A Year of GEARS

[iacas]

Over the past year, many people have asked me how my instruction has changed since I got GEARS (an incredibly accurate fully 3D swing capture system).

I've been aware of GEARS since it was introduced at a PGA Show in 2014. I'd had previous experience with the TaylorMade MATT (Motion Analysis Technology by TaylorMade) system when I visited Reynolds Plantation for the launch of the TP line of golf balls (you can see the suit and some clubs in one of the photos there, and a video of the MATT here), and MATT played a role in GEARS (you'll notice the similarities) via Michael Neff.

(I believe that's AMG's Shaun Webb at about 2:50 taking some swings on the GEARS.)

Anyway, when GEARS was introduced, we considered getting one at Golf Evolution. Ultimately, we did not for a variety of reasons, but high on the list was that… we weren't entirely sure that our golfers were ready for such a thing. The added cost, the added time… it was going to be a lot to ask of my golfers seven years prior. I also didn't teach quite as much then as I do now.

That was the right call at the time, just as I think it was the right call to finally get a GEARS last year, even though local golfers still don't really understand technology. I have said before that Erie is about ten years behind everywhere else, and that's still true. AMG has done a lot to show off what you can do in GEARS, so I've gotten a number of students who have traveled to Erie from two or three hours away. Plus, the software has advanced beyond some of the concerns we had at the time back in 2014 or so.

---

Now that I've had GEARS for a year (plus), many have asked me: how has my teaching changed? I can answer that in a few ways.

First, I'll tell a lot of people that "I could see the stuff GEARS shows you before" because I exist in the real world in 3D, so I could "see" that someone was bending their right elbow too much, or that their hand path was bad, or whatever. I of course didn't have the measurement capabilities that GEARS has with my eyes or a camera, but I could "see" it because I have depth perception, so what I see on a camera after the fact is not just that — I can put that against what I see with my eyes.

Still, there are ways in which my teaching has changed a bit. I think the main ways are as follows.

No Argument

Let's say a student over-bent his right elbow during the backswing. I might say to him "let's have you make a swing where it bends less than 70° instead of the roughly 120° you're doing now." So the person makes a change, it feels different, but it wasn't really too different — maybe the golfer bent it later (before it bent a ton at the end), or maybe they didn't hinge their wrists as much, or they didn't turn their shoulders as much… whatever. To them, something was different. So when I'd say "no, no, that was almost the same, let's try it again," part of me has wondered if the golfer is thinking "what's he talking about? I definitely did that one different like he asked. Doing it five times as much is crazy. That can't be right. What's he even talking about?"

After GEARS, it's a bit of a joke that I just point at the screen and show them whatever the number is that we're trying to change, and they can't really argue with that. "Oh, you bent your elbow 122° before, and that last swing felt like it stayed straight, but still ended up bending 110°?" They'll see the number and believe it far more readily than they'd believe me, even if I had the video to show them.

Whatever "priority piece" someone has, I generally isolate it to a number or two, and my job remains to get them to do it. GEARS removes the doubt about whether I'm being truthful, about whether they "did it" or not, and quickly makes golfers aware of how extreme something often has to be to make the necessary change.

Accurate Measurements

I might have been able to see "in the real world" that someone's elbow bent "too much," or that their hips slid back "too far" for "too long" into the backswing, or that their left knee didn't bend "enough," or… whatever, but I couldn't put a number to it with < 0.2mm or < 0.1° accuracy.

GEARS gives me that accuracy. And even though I'm looking at the trail elbow, everything else is being measured as well — so I can see how the bending of the trail elbow affects everything else the golfer is doing.

The Ideal Camera(s)

When doing a lesson with a camera, it's impossible to put the camera in the exact right place every time. I take a lot of care to get it as good as I can, but especially with better players, if you're off an inch or two, that can make a difference. Even if you're one inch inside on one recording, and an inch outside on another, that swing-to-swing inconsistency can surface as different "looks" to the swing:

Also, there's just one of me with one camera (most of the time). Though there are systems that will run multiple cameras at once… they're often a bit kludgy, overkill (you don't always need them all going at once), and lower frame rate (few are higher than even 120 FPS).

GEARS offers two camera-related perks:

• Perfect camera angles.
• Every camera angle.

The camera angles and positioning in GEARS is perfect. Perfectly down the line, perfectly face-on, perfect from any of the six views (above, below, rear, and from the target in addition to the traditional face-on/caddie and down-the-line). Because it's software, the camera can "move" to whatever the perfect angle with perfect alignment. And these perfect views exist for literally infinite camera views, I get any camera view I want. If I want to look at something, I can whip the camera around virtually, even while the avatar is swinging, and see whatever I want to see.

If I'm working with a student primarily in the "down the line" view, but he says "how's that look face-on?," it's one click away. For example, sometimes something like increasing palmar flexion to affect the clubface (often best seen down-the-line) affects shaft lean, so it's convenient to pop into that view now and then to see what effects it has. GEARS makes that as simple as a click, and for that same swing — previously I'd have to record another swing and hope the golfer made a similar swing.

Club Data

I almost included this above, because it's also an accurate measurement… but of the club. There are some instructors who teach more based on what the club is doing. I teach more based on what the body moving the club is doing, but it's still really good to be able to show a student who was swinging 6° to the left that their path is now only 1° left, or has moved to 3° right. Or that their AoA went from +0.5° on average to -2.45°. Or that they've not hit a single shot off the toe the entire session after coming in hitting them only off the toe.

With GEARS, I can show people the path, AoA, contact location… shaft kick, forward lean/dynamic loft…etc. All of this gives a pretty accurate look into what their ball flight will be, and shows changes of pattern that are sometimes impossible to see with the naked eye, and difficult to see with a high-speed camera (let alone measure). And all with the software you're running anyway, without any need to run separate launch monitor software (though if you want to measure the ball flight, another system still provides additional information).

Easier Comparisons

 

As someone who created and still uses Analyzr (on a near-daily basis), with our two "B" and "A" viewers that are made for comparisons… I'm the first to say we can't do what GEARS does.

Because the GEARS "cameras" (not the physical OptiTrack cameras, but the virtual in the application) are software, and "perfect" per the above, you can overlay a player on himself or another player and more readily see the differences. This feature of GEARS is incredible, and may be one of the best ways to show the golfer how much of a change they are capable of making. For example, below you'll see how I've done both side-by-side and "overlay" views. All of these views exist in 3D, so I can move the virtual camera around and look at the golfer(s) from any angle I want. For example, the third image in my tweet below illustrates how much less the hands have gone "around" the body despite the larger shoulder turn, which is tough to see from traditional face-on or down-the-line views.

And of course, because GEARS normalizes avatar shapes, you can compare yourself to Rory McIlroy, Jon Rahm, Tony Finau, Rickie Fowler, and 50 or so other PGA Tour or LPGA Tour players (including an unusually high percentage of LIV players — Cam Smith, Brooks, Bryson, Poulter, Sergio, Greg Norman, DJ, Hudson Swafford, and Harold Varner).

Can Still "Get In There"

GEARS does not prevent me from getting in the "space" and working directly with the student. I've held alignment sticks, moved students myself, positioned things, etc. So long as I don't block too many markers for too long, you can get in there and position things, or hold things, or whatever.

Above, you can see I've positioned a Chiliwacker in the space. Putting stuff on the ground is trivial, and again so long as I stay out of the way for the most part, I can hold a student's head, hold a club against their lead hip, move their knees around or hold a foot down, and so on.

This swing (below) was made by a student who would very quickly rotate his hips forward… so I pulled him back away from the target and away from the ball slightly with my hands before releasing him just before the end of his backswing:

You can see the pretty large shift from the pelvis and ribcage centers (and you can see how late I released him before the downswing began — it's that little notch in the pelvis trace).

Web Locker Access

I love that GEARS gives every student access to what they call the "web locker." The Web Locker contains six views of your swings (though annoying the down-the-line is from out at the ball) as short movie clips, a bunch of data, and screenshots I take during lessons are uploaded for viewing. This is how I often communicate the changes made and the things we worked on in a lesson — I "star" the swing and attach screenshots, and students can access them from home, for free, at any time.

Might be Forgetting Something?

I might be forgetting something, but I think I've gotten to most of the bigger things that I've appreciated about my Year with GEARS. I look forward to continuing to explore and use the software and the system in new and interesting ways. Lately, I've had occasion to use the awesome graphs that exist in GEARS to compare swings to PGA Tour players in terms of… when the hips rotate, or when they shift and how much, or when the left wrist sets, or the rib cage lifts or falls. In the November update we were given the ability to measure the distance or angle between any two or three marks… be they "bones" or the physical markers on your suit or club.

GEARS isn't perfect, and there are a lot of small changes I'd make to the software if I was the GEARS czar, but they're aware of them and working on a few of them.

And while I'm glad AMG and others got on the bus early, November 2021 was a good time for me to hop on.

If you haven't been here to get on my GEARS system, DM me to inquire about it. I'll always give TST people a good rate and/or some extra time. Come spend a day or two. You'll be blown away by what you can see, what you can accomplish, and what kinds of things you can see (and improve) in your golf swing.

[Wanzo]

I'm really looking forward to making a trip to Erie in 2023 to get on GEARS.  I know it will be time well spent....and fun to see how it all works.  

[saevel25]

On 12/26/2022 at 5:29 PM, iacas said:

GEARS removes the doubt about whether I'm being truthful, about whether they "did it" or not, and quickly makes golfers aware of how extreme something often has to be to make the necessary change.

I love that about GEARS. It is a great reinforcement when you are working on nailing down a feel. 

On 12/26/2022 at 5:29 PM, iacas said:

The camera angles and positioning in GEARS is perfect. Perfectly down the line, perfectly face-on, perfect from any of the six views (above, below, rear, and from the target in addition to the traditional face-on/caddie and down-the-line). Because it's software, the camera can "move" to whatever the perfect angle with perfect alignment. And these perfect views exist for literally infinite camera views, I get any camera view I want. If I want to look at something, I can whip the camera around virtually, even while the avatar is swinging, and see whatever I want to see.

What I like about this is, it captures all of them for the same swing. Lets say you use a single video camera, you need to make 2-3 different swings to get the angles you want. When exaggerating something, you may not be the same every time. With GEARS, going from DTL, to FO, to maybe from the top down is really nice. 

This made me think of wanting to create some sort of attachment for my tripod, so maybe I can pull a string out straight so I can set up the alignment stick correctly ever time. 

On 12/26/2022 at 5:29 PM, iacas said:

I love that GEARS gives every student access to what they call the "web locker." The Web Locker contains six views of your swings (though annoying the down-the-line is from out at the ball) as short movie clips, a bunch of data, and screenshots I take during lessons are uploaded for viewing. This is how I often communicate the changes made and the things we worked on in a lesson — I "star" the swing and attach screenshots, and students can access them from home, for free, at any time.

This is super nice for the student. It is so convenient to be able to go to the range, pull up the web locker and review stuff as you go. 

At least for me, I like to imagine, making a mental image of my self making a type of motion. Being able to see a good version of what I want to do, I think is very beneficial. 

 

[ChetlovesMer]

On 12/26/2022 at 5:29 PM, iacas said:

I can hold a student's head, hold a club against their lead hip, move their knees around or hold a foot down, and so on.

 

I can vouch for this. I've been shoved, pushed, pulled and leaned on while on GEARS. The person doing the shoving, pushing, pulling and what not doesn't show up. It's almost like a green screen special affect in a movie. ... You know the ones where the people wear those totally green outfits so they can be digitally removed. Only with GEARs the person doesn't have to be removed. It's more like he was never there. 

It's also pretty amazing how you are getting every camera angle at the same time... (or camera angels as the case may be.) 

[iacas]

I'm using the AlmostGolf balls more and more, and considering using them in regular lessons more too.

They have two main benefits, both while the golfer is still swinging at something that looks like a golf ball (because it basically is):

• The markers on the shaft in GEARS are far less likely to vibrate off from a mis-hit.
• The golfer is more willing to make a bigger change because they won't feel the harsh vibrations or whatever from a mis-hit, a shank, etc.

I'm a big fan of hitting a lot of golf balls during a lesson, and even if people are going to make a rehearsal backswing, I like them to do that after they set up to a golf ball. It makes the rehearsal they'll do "more real."

The second bullet point above is the reason I'm considering using them more in regular lessons.

almostGolf - #1 Practice Ball

---

The Ultimate Off-Course Practice Golf Ball. Performs like a real golf ball, except one-third the distance. Neighborhood and backyard safe.

What do you think? If you showed up at a lesson, and the instructor gave you these balls, what would you be thinking?

Also, I encourage everyone to get a dozen (or more). I bought the 240-pack over Christmas.

[Big Lex]

It's really cool to read all that. Smart people (you, AMG, and I'm sure a few others) digging into that system and the data it provides will no doubt improve instruction, but I'm sure teach us more about the swing in general. I had the thought that some day, there will probably be AI systems that can take GEARS data as input and "teach" a student. Maybe these already exist. Kind of like if something like Hack Motion's "teaching" functionality was analagous to, oh, tic tac toe, I'm envisioning a GEARS AI being like Spock's 3-D chess. I'm sure there are better metaphors......

Or maybe AI wouldn't work for golf teaching. I know practically nothing about both 🙂

 

[iacas]

2 minutes ago, Big Lex said:

It's really cool to read all that. Smart people (you, AMG, and I'm sure a few others) digging into that system and the data it provides will no doubt improve instruction, but I'm sure teach us more about the swing in general. I had the thought that some day, there will probably be AI systems that can take GEARS data as input and "teach" a student. Maybe these already exist. Kind of like if something like Hack Motion's "teaching" functionality was analagous to, oh, tic tac toe, I'm envisioning a GEARS AI being like Spock's 3-D chess. I'm sure there are better metaphors......

Or maybe AI wouldn't work for golf teaching. I know practically nothing about both 🙂

It could. Eventually.

It's there now if you want to teach only one swing model. It could even, if a competent developer was behind it, prioritize things and probably know what downstream effects of a single change would be.

But I don't think it's super close to being able to teach actual humans who have all sorts of history, capability, time to practice… etc.

[Big Lex]

38 minutes ago, iacas said:

...prioritize things and probably know what downstream effects of a single change would be.

To me, one frustration with golf is you change one thing, which causes and improvement, and this triggers a change in something ELSE, which sometimes is NOT an improvement. I remember MANY times, in live lessons or watching videos or reading books - I'm talking golf teaching from say the 1970's through maybe 2000 - teachers saying "the trouble with golf is, people try to fix symptoms...they don't fix the CAUSE of the problems." Well, duh, I don't think anyone actually WANTS to fix a "symptom." They are always trying to identify and fix the cause. It's just that their understanding of causality was pretty bad in those days. 

The fact that GEARS data can possibly get a real, valid handle on the cause and effect chain is really exciting, because maybe some day, all golf teaching can properly isolate the real causes for every student. I realize it's more complicated than this, and I do accept that we already know alot, and improvement requires a ton of work that no amount of knowledge alone can replace. But teaching is already way better today than just a short time ago, just with the proliferation of conventional types of tech like video, force plates, etc., and the growth of golf's knowledge base in general. GEARS can only take it further. 

I've heard GEARS described as a "golf MRI." I think it's more than that, alot more. If scientists like Sacho and Kwon and Jacob's guy have figured out the structure of golf DNA, GEARS is like the development of nexgen sequencing, where we can take ANY golfer and isolate their own, unique swing DNA in an instant. (I realize GEARS does not calculate things like the force vectors that people like Sacho or Kwon study and depict in their systems, so it's not an exact analogy...but the point is, I think GEARS is a disruptive, leap of tech, not just a fancy new tool.)

Edited December 28, 2022 by Big Lex

[boogielicious]

As long as they provide some feedback I’m fine with using them. I will get a dozen for my indoor work. I have other foam balls, but they are kind of flimsy.

[iacas]

2 hours ago, boogielicious said:

As long as they provide some feedback I’m fine with using them. I will get a dozen for my indoor work. I have other foam balls, but they are kind of flimsy.

Some. The biggest benefit is that they're much safer (due to their light weight) - you can hit it into a window and it likely won't do anything, etc. I demonstrate by whipping it at our main big windows.

[Big Lex]

17 hours ago, iacas said:

I'm using the AlmostGolf balls more and more, and considering using them in regular lessons more too.

They have two main benefits, both while the golfer is still swinging at something that looks like a golf ball (because it basically is):

• The markers on the shaft in GEARS are far less likely to vibrate off from a mis-hit.
• The golfer is more willing to make a bigger change because they won't feel the harsh vibrations or whatever from a mis-hit, a shank, etc.

I'm a big fan of hitting a lot of golf balls during a lesson, and even if people are going to make a rehearsal backswing, I like them to do that after they set up to a golf ball. It makes the rehearsal they'll do "more real."

The second bullet point above is the reason I'm considering using them more in regular lessons.

almostGolf - #1 Practice Ball

---

The Ultimate Off-Course Practice Golf Ball. Performs like a real golf ball, except one-third the distance. Neighborhood and backyard safe.

What do you think? If you showed up at a lesson, and the instructor gave you these balls, what would you be thinking?

Also, I encourage everyone to get a dozen (or more). I bought the 240-pack over Christmas.

I bought a dozen of these a few months ago. They are great for all th reasons you mentioned. They are not like the flimsy, sponge-nerf type balls. They have some firmness and while impact is soft, it still sort of feels like you are hitting a golf ball. The simulator (mine is based on a Uneekor launch monitor) also tracks them as well as a real golf ball. Of course they spin and launch differently than a real ball, but you can use them and still get (I think) reliable information about face angle, path, etc., with most of the launch monitor systems out there. I find that people who are beginners or otherwise kind of tentative about swinging a golf club and hitting a ball inside my house will more readily try it with these balls because they aren't afraid they will break something. 

[ChetlovesMer]

On 12/28/2022 at 6:51 PM, Big Lex said:

To me, one frustration with golf is you change one thing, which causes and improvement, and this triggers a change in something ELSE, which sometimes is NOT an improvement. I remember MANY times, in live lessons or watching videos or reading books - I'm talking golf teaching from say the 1970's through maybe 2000 - teachers saying "the trouble with golf is, people try to fix symptoms...they don't fix the CAUSE of the problems." Well, duh, I don't think anyone actually WANTS to fix a "symptom." They are always trying to identify and fix the cause. It's just that their understanding of causality was pretty bad in those days. 

The fact that GEARS data can possibly get a real, valid handle on the cause and effect chain is really exciting, because maybe some day, all golf teaching can properly isolate the real causes for every student. I realize it's more complicated than this, and I do accept that we already know alot, and improvement requires a ton of work that no amount of knowledge alone can replace. But teaching is already way better today than just a short time ago, just with the proliferation of conventional types of tech like video, force plates, etc., and the growth of golf's knowledge base in general. GEARS can only take it further. 

I've heard GEARS described as a "golf MRI." I think it's more than that, alot more. If scientists like Sacho and Kwon and Jacob's guy have figured out the structure of golf DNA, GEARS is like the development of nexgen sequencing, where we can take ANY golfer and isolate their own, unique swing DNA in an instant. (I realize GEARS does not calculate things like the force vectors that people like Sacho or Kwon study and depict in their systems, so it's not an exact analogy...but the point is, I think GEARS is a disruptive, leap of tech, not just a fancy new tool.)

I had another lesson on GEARs this past Friday. If anyone is on the fence of whether or not to try it, you owe it to yourself to give it a go. You see a lot of "what's really going on". 
My guess is one of the fears of using it is that you will see your faults. It reminds me a bit of when people start using a product like Arccos or Shotscope and hate it, because they don't really want to know how far they hit each club. GEARs is kind of like that. You can't hide a fault from GEARs because it can "see" you at every angle (or angel) at once. 

The other reason I think that people are reluctant is the same reason I hear people say that they don't want to take lessons. "You're going to compare me to a tour pro." ..."I'm not a tour pro." 

Of course you aren't. But there are lots of areas where comparing what tour pros do to what you do makes sense. If you have some true disabilities that puts you in another situation. But I am one of the least flexible and least coordinated people I know. I have no rhythm what so ever. Never-the-less, I can compare my swing to what Rory McIlroy does, and I can learn from that. GEARs can show me instantly if I'm heading in the right direction. 

In my last GEARs session as well as my other ones too. I can look and say, here's what you are doing. Here's what you want to be doing. Then I can "see" what I'm trying to achieve. Let me try this feel. Oh no, that doesn't work. How about this. Hey that gets me closer. When I get closer to where I want to be I hit better shots.... LO AND BEHOLD!  

It's also cool because you have a record of how far you've come. I can look back and see that I was nowhere near where I am now. Then I can look forward and say "Check that out, I'm kinda close there on that occasion. I need to do more of that." (what ever "that" is, it will be different for everyone.)  

Lastly, I've heard the stories and read the books about "finding YOUR true swing" and all of that. Which is all well and good. But why not have "your swing" be better? When I watch the little GEARs guy swing (You know the guy I'm talking about) I can still see "my swing". It is still as unique as a thumbprint. Now, its just a little better thumbprint with better, more consistent contact. 

If you've tried it, you know what I'm talking about. If you haven't tried it. You should. 

[billchao]

4 hours ago, ChetlovesMer said:

I can look and say, here's what you are doing. Here's what you want to be doing. Then I can "see" what I'm trying to achieve. Let me try this feel. Oh no, that doesn't work. How about this. Hey that gets me closer.

I've said it before, but I think this is the biggest benefit to GEARS for me. It removes the ambiguity of communication. If @iacas is trying to get me to do something and I'm not doing it, is it because I'm not quite understanding what he wants me to do, or am I just doing it wrong? With GEARS it's like, see that number, X? Make it closer to Y instead. Then I go about exploring some feels, which for me feels less foreign because it's coming out of my brain.

[ChetlovesMer]

9 hours ago, billchao said:

I've said it before, but I think this is the biggest benefit to GEARS for me. It removes the ambiguity of communication. If @iacas is trying to get me to do something and I'm not doing it, is it because I'm not quite understanding what he wants me to do, or am I just doing it wrong? With GEARS it's like, see that number, X? Make it closer to Y instead. Then I go about exploring some feels, which for me feels less foreign because it's coming out of my brain.

I think you hit the nail on the head.

Yeah, this last week. Yoda's like "See how when we trace your movement it makes a line that is shaped like this... Make it shaped like this."

Then I can picture it. So I try one feel and it made it worse. Then I tried another feel and I went too far the other way. So, @iacas is like "Yeah, do that, but less of it." Then suddenly you get it right and you're like. "Oh, look. I can do it." The ability to make a good swing is in there. 

I think a lot of people would be surprised what they "can" actually do. 

[iacas]