Thanks to all who replied, and apologies for the tardy results. While there were not enough submissions to pin down exact data, some patterns did emerge.

Before giving the results I should add that my Buzzbomb finally arrived yesterday. Interestingly enough, I have the right combination of comparative equipment, style, low rev rate, and flood condition to fill in the blanks inthe data. It will be interesting. If I get mine drilled Monday, I'll report after league. If not, it'll be a week... I thought about delaying until I could add my own info, but that would take too long.

PLEASE, don't shoot the messenger. I'm just telling you what the numbers tell me.

General assumptions:

1. The ball appears to be an extremely strong combination, too strong for rev rates classified as med-high and above UNLESS they get the exact specs they need. But then again, weaker balls would give more predictable results in most cases...
2. Most people reported too much rev rate to use this ball effectively, but see notes further down.
3. Slower speeds with low rev rates will have better impressions, and may also benefit from lower top weights.
4. One set of stats was too ridiculously good to match any pattern and was thrown out. Submitter shall remain nameless.
5. There is a small indication (which needs further data) that very high top weight and statics really do matter with this ball for higher rev rates to see success. That's not terribly surprising. Higher rev rates MUST push this ball down the lane to get results.
6. High rev rates and pin under doesn't work well on this ball. You would expect that from the generalizations.
7. Moderate indication this ball doesn't like wood, which would again, make sense.
8. One last note. There may be one "dud" ball in the group, Nicanor's. But there's too much data not filled in to say one way or another.

ON EDIT... I should have added something, and apologizxe for leaving it out. High rev rates that did NOT fare well in the results also had higher ball speed.

Well, that's it from the small sample submitted. I think the data can be substantiated, even with the small sample size.

Generalizations...
A. Heavier hands looking for monster hook in the box are getting the wrong ball for the wrong reason.
B. This should be a winner for true low rev players on oil, but mainly impressive for that audience.
C. Way too few low rev people submitted their results to prove the real use of this ball. I'll fix that this week  

Feel free to ask questions about the interpretation. I'll respond when time permits. I'll also accept more submissions, but I have to add that they need to be as complete as possible to validate more than what we already have.
--------------------
Signature? I don't need no stinking signature...

Edited on 3/1/2008 3:46 PM

Edited on 3/1/2008 8:52 PM

Sounds good in theory, but there are too many negative results. As I said before, the simple "it's a match up" issue is equal to burying your head in the sand. Glad it worked for you, but there are a lot who didn't have that luck. I respectfully suggest you can't make that assumption for others.
--------------------
Signature? I don't need no stinking signature...

T-God, I was waiting for you to chime in. It's only the 20th time you've mentioned it in threads. Sorry, there are as many negative replies to that layout as positive. Check the length rating in BTM, 10.. That's as early as they come. Add a pin down to that with high revs and speed (which is where the heavy handers who got bad results fall in the data, and the ball's going to have a tendency to burn up early, period.

As you yourself have often said, statics play a bigger role than admitted in Lane 1, right? Now remember, I just got my first Lane 1 yesterday, I've been learning from listening to you. If I don't have sufficient top and side to carry it down, it burns up quick.

Ok, next... Who's going to jump in about polish and the minimal impact of statics?  
--------------------
Signature? I don't need no stinking signature...

Edited on 3/1/2008 8:51 PM

Actually, the data submitted did NOT support high revs and high speed as a guaranteed combination, but low-mid revs with ball speed 17 or less was. There's enough negative reports in the high rev/high speed category that strongly suggest something is missing. There wasn't enough data to say what, but the pattern is certainly there.
--------------------
Signature? I don't need no stinking signature...

We agree there's an answer, but the data showed that the high speed players had the highest percentage of trouble consistently across all surface preps. That was interesting. Now, that could be a top weight issue, or a lack of side weight. Regrettably, there was insufficient data filled in to pick which item was the problem.

I actually think this ball may prove to be a great fit for me and am anxious to get mine drilled. However, I'm trying to find hook in a box. High rev high speed players already playing a swing just want to hook 40 boards (or at least 20), and this doesn't seem to be the best ball for that market.
My $.02 from the data reported. As I said before, don't shoot the messenger.
--------------------
Signature? I don't need no stinking signature...