Is there a way for Trackman to give the actual face calculation on the shot and the face calcuation if the shot were on a center hit? (I know it does this if the shot is an on center hit - duh!) For example, if the face calculation is -1.9 because I hit it on the heel could it also give me the calculation for the face angle assuming that shot was hit in the center with no gear effect? Might be useful to see this information to better understand how I'm delivering the club into impact. I don't know if Trackman could reverse calculate a face angle for a center hit from the actual hit and face angle. This is not a knock on Trackman's calculation at all, just the more information I have the better I learn.
Trackman Face Calculation - Center Hit - No Gear Effect
- Thread starter cwdlaw223
- Start date
- Status
www.brianmanzella.com/golfing-discussions/16630-manzella-isms.html
From the above, are you asking for the face at impact, rather than the effective clubface?
From the above, are you asking for the face at impact, rather than the effective clubface?
Yep, I hadn't appreciated the effect of path until I watched Brain's recent vimeo. Plus there is always vertical gear effect.
I can see why you're asking, but it still makes more sense to me to start with what the ball sees and work backwards.
Seems to me that the D-plane and the actual spin axis are seldom the same. Any comments?
How could it know that because main part of the face numbers are counted from the ball flight?
Brian Manzella
Administrator
What FACE number are we talking about??
The horizontal or vertical?
The horizontal or vertical?
All of them and I bet you know and understand that also.
I didn't want to say this earlier, but now when there is more and more people all around talking about that I can be straight also. Those devices can't see the club face and they can't see the impact. That's so clear if you only understand the technique used and where the unit is situated.
They don't make those devices useless or bad, the result is still there and when you work with those you can learn to read the results and fix the shot to make right pattern. So they for perfectly to that the results they give are just right enough to make the needed changes for players and get best out of them.
Brian Manzella
Administrator
Tapio,
Which FlightScope model do you have?
Which FlightScope model do you have?
Still that X2 like before.
Don't understand what? And what the heck I'm guessing. I'm using FS so are you saying that's guessing??
I try to be so clear as possible: Because main part of the face orientation is calculated from ball flight like launch angle, direction spin etc. and the ball starts the flight only once, so only once we get those numbers. That's effective face angle and so on, because it's based on math and not to the seeing or measuring the face itself. That's why it can't really well even say something about the heel or toe impact, but still calculate even those quite well from the ball flight.
I once asked you have you hit any rabbit killers with those devices and what numbers you get then. I give you the answer: pure zeroes to the face then because it's confused when it sees some ch speed and can't find the math function to fit to that ball flight.
Tapio -
Do you believe the calculation of face angle by these machines is incorrect? If so, why?
If we don't have these machines and their calculations we're just guessing about what the face angle would be. This isn't about you, it's about everyone just guessing without a device like Flightscope or Trackamn (or something else that comes down the pike).
My original request for two numbers could be possible. Just pull out the gear effect from the calculation. It's a calculation so the calculation can be changed. I wouldn't automatically say it can't be done, mith not vs. cannot are vastly different.
My questions are not intended to criticize you or your work, just to understand the context of your posts on this thread.
Do you believe the calculation of face angle by these machines is incorrect? If so, why?
If we don't have these machines and their calculations we're just guessing about what the face angle would be. This isn't about you, it's about everyone just guessing without a device like Flightscope or Trackamn (or something else that comes down the pike).
My original request for two numbers could be possible. Just pull out the gear effect from the calculation. It's a calculation so the calculation can be changed. I wouldn't automatically say it can't be done, mith not vs. cannot are vastly different.
My questions are not intended to criticize you or your work, just to understand the context of your posts on this thread.
Last edited:
Never said they are incorrect. Actually no one knows how correct they are, but it doesn't mean anything if they are or not. Still more is more and less is less. You understand? Maybe not but I still try.
If you get ball flight which starts to the right and curves to the right, you can see those devices giving you some numbers for path and face direction (also AoA but lets go with those two now) When you learn how to use those devices and read the numbers and you can understand those numbers, you can start to fix someones swing based on that information and for sure we need that. When you know how to work with those numbers you know which to change first and how it affects to the other also. You know the good numbers so you will guide your student to those numbers and they will get better. So in that case it doesn't matter if for example FS sees face 2 degree open if the reality would be 4,3 open. Your goal is for example to get it 0,5 closed and path 2 in, so you know which way to move and how much.
But my comment was to your question at first time and now you are taking this debate away from it again. You have been asking if there could be more post impact measurements or if there could be heel/toe measurement included to report. The answer is no, because they can't see it from that direction.
I'm only worried when people start to make science with those devices without understanding those limits they got. There is so much more at impact and there is no device on the market that could tell us all things that matters. So they are tools for teaching and great for that, but not tools to make real research or science, because some parts are calculated by math functions, not really measured, and also some measurements still misses definitions how and from what period. Have you seen them telling what was the club head speed at separation point relative to the hit point?
Last edited:
Frans@France
New
Maybe with the FS but the TM will give you no data at all as soon as there is not enough data to make a correct calculation!
- Status