Brian Manzella
Administrator
<iframe src="http://player.vimeo.com/video/34394940?title=0&byline=0&portrait=0" width="700" height="473" frameborder="0" webkitAllowFullScreen mozallowfullscreen allowFullScreen></iframe>
It's Math Anyway (with a Brian Manzella video)
- Thread starter Brian Manzella
- Start date
- Status
Fantastic video! You can't see the center of gravity of the clubface in video let alone the path. You can only estimate this stuff with the naked eye. I suspect we're dealing with milimeters on the clubface for some of these measurements and you can't see that type of detail with video no matter how fast the video.
I'm still amazed at Trackman and what it can do, especially for the better player.
I'm still amazed at Trackman and what it can do, especially for the better player.
What about if someone makes the radar device that is facing toward the face? Or combination of two where one is watching the ball and one for the club head?
And no one has yet answered my question about AoA. Is there someone who knows that because i'm really interested about that?
And no one has yet answered my question about AoA. Is there someone who knows that because i'm really interested about that?
Attack angle is MEASURED (not calculated) by Trackman. What's your question about attack angle?
If someone made such a forward measuring device another person would come along and say the ball blocks the clubface and therefore it can't be measured properly. You would probably still need to calculate face angle because face angle at impact is affected by gear effect as explained by Brian in his video. If you put something in the club maybe that would work.
If someone made such a forward measuring device another person would come along and say the ball blocks the clubface and therefore it can't be measured properly. You would probably still need to calculate face angle because face angle at impact is affected by gear effect as explained by Brian in his video. If you put something in the club maybe that would work.
My question has been if anyone knows the definition what they use for AoA in TM or FS. How much before impact and how far after it.
What you said about gear at impact is just interesting point. It would be something I'd really like to in my scientistic view. And radar systems are only way (maybe some others but not video) to measure that with accurate. Maybe part of the future and maybe telling something new, maybe not.
Brian Manzella
Administrator
I'll ask the question to TrackMan on Tuesday about the where in the Angle of Attack.
But, the measured vs. calculated face should now be put to bed (even though I still have more ammo). Those whop were spouting off try to take the loss like a man.
But, the measured vs. calculated face should now be put to bed (even though I still have more ammo). Those whop were spouting off try to take the loss like a man.
Frankly it is now clearer than clear that the face angle thing is an IRRELEVANCY.
Why? For the simple reason that THE WHOLE D-PLANE MODEL is an ESTIMATION.
Why? Because GEAR EFFECT CANNOT MEASURED.
Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but please don't just tell me I'm wrong because I'm saying something negative about high end LMs.
Why? For the simple reason that THE WHOLE D-PLANE MODEL is an ESTIMATION.
Why? Because GEAR EFFECT CANNOT MEASURED.
Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but please don't just tell me I'm wrong because I'm saying something negative about high end LMs.
mgranato
New
I'm 95% sure who told me this, but I won't mention the name because I'm not 100% sure. And if it's not true I hope to be corrected...
TM's reported AA data includes measuring after impact, while FS's reported data does not include measuring after the impact collision. This was the explanation given why TM doesn't like divots, but FS doesn't mind them. Again, I have not tried to have this information independently confirmed.
Dariusz J.
New member
Naah. Gravity is not a theory, it is a real force. The fact that noone can explain it does not make it is unreal.
Cheers
Prove that it exists! You can't prove it with mathematical certainty but that's what certain detractors want from Trackman (and the subtle point of my post). There are certain scientific truths that are built upon faith that can't be proven with exacting certainty but we accept these truths in life.
Some people still believe the sun revolves around the earth! Geocentrists.
Still believe it is not a theory? Read this: http://www.philvaz.com/apologetics/p67.htm
I take it as fact just as I do that logic, language and mathematics are real.
Last edited:
Dariusz J.
New member
Throw a stone up and let it fall on your head. What better prove do you need ?
What an universal truth as gravity has with a simple tool as Trackman - beats me. What geocentrists have in common with gravity - beats me as well (my countryman Copernicus could have answered it better)
Happy New Year !
Brian Manzella
Administrator
What a friggin' joke all of this stuff is.
TEACH A WORLD-CLASS PLAYER on a TrackMan, someone who can tell the diff between 0° and 1.5° and CAN DO IT, teach 'em 80 places up the world rankings using the D-Plane and then call me in the morning.
Otherwise—like they say at Norman playground after you lose—SIT DOWN!
TEACH A WORLD-CLASS PLAYER on a TrackMan, someone who can tell the diff between 0° and 1.5° and CAN DO IT, teach 'em 80 places up the world rankings using the D-Plane and then call me in the morning.
Otherwise—like they say at Norman playground after you lose—SIT DOWN!
You know how else we know gravity works....? Because TRACKMAN measures the ball coming down, as well as going up......
A delicious juxtaposition, don't you think?
God knows I'm no TRACKMAN expert, and I don't want to involve myself in a launch monitor war here, but to the TRACKMAN naysayers:
What would be a good model to allay your concerns? I'm really just interested in what ideas are out there. Don't know enough to involve myself in a discourse...Really just asking out of interest and to further my own knowledge.
Thanks
A delicious juxtaposition, don't you think?
God knows I'm no TRACKMAN expert, and I don't want to involve myself in a launch monitor war here, but to the TRACKMAN naysayers:
What would be a good model to allay your concerns? I'm really just interested in what ideas are out there. Don't know enough to involve myself in a discourse...Really just asking out of interest and to further my own knowledge.
Thanks
I was testing my FS few days ago and seems the after impact level has big influence to the results. So big, that even about same angle to the ball but low and long follow through gave different results than sharply up taken ch after impact. So even the ch that seems to come to impact bit negative can get positive number because it's raising very soon.
@cwdlaw223: Have to say you are the true believer
, but measured is not the right answer. Anyway happy new year from here.. from 2012
mjstrong
New
Just curious: How did you verify the different CH behaviours (low & long vs. sharply upwards), aside from feel?
ZAP
New
Interesting video. Seems to me that while there might not be a perfect system to measure exactly what the club is doing at this point.
BUT(and that is a huge but) TM and for that matter FS are a huge step forward for golfers. Affordability is the big drawback.
Hopefully it will get to the point where it is an App on a smart phone. If you would have told me 20 years ago that nearly everyone would have a phone in their pocket and be able to send pictures across the country instantly I would have called you crazy. Who knows what is possible?
BUT(and that is a huge but) TM and for that matter FS are a huge step forward for golfers. Affordability is the big drawback.
Hopefully it will get to the point where it is an App on a smart phone. If you would have told me 20 years ago that nearly everyone would have a phone in their pocket and be able to send pictures across the country instantly I would have called you crazy. Who knows what is possible?
Brian Manzella
Administrator
- Status