The thing is that the hart is 90 degrees from the psa or preferential spin axis. Though the psa is different from a mass bias, it is generally safe to assume that they are the same or very close in location. The term preferential spin axis though gives a better impression, as the ball is said to have an axis that runs through the ball. Thus the preferential spin axis reaches the cover at two points. The hart is directly between these points.
If one were to layout a ball with the hart at 135 degrees which is a typical layout, hart to the track side of one's grip, the psa would actually be located in the 45 degree position, which is generally a strong psa location. The other psa location is on the other side of the ball, at 225 degrees or negative 45 degrees.
This hart position is around negative 45 degrees or 315 degrees, thus putting the psa in the same location. The only difference between the two layouts is the position of the cg. Now as Brunsnick has pointed out on so many occasions cgnomaddah, but as the USBC has pointed out on so many others staticweightmaddah?
?. Generally the entire point of the layout is to get so much sideweight that you need a gigantic weight hole in the finger quadrant. A weight hole in this position decreases flare a bit but makes the reaction much less skid snap.
The point of the no mercy cg offset from the psa design is to allow the bowler to use strong mass bias placements without needing a weight hole, yet there are a few side effects. Some trick layouts like this are possible for one, but weight holes on the track side of the ball are another. Its a very interesting ball, and a fair idea that the people from hammer have. Moreover, if the proposed cg and x hole regulations are ever enacted the no mercy design is sure to be coppied by other companies.
--------------------
four fried chickens and a coke[/size=4]
Let me say something, let me say something...
AAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
