Back from the test range. I lightly hit the ball with a 1.500 grit pad from 4 sides, and then added Lanemasters' Polish from 6 sides, lightly. The result is shinier than OOB, but sanding lines are still to make out.
Back again at the same house, this time on a lane in virgin condition - recognizably more oil and more defined wet/dry areas.
To be honest, the first game with the polished RX1 was crap. I was not sure which line to play: with hand behind the ball the RX1 would hook a lot, when trying to compensate with my feet I'd pass the breakpoint and get a washout or bucket leave. I think I wanted to overcome or steer the ball, rather than play it. A 147 was the shocking result, including 3 splits and open frames due to the unknown reaction of the ball with the new surface.
But so far, I could see a clear change in overall reaction. The shinier RX1 would go 4-5' longer (also due to the higher amount of oil now) and start its move with a more defined breakpoint and with more back end movement. While not a snappy ball or a hooker, the difference was easy to see and seemed to go into the intended direction.
But my mind was still set on the arcing move of the OOB finish - therefore, back to basics and the original plan to play between 1st and 2nd arrow.
So I lined up in the 20th board area and checked what the ball would "want" me to do to get it into the pocket. Within 2 shots I went 2 boards to the right (right shoe tip at 18, aiming at
, and from there reduced my hand position to a straight wrist while controlling length and breakpoint through axis rotation adjustments and hand position changes. This was almost surreal, because it was so easy and effective.
The next 3 games saw a 630 series, including 20 closed frames in a row and with only two open frames in total due to wide open splits while I tried to adjust to the changing conditions on my line with the movement lof my feet. This game strategy seemed to suit the RX1 well - I was able to keep the ball on line and in the pocket just with minimal adjustments (changing axis rotation from 45° to 75° in the course of the session).
On the other side, trying other/deeper lines were not successful - I guess the overall limited hoom potential rather warrants a stable, straight line than a complete re-adjustment on the lane, but this has to be proved through future trials.
With the polished cover, the RX1's overall reaction became much more like that of a reactive piece. It "lost" its smooth, urethane-like arc, its breakpoint became more defined and also the recovery from shots that went too far outside to the gutter has improved. As mentioned before, the ball's length was also considerably improved, but without sacrificing its good predictability and carry.
Positive result!
--------------------
DizzyFugu - Reporting from Germany
Confused by bowling? Check out BR.com's vault of wisdom: the unofficial FAQ section
