Jump to content
IGNORED

Has MyGolfSpy Lost Its Edge?


ChetlovesMer
Note: This thread is 1106 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, Darkfrog said:

I'm not sure using a robot makes the test any better.

Who are the experts they spoke with?

What are the tolerances of the robot, and how was this verified for before/during/after testing?

What is the expected variance in spin, distance, and dispersion based on the swing robot tolerances?

What are the tolerances of the Trackman used to generate the spin, distance, and dispersion data?

Was any data generated to show that the robot delivered the club the same way, within tolerance for every swing? 

Was strike location for every single ball hit verified to be the exact same spot on the club face? How was strike location accounted for  in the data if it varies?

Were Trackman data for face/path/angle of attack accounted for when looking at the spin, distance, and dispersion data from each ball struck?

How many balls of each type to you need to hit to establish statistical significance of the data set, and did they hit this many balls?

Did they prove linearity of performance between swing speeds or is that an assumption?

Did they perform testing with different club designs to eliminate the club type as a variable (e.g., blade vs. hollow body vs. cavity back)?

Was the test done indoors or outdoors? What was the temperature, wind, humidity when each shot was struck? How were environmental conditions controlled and normalized?

I’m not sure what your point is?  Robots are more accurate and consistent than humans.  So far this is the most (or only) comprehensive test I’ve seen.  Which makes it better than just guessing.  
 

so, as far as I (or anyone) is concerned this is the best job of testing available to the public.    But, if someone can provide a better test, I’m certainly excited to read it. 

:tmade:  - SIM2 - Kuro Kage silver 60 shaft
:cobra:  - F9 3W, 15 degree - Fukijara Atmos white tour spec stiff flex shaft

:tmade: - M2 hybrid, 19 degree
:tmade: - GAPR 3 iron - 18degree
:mizuno: MP-H5 4-5 iron, MP-25 6-8 iron, MP-5 9-PW

Miura - 1957 series k-grind - 56 degree
:bettinardi: - 52 degree
:titleist: - Scotty Cameron Newport 2 - Putter

check out my swing here

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Administrator
15 minutes ago, lastings said:

I’m not sure what your point is?

I thought it was pretty obvious.

15 minutes ago, lastings said:

Robots are more accurate and consistent than humans.

Not necessarily. They often are, but what if the way the clubhead attached to the machine was not perfectly secure, and the club face could wobble around slightly. What if it hit the ball +/- 1/2" from the center of the face - many humans could "beat" that.

15 minutes ago, lastings said:

Which makes it better than just guessing.

Now there's a ringing endorsement.

Erik J. Barzeski —  I knock a ball. It goes in a gopher hole. 🏌🏼‍♂️
Director of Instruction Golf Evolution • Owner, The Sand Trap .com • AuthorLowest Score Wins
Golf Digest "Best Young Teachers in America" 2016-17 & "Best in State" 2017-20 • WNY Section PGA Teacher of the Year 2019 :edel: :true_linkswear:

Check Out: New Topics | TST Blog | Golf Terms | Instructional Content | Analyzr | LSW | Instructional Droplets

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

19 minutes ago, iacas said:

Now there's a ringing endorsement.

It's always easy to find flaws in anything, especially when you really want to.     Showing me something better is a real challenge.   
That said, given the marketing budget of companies like callaway, and the consumer traction MyGolfSpy is gaining, if this was a truly flawed test, we probably would have been beaten over the head with it.    My guess is that their raw data and testing methods are more than sufficient to justify their conclusions. 

 

:tmade:  - SIM2 - Kuro Kage silver 60 shaft
:cobra:  - F9 3W, 15 degree - Fukijara Atmos white tour spec stiff flex shaft

:tmade: - M2 hybrid, 19 degree
:tmade: - GAPR 3 iron - 18degree
:mizuno: MP-H5 4-5 iron, MP-25 6-8 iron, MP-5 9-PW

Miura - 1957 series k-grind - 56 degree
:bettinardi: - 52 degree
:titleist: - Scotty Cameron Newport 2 - Putter

check out my swing here

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Administrator
21 minutes ago, lastings said:

Showing me something better is a real challenge.

I don't have to be able to show you something better in order for me to prove that the MGS study sucked.

21 minutes ago, lastings said:

That said, given the marketing budget of companies like callaway, and the consumer traction MyGolfSpy is gaining, if this was a truly flawed test, we probably would have been beaten over the head with it.

Uhm, read the comments section. And those are just the ones they didn't delete.

Also, why the f*** would Callaway bother to refute a goofy Internet site that's biased for Snell, EVNROLL, etc. There's a reason Coke almost never mentions Pepsi, but Pepsi talks about Coke all the time.

MGS hopes that Callaway would actively respond to and engage with them. It would go a long way toward legitimizing MGS as a voice to be listened to. They may have responded occasionally, briefly, but as you note they didn't do much.

Erik J. Barzeski —  I knock a ball. It goes in a gopher hole. 🏌🏼‍♂️
Director of Instruction Golf Evolution • Owner, The Sand Trap .com • AuthorLowest Score Wins
Golf Digest "Best Young Teachers in America" 2016-17 & "Best in State" 2017-20 • WNY Section PGA Teacher of the Year 2019 :edel: :true_linkswear:

Check Out: New Topics | TST Blog | Golf Terms | Instructional Content | Analyzr | LSW | Instructional Droplets

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

3 hours ago, Darkfrog said:

I agree that their tests are poorly done, including the ball test. But it's probably a good move by MGS to not publish any specifics about how they perform their testing and data analysis (which makes them even shadier).

If I were "Big Golf Company X" and my product was not rated as most wanted, if I knew their exact test methods, I would simply repeat the test, likely get different results, and prove that the MGS experiments are poorly designed. Or I would hire some real subject matter experts on experiment design (i.e, scientists, not MGS staff), and have them pick apart everything MGS did wrong. Either way, MGS loses. When they don't say what they did, the worst they get is internet dissent, and their most wanted stamp of approval retains it's significance (i.e., monetary value to their brand).

I see your point. However, I disagree. This is how science works. Let the manufacturers do their own tests and publish their own results. They can't really do that with what MGS provided. Also, we can't really know how good the test if we don't know simple things like how many balls they hit.

3 hours ago, ncates00 said:

I suppose you're attempting to demonstrate bias (post-testing) here?

No, pre-test bias. Snell is a significant advertiser with them. At no point, during the test or during the interview, did they disclose this. If I remember correctly, the MTB-X was sold out right after this test was published. Who knows if there was anything fishy going on (and since they didn't publish all their data, it's impossible to know ...), but that is not a good look.

  • Like 1

-- Daniel

In my bag: :callaway: Paradym :callaway: Epic Flash 3.5W (16 degrees)

:callaway: Rogue Pro 3-PW :edel: SMS Wedges - V-Grind (48, 54, 58):edel: Putter

 :aimpoint:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

my assumption is that they hit enough of each ball to substantiate a valid conclusion, and used a functional robot with a very minimal tolerance for off center hits.  No clue why they would ever put that much effort into a test where the data wasn't reliable enough to substantiate an accurate conclusion. 
I will use the information drawn here to help inform my golf ball decisions (Bridgestone Tour BX).  because, frankly, no one else is giving me any other information at all.   

:tmade:  - SIM2 - Kuro Kage silver 60 shaft
:cobra:  - F9 3W, 15 degree - Fukijara Atmos white tour spec stiff flex shaft

:tmade: - M2 hybrid, 19 degree
:tmade: - GAPR 3 iron - 18degree
:mizuno: MP-H5 4-5 iron, MP-25 6-8 iron, MP-5 9-PW

Miura - 1957 series k-grind - 56 degree
:bettinardi: - 52 degree
:titleist: - Scotty Cameron Newport 2 - Putter

check out my swing here

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Administrator
22 minutes ago, lastings said:

my assumption

Oy.

That’s the problem man!

Erik J. Barzeski —  I knock a ball. It goes in a gopher hole. 🏌🏼‍♂️
Director of Instruction Golf Evolution • Owner, The Sand Trap .com • AuthorLowest Score Wins
Golf Digest "Best Young Teachers in America" 2016-17 & "Best in State" 2017-20 • WNY Section PGA Teacher of the Year 2019 :edel: :true_linkswear:

Check Out: New Topics | TST Blog | Golf Terms | Instructional Content | Analyzr | LSW | Instructional Droplets

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

20 minutes ago, iacas said:

Oy.

That’s the problem man!

It's not a problem at all, if there is nothing else to compare it to.   I can't even take 20 boxes of balls to the range and test things myself if I wanted to.   (i mean I could, but thats pretty expensive).   I have to get data from somewhere.  So, until you go out and do some testing that you can get behind and then publish the data, I've gotta take them at their word.   because it's theirs, or Jimmy the guy from my club that swears by Maxfli's.  those are my options. 

Edited by lastings

:tmade:  - SIM2 - Kuro Kage silver 60 shaft
:cobra:  - F9 3W, 15 degree - Fukijara Atmos white tour spec stiff flex shaft

:tmade: - M2 hybrid, 19 degree
:tmade: - GAPR 3 iron - 18degree
:mizuno: MP-H5 4-5 iron, MP-25 6-8 iron, MP-5 9-PW

Miura - 1957 series k-grind - 56 degree
:bettinardi: - 52 degree
:titleist: - Scotty Cameron Newport 2 - Putter

check out my swing here

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Administrator
17 minutes ago, lastings said:

It's not a problem at all

Oy.

That’s the problem with MGS. They are relying on you making assumptions and calling it “scientific” despite no real evidence that shows it to be all that scientific.

The topic is about MGS not you.

Erik J. Barzeski —  I knock a ball. It goes in a gopher hole. 🏌🏼‍♂️
Director of Instruction Golf Evolution • Owner, The Sand Trap .com • AuthorLowest Score Wins
Golf Digest "Best Young Teachers in America" 2016-17 & "Best in State" 2017-20 • WNY Section PGA Teacher of the Year 2019 :edel: :true_linkswear:

Check Out: New Topics | TST Blog | Golf Terms | Instructional Content | Analyzr | LSW | Instructional Droplets

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Moderator
13 hours ago, lastings said:

It's not a problem at all, if there is nothing else to compare it to.   I can't even take 20 boxes of balls to the range and test things myself if I wanted to.   (i mean I could, but thats pretty expensive).   I have to get data from somewhere.  So, until you go out and do some testing that you can get behind and then publish the data, I've gotta take them at their word.   because it's theirs, or Jimmy the guy from my club that swears by Maxfli's.  those are my options. 

Taking them at their word is the issue. Without showing actual data done with proper scientific methods, their data can have bias. It is not necessarily on purpose either, it is just not valid from a statistical standpoint.

It is a daunting task to collect the data with proper methods, which is why they take shortcuts to make deadlines. If we understand that when we read their report, then their review is more like a restaurant review, which is subjective versus objective.

  • Upvote 1

Scott

Titleist, Edel, Scotty Cameron Putter, Snell - AimPoint - Evolvr - MirrorVision

My Swing Thread

boogielicious - Adjective describing the perfect surf wave

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

3 hours ago, boogielicious said:

Taking them at their word is the issue. Without showing actual data done with proper scientific methods, their data can have bias. It is not necessarily on purpose either, it is just not valid from a statistical standpoint.

It is a daunting task to collect the data with proper methods, which is why they take shortcuts to make deadlines. If we understand that when we read their report, then their review is more like a restaurant review, which is subjective versus objective.

And really no different than that of “Jimmy at the club”...

In David's bag....

Driver: Titleist 910 D-3;  9.5* Diamana Kai'li
3-Wood: Titleist 910F;  15* Diamana Kai'li
Hybrids: Titleist 910H 19* and 21* Diamana Kai'li
Irons: Titleist 695cb 5-Pw

Wedges: Scratch 51-11 TNC grind, Vokey SM-5's;  56-14 F grind and 60-11 K grind
Putter: Scotty Cameron Kombi S
Ball: ProV1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Their attitude on social media and in the comments really puts me off.  And their article on union green reads like an advertisement but they're not up front about it.  Hard to take them seriously 

Dan

:tmade: R11s 10.5*, Adila RIP Phenom 60g Stiff
:ping: G20 3W
:callaway: Diablo 3H
:ping:
i20 4-U, KBS Tour Stiff
:vokey: Vokey SM4 54.14 
:vokey: Vokey :) 58.11

:scotty_cameron: Newport 2
:sunmountain: Four 5

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

On 2/14/2020 at 1:27 PM, DeadMan said:

However, I disagree. This is how science works.

I think we're both saying the same thing. Maybe it came across as if I were defending MGS's tactic, but I was trying to make the point that what MGS does isn't anything close to science, in fact it is quite antithetical to how science works. If MGS were really scientific in any regard, they would publish their test methods and all the raw data, and encourage experts to prove their conclusions wrong.

On 2/14/2020 at 1:27 PM, DeadMan said:

Let the manufacturers do their own tests and publish their own results.

I'm 99.9% sure that ball manufacturers have extensive data on how their balls performs, probably much more rigorously tested than MGS. I wouldn't be shocked if the big manufacturers like Acushnet have extensive data on their competitor's products as well. Of course, publishing it is a different matter.

  • Upvote 1

-Peter

  • :titleist: TSR2
  • :callaway: Paradym, 4W
  • :pxg: GEN4 0317X, Hybrid
  • :srixon: ZX 3-iron, ZX5 4-AW
  • :cleveland:  RTX Zipcore 54 & 58
  • L.A.B. Golf Directed Force 2.1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • 1 year later...

Don't get me wrong. I appreciate what MyGolfSpy tries to do. I also appreciate what they and others like them have done. 
More and More I'm disappointed in them. 

Here's my latest beef: 

 


Are you in the market for a new spikeless golf shoe? If so, we have tested the golf shoes on the market to determine which ones you should consider.


Please correct me if I'm wrong. But they didn't even test True LinksWear spikeless shoes in this test. What the Hell, MGS? I've seen a couple of your guys wearing True Linkswear shoes, why wouldn't you include them in this test? 

My bag is an ever-changing combination of clubs. 

A mix I am forever tinkering with. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

On 2/14/2020 at 5:35 PM, iacas said:

Oy.

That’s the problem with MGS. They are relying on you making assumptions and calling it “scientific” despite no real evidence that shows it to be all that scientific.

The topic is about MGS not you.

They are also hostile to anyone who questions their methods. I did once, and they went off on me in the comments section not their website. 

I was able to download their data for the 2021 drivers. I did not like their methodology in how they analyzed dispersion. I felt like they didn't take into account the players tendency for left or right bias. I don't think the weed out enough mishits. They have an outlier data  point, but they allow sub 1.35 smash factor for drivers to not be considered an outlier? That is a horrible strike. 

At least they publish some data. I do like to see the ball speed, and shot area stuff. I like it when they publish drivers for higher swing speeds, at least they are breaking it out so you can see if certain drivers perform better under different variables. 

 

Matt Dougherty, P.E.
 fasdfa dfdsaf 

What's in My Bag
Driver; :pxg: 0311 Gen 5,  3-Wood: 
:titleist: 917h3 ,  Hybrid:  :titleist: 915 2-Hybrid,  Irons: Sub 70 TAIII Fordged
Wedges: :edel: (52, 56, 60),  Putter: :edel:,  Ball: :snell: MTB,  Shoe: :true_linkswear:,  Rangfinder: :leupold:
Bag: :ping:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

1 hour ago, ChetlovesMer said:

Don't get me wrong. I appreciate what MyGolfSpy tries to do. I also appreciate what they and others like them have done. 
More and More I'm disappointed in them. 

Here's my latest beef: 

 


Are you in the market for a new spikeless golf shoe? If so, we have tested the golf shoes on the market to determine which ones you should consider.


Please correct me if I'm wrong. But they didn't even test True LinksWear spikeless shoes in this test. What the Hell, MGS? I've seen a couple of your guys wearing True Linkswear shoes, why wouldn't you include them in this test? 

I may be wrong, but I think they only test what companies send them to test.   So, if TRUE isn't in there, that would have been TRUE's decision not to take part.  

Also, I noticed that they have now started publishing all of their testing data.  downloadable to CSV (a big complaint from folks around here).  

looks like for the Most Wanted Driver test they are hitting between 406 and 433 balls with each Driver.  

 

:tmade:  - SIM2 - Kuro Kage silver 60 shaft
:cobra:  - F9 3W, 15 degree - Fukijara Atmos white tour spec stiff flex shaft

:tmade: - M2 hybrid, 19 degree
:tmade: - GAPR 3 iron - 18degree
:mizuno: MP-H5 4-5 iron, MP-25 6-8 iron, MP-5 9-PW

Miura - 1957 series k-grind - 56 degree
:bettinardi: - 52 degree
:titleist: - Scotty Cameron Newport 2 - Putter

check out my swing here

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

21 minutes ago, saevel25 said:

I was able to download their data for the 2021 drivers. I did not like their methodology in how they analyzed dispersion. I felt like they didn't take into account the players tendency for left or right bias. I don't think the weed out enough mishits. They have an outlier data  point, but they allow sub 1.35 smash factor for drivers to not be considered an outlier? That is a horrible strike. 

At least they publish some data. I do like to see the ball speed, and shot area stuff. I like it when they publish drivers for higher swing speeds, at least they are breaking it out so you can see if certain drivers perform better under different variables. 

 

 

i saw in the comments that they are doing a ball test this year.   I'll be most interested to see if they publish all the data on that as well.  

 

:tmade:  - SIM2 - Kuro Kage silver 60 shaft
:cobra:  - F9 3W, 15 degree - Fukijara Atmos white tour spec stiff flex shaft

:tmade: - M2 hybrid, 19 degree
:tmade: - GAPR 3 iron - 18degree
:mizuno: MP-H5 4-5 iron, MP-25 6-8 iron, MP-5 9-PW

Miura - 1957 series k-grind - 56 degree
:bettinardi: - 52 degree
:titleist: - Scotty Cameron Newport 2 - Putter

check out my swing here

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

(edited)
1 hour ago, lastings said:

I may be wrong, but I think they only test what companies send them to test.   So, if TRUE isn't in there, that would have been TRUE's decision not to take part.  

Hmm... maybe. But MGS has this huge dissertation on their webpage about how they go through "standard" channels to buy everything. That way the manufacturer can't seen them "better than normal stuff." They go on to say how they have friends and family members purchase stuff for them just to be certain to hide the identity of the buyer. That way it protects the randomness of the selection of the products they are testing. 

I remember them going on and on in their ball testing podcast about how they were worried Callaway would somehow find out who was purchasing balls for them and then hand pick a dozen of their best balls to send them just to be certain to get good test results. One of the guys was saying he had his grandmother's neighbor (or something like that) buy stuff for him so the manufacturers couldn't know it was going to MGS. 

Edited by ChetlovesMer

My bag is an ever-changing combination of clubs. 

A mix I am forever tinkering with. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Note: This thread is 1106 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • TST Partners

    TourStriker PlaneMate
    Golfer's Journal
    ShotScope
    The Stack System
    FlightScope Mevo
    Direct: Mevo, Mevo+, and Pro Package.

    Coupon Codes (save 10-15%): "IACAS" for Mevo/Stack, "IACASPLUS" for Mevo+/Pro Package, and "THESANDTRAP" for ShotScope.
  • Posts

    • In general, granting free relief anywhere on the course isn't recommended.  Similarly, when marking GUR, the VSGA and MAPGA generally don't mark areas that are well away from the intended playing lines, no matter how poor the conditions.  If you hit it far enough offline, you don't necessarily deserve free relief.  And you don't have to damage clubs, take unplayable relief, take the stroke, and drop the ball in a better spot.
    • If it's not broken don't fix it. If you want to add grooves to it just because of looks that's your choice of course. Grooves are cut into putter faces to reduce skid, the roll faced putter is designed to do the same thing. I'm no expert but it seems counter productive to add grooves to the roll face. Maybe you can have it sand-blasted or something to clean up the face. Take a look at Tigers putter, its beat to hell but he still uses it.     
    • I get trying to limit relief to the fairway, but how many roots do you typically find in the fairway? Our local rule allows for relief from roots & rocks anywhere on the course (that is in play). My home course has quite a few 100 year old oaks that separate the fairways. Lift and move the ball no closer to the hole. None of us want to damage clubs.
    • Hello, I've been playing a Teardrop td17 F.C. putter for many years and love it. It still putts and feels as good or  better than any of the new putters I've tried and it's in excellent condition except the face has dings in it ever since I bought it used that kind of bother me. I was just wondering if it's possible to have some really shallow horizontal grooves milled into the face on a "roll face" putter. I think I would rather spend some money on it instead of trying to get used to a new putter.  Thanks
    • I agree with @klineka & @DaveP043 above.  When a new member first joins the club they cold be told that they are not eligible for tournaments until they have an established HCP.  As you said, it only takes a few rounds.  If they do not to post HCP that was their choice and choices have consequences.  If playing in the tournament is important to them then they should step up and establish an HCP.  Maybe they miss the 1st tournament, is that a real big deal?  And if it is a "Big Deal" to them then they had the opportunity to establish the HCP. As for not knowing how to report for HCP I assume your club has a pro and they should be able to assist in getting the scores reported and I suspect out of state courses may also have staff that can assist if asked.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Welcome to TST! Signing up is free, and you'll see fewer ads and can talk with fellow golf enthusiasts! By using TST, you agree to our Terms of Use, our Privacy Policy, and our Guidelines.

The popup will be closed in 10 seconds...