I believe when the C. Mass came out Phil made a comment something like...that the asymmetric was best used on fresh condition, but that symmetric balls were better once the condition broke down.
I find the C.Mass valuable on broken down conditions because it seems to continue making its move in a predictable way without being thrown off by the unpredictable oil - making it more reliable than my symmetric core balls. And some big boomers have reported their success using the C. Mass through many games without having to put it away, implying that it worked well right through transition for them as well.
However, I respect Phil's opinions very much so I'd like to better understand what he meant. Perhaps he meant the asymmetric is more predictable through the wet/dry - over/under stage? But, even if that is correct, it doesn't explain the relative advantage of the symmetric look once the condition breaks down.
Any ideas?
--------------------
Throwing rocks at sticks...Does it get any better than this?
