ceramic cores in balls. So the ball didn't have as much give as others.

A analogy used at the time was the pillow analogy, the old balls were like pillows and the ones with a ceramic core was like a pillow with a brick in it.

Perhaps the 'no bounce' means the ball does not stray from its path through the pins as much? That's what I took from it.

It seems like when the pins hit the ball, the new core material will absorb the energy and the pin will rebound less, not more.