Jump to content
Check out the Spin Axis Podcast! ×
Note: This thread is 3666 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

  • Moderator
Posted

I always meant to wikipedia Trackman, read about its history, and here it is, sans Wikipedia. There actually isn't an entry in Wikipedia. I didn't know PGA pros bought their Trackman, I thought they got a deal or got it free. Military radars start at 2 million pounds. 350+ pros own a TM. They are still hand built. The part where they visit Nike, Callaway, Ping, etc... is interesting.

Quote

In 2002, three golf-mad Danes had an idea. One of them was Klaus Eldrup-Jørgensen, a talented golfer who had represented the Danish national team and competed in several European Tour events before taking his parents’ advice and focusing on the world of business. The other two were Klaus’ brother Morten and his business partner Carsten Hallas, who ran four large driving ranges across Europe, spending large chunks of their time watching keen amateurs hit golf balls in the pursuit of improvement. Together, they realised that something was missing. Golfers would hit balls, watch the flight, and guess what caused the ball to do what it did. The trio found this guesswork unacceptable. They felt that golfers should have something that told them exactly what the ball was doing – and why.

http://www.todaysgolfer.co.uk/news-and-events/general-news/2015/november/behind-the-scenes-at-trackman-the-company-revolutionising-golf/

Steve

Kill slow play. Allow walking. Reduce ineffective golf instruction. Use environmentally friendly course maintenance.

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Administrator
Posted

FlightScope's history is similar: they too built (still build under EDH) missile tracking systems that use radar.

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

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Moderator
Posted
57 minutes ago, iacas said:

FlightScope's history is similar: they too built (still build under EDH) missile tracking systems that use radar.

Couldn't find a similar piece for Flightscope. There's this about its CEO:

Quote

Future business plans: We’re looking at the possibilities of incorporating neuroscience into FlightScope’s product range for new technologies and products that can help unlock athletes’ potential.

 

http://www.bizjournals.com/orlando/blog/2015/11/2015-ceos-of-the-year-henri-johnson.html

 

 

Steve

Kill slow play. Allow walking. Reduce ineffective golf instruction. Use environmentally friendly course maintenance.

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Note: This thread is 3666 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

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

    Coupon Codes (save 10-20%): "IACAS" for Mevo/Stack/FitForGolf, "IACASPLUS" for Mevo+/Pro Package, and "THESANDTRAP" for ShotScope. 15% off TourStriker (no code).
  • Posts

    • As an analyst by nature, I would like to compare the scores under both systems. It is something we can easily do if we have the data. I actually thought the new system was less fair to those whose game was on the decline - like mine! Old: Best 10 of last 20 scores with the .96 multiplier. Course handicap excluded course rating and overall par. New: Best 8/20. Course handicap includes course rating -par. My understanding is Stableford caps scores at Net double bogey like stroke play. If so, handicap should be slower to rise because you are only using 8 versus 10 scores. If I am missing something, I am curious enough to  want to understand what that may be. My home course tees that I play are 72.1/154 now. My best score out here is 82. When my game started to decline, my handicap didn’t budge for 13 rounds because of good scores in my first 8! I know I am an anomaly but my handicap has increased almost 80% in the past few years (with only a few rounds this year). For a few months I knew I was losing every bet because my game was nowhere near my handicap. I suspect I have steamrolled a few nuances but that shouldn’t matter much. When I have modeled this with someone playing the same tees and course, one good round, or return to form, will immediately reduce the handicap by some amount.
    • Wordle 1,631 3/6* ⬛⬛🟦⬛🟧 ⬛🟧🟧⬛🟧 🟧🟧🟧🟧🟧 Awesome, @WillieT! Go get another!
    • Wordle 1,631 2/6* ⬛🟩🟩🟩⬛ 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
    • Day 11: did mirror work for a while. Worked on the same stuff. 
    • I'm not sure you're calculating the number of strokes you would need to give correctly. The way I figure it, a 6.9 index golfer playing from tees that are rated 70.8/126 would have a course handicap of 6. A 20-index golfer playing from tees that are rated 64/106 would have a course handicap of 11. Therefore, based on the example above, assuming this is the same golf course and these index & slope numbers are based on the different tees, you should only have to give 5 strokes (or one stroke on the five most difficult holes if match play) not 6. Regardless, I get your point...the average golfer has no understanding of how the system works and trying to explain it to people, who haven't bothered to read the documentation provided by either the USGA or the R&A, is hopeless. In any case, I think the WHS as it currently is, does the best job possible of leveling the playing field and I think most golfers (obviously, based on the back & forth on this thread, not all golfers) at least comprehend that.   
×
×
  • 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.