|
Re: Brunswick Evil Siege
Ball: Brunswick Evil Siege
Layout:
Pin 5” from PAP above fingers
45-degree locator line angle
(Dual-angle: 45 by 5” by 30)
No XH
Initial Surface Preparation:
Box finish
Purpose:
To serve as a “go-to” ball from the Siege, and to provide me with a pin-above asymmetric for use on more medium conditions.
Why this ball?
With its Propel Pearl cover, the Evil Siege is intended to be cleaner through the front part of the lane than the Siege.
Observations:
The first time I threw the Evil Siege was during a practice session on a fresh house pattern at a center with five-year-old Pro Anvilanes. I started the session by throwing the C-(System) 2.5 to establish a baseline. Fresher patterns really aren't the strong suit for the 2.5, and while I was able to get to the pocket, I had to be careful with my speed if I wanted to get corners out. I then switched to the Evil Siege, and from the same line, I had a much more even look at the lane from front to back, which resulted in much better pin carry. The Evil was still clean in front, but picked up the midlane quicker, and went into a strong roll in back. My carry improved further when I bumped one-and-one right and went with a firmer release.
I've used the Evil Siege twice more at the same center in a second-shift league. The first time was after a strip-and-oil over a tougher tournament pattern, so there wasn't quite as much hold or free hook as we usually get in this league. Because of that, we all had to keep the ball in a narrower range to the break, and be careful with our speed if we wanted to carry. With its midlane read, the Evil Siege made this condition somewhat easier to play, as it helped to open up the track without over-bouncing off of the dry boards. The second time was on a pair where there was a significant amount of friction. I was afraid that I might not be able to get my feet to the left and still get an good angle on the corners, but this turned out not to be a problem. The Evil remained clean through the front part of the lane as the condition broke down, and didn't bog down in back when I had to give up the pocket.
I also used the Evil Siege at a center with HPL in front and older wood in back, on a fresh house pattern. The Evil did a good job of staying on line through the front part of the lane, and was surprisingly sharp off of the break. On this condition, I found that I could get my feet further left and send it to the dry, or square up and play a more direct line through the oil, and have enough angle to the pocket to carry the corners either way.
Conclusions:
For the last few years, I've been seeking a reaction similar to what I used to get from the old asymmetrical Zones. The Wild Ride gives me that sort of reaction, but has been better for me on conditions where there is a defined dry area, either down lane or outside. For me, the Evil Siege has been like a stronger Wild Ride, for it has that old Zone look while being capable of handling more volume, and it has a similar presence through the pin deck that the Siege has. Also, as with the Siege, I'm not seeing an inside limitation with the Evil, for I can chase oil inside as the condition breaks down without losing recovery or hit.
For me, the Evil Siege fits nicely between my pin-above Wild Card and pin-above Wild Thing. The Evil is a bit longer and more angular than the Wild Card, but doesn't push quite as far as the Wild Thing does. Also, the Evil Siege will give me the extra length I need on conditions when the Siege starts to burn too quickly and not make the turn.
NOTE: The opinions expressed are solely those of the writer and not of Brunswick Corporation.
|
