Jim Kobylinski
Super Moderator
Michael Jacobs can correct me BUT I'm pretty sure the older version/software of flightscope had issues but the new one is fine.
Where did the "Ideas" come from?
- Thread starter Brian Manzella
- Start date
- Status
Michael Jacobs can correct me BUT I'm pretty sure the older version/software of flightscope had issues but the new one is fine.
Brian Manzella
Administrator
What the heck does any of this have to do with anything???
Geez....
The video was about WHERE we got the "Ideas."
THE END.
Geez....
The video was about WHERE we got the "Ideas."
THE END.
The good ol' argument that if the tool is not measuring correctly, then the data gained cannot support the conclusion.
Brian Manzella
Administrator
I have a blockbuster video explanation coming out soon that will DESTROY all the "TrackMan measures the bottom vector of the D-Plane (angle of attack + resultant path) but calculates the top vector (dynamic loft and face angle)" folks so it can't be any good.
That's true about calculating the top vector, but.....
This new revelation will.....
Make them rethink their whole flawed non-arguement.
I didn't say anything about issues. I know quite much about those devises and just wanted to say, once again, that it's not right or wrong, it can also be just different. Same with 3D devices. We have to understand how the measurement is done to be able to compare two things even roughly.
Brian Manzella
Administrator
I think the question I asked TeeAce is a fair one as well....
I'll ask it again:
"Does your '4D' machine measure forces and torques?"
I'll ask it again:
"Does your '4D' machine measure forces and torques?"
Is there a thread dealing with this particular point that a kind soul could throw my way? I do not fully understand how a dude can hit 6* down on it, but still pick it. I have been meaning to look this up. Any help is appreciated.
Brian Manzella
Administrator
I'll give you a better one:
You can hit down on it 10° and top it.
And another:
You can hit up on it and take a divot.
Now you are just a cat with a ball of yarn!
I actually think I accomplished the first scenario today! Sitting down in light rough, I went down after it with a hybrid...hit it on the head. I am a decent stick, so I was helluva confused.
Last edited:
Sorry if I didn't answer, but there is so much going on. No for sure it doesn't and why should it even be able to do that?
Would be nice to see something that measures forces and tongues without anything attached to player and club.
But Brian you can be fair and if you don't know the answer, don't get mad about the question. I feel you take many things very offensive when they are not, but outside of what you know.
I meet lot of people in forums and IRL who has strong opinions of many things. The will say TPI is measuring incorrect, we measure incorrect as well does the K-vest, Trackman is measuring incorrect, as well as Flightshope. NO THEY ARE NOT!
They are not perfect, but they are doing their job as meant to do. If you take our, FS and TM AoA, they might be different, because of definitions, but not one of them is wrong. One way can be better than the other, but at least we should know what is the difference. Then we got people who believe one device is the only right and others are giving wrong numbers and I get crazy with them, because they are just screaming out that they know nothing.
lia41985
New member
This.
This is Teeace's point. How do you define "hitting down" and "hitting up". Clearly if you "hit up" and take a divot after the ball you have hot really "hit up". But you may well have had a positive AoA.
This is a ridiculous argument. TM and FS have been compiling data from Tour Players (experts in their field) for years. The data I get from my student via Flightscope X2 is directly comparable to those numbers. It's apples to apples. If someone comes along and comes up with another formula (or machine) that calculates any of these measurements, it would be unusable until everyone started using the same formula or machine.
I think no one has said anything which is against that. Of course there is same data in at every FS and every TM, but there can be difference between FS and TM, or some other devices, because there is no standard how to define AoA. Thats why it's not possible to say that some devices get worn and some get it right.
Brian Manzella
Administrator
Of course I know "4d" doesn't measure forces and torques.
Rhetorical.....
That's why we have REAL GOLF SCIENTISTS!!!!!
Not a guy using video taking guesses.
Not a guy using a 3D machine (4d included) and taking GUESSES.
No, real scientists.
That's where we get our stuff.
THE END.
Rhetorical.....
That's why we have REAL GOLF SCIENTISTS!!!!!
Not a guy using video taking guesses.
Not a guy using a 3D machine (4d included) and taking GUESSES.
No, real scientists.
That's where we get our stuff.
THE END.
lia41985
New member
The end? So you aren't going to give an explanation as to how Trackman or Flightscope measures angle of attack? Why not? Do you even have an explanation? If not, that may be because this is proprietary information, which is what I was saying before. You're "better one" scenarios don't really surprise me. With regards to the measurement, there seems to be a dependency on where the ball is struck by the club. So, if you strike down 10 degrees (however again that is measured, a question that still stands) on the ball at a point that's on the top-forward portion of the ball you'll top it. I just don't get why this is "the end"--I thought this place was about finding answers and learning information? I can't think of a question much more innocuous than what has been asked and yet the fact that the discussion has been summarily ended will inevitably rub people the wrong way and it should because it's, at best, evasive.
Kevin Shields
Super Moderator
My guess is THE END wasn't directed at the question about Trackman measurements.
- Status