Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'simulator'.
Found 4 results
-
Hello, I am thinking about buying a golf simulator. I've spent a lot of time researching this decision. My finalists are ProTee, SkyTrak, GC2, or GC2 with HMT. If money wasn't a factor, I think the GCQuad would easily be my top choice. SkyTrak is the cheapest, but I don't think I can tolerate the delay between hitting the ball and seeing the results. I also intensely dislike their business model with their monthly fees. I'm currently leaning towards ProTee. Despite all the time I've spent on research, I haven't been able to find any data comparing ProTee to other launch monitors. ProTee vs GCQuad would be ideal, as GCQuad seems to me to be the gold standard. Ideally, the tester would have ProTee and GCQuad set up at the same time measuring the same shots. It'd be informative to compare spin rate, carry distance, apex, etc. It'd be nice to see some wedges, some mid-irons, and some drivers. I wouldn't expect ProTee to match GCQuad, given that ProTee is less expensive. But without having any idea of what the ProTee margin of error is, I'm going to have a problem pulling the trigger. Have you seen any comparisons like this on the internet? If so, please reply with the links. I wonder why ProTee doesn't include any specific claims about accuracy on their website. Do you think I should be concerned about this? It seems to me that lots of potential customers would have this same question. Thanks for your replies.
-
.thumb.JPG.640dd6f31fe7f6aef91f879119bae1d9.JPG)
moderation Note to Media: Knee-Height Drops Make Sense!
DeadMan posted a blog entry in The Rules Chair
We're in that special hell of rules controversies with the implementation of the new Rules of Golf. There have been some growing pains with the new rules, and that has allowed the golf media to tee off on its favorite target, the USGA. Which, to be fair, can make itself an easy target: https://www.golfdigest.com/story/despite-harsh-words-from-some-tour-pros-usga-pleased-with-roll-out-of-new-rules-of-golf. That aside, I wanted to talk about the "controversy" about the knee-height drop that the Rules now require. Rickie Fowler got a one stroke penalty for dropping from shoulder height this past weekend. Cue the complaining from him: https://golfweek.com/2019/02/22/rickie-fowler-hit-with-one-shot-penalty-for-illegal-drop-at-wgc-mexico-championship/ I can forgive him - he just had a brain fart, probably didn't gain an advantage in this situation, it cost him money. I'm always annoyed when I get a penalty, personally, and it's absolutely never my fault, okay? But cue the pearl clutching from the media: https://www.golf.com/news/2019/02/25/backstopping-pro-tours-under-policed/ I'm here to tell you that this is wrong, and knee-height drops actually make a ton of sense. One of the best things the new Rules do is simplify dropping. Now, all you have to do when dropping is land the ball in the relief area (without touching you or your equipment before hitting the ground) and ensure the ball comes to rest in the relief area. If you don't do this, you have to redrop. Pretty simple. Yes, you have to figure out what your relief area is, but that's pretty simple, too. (For a fuller explanation of this, see Rule 14 and the definitions in the Rules of Golf.) The old rules were much more complex. Specifically, if your ball rolled to one of 9 areas after you dropped it, you had to redrop. For example, if your ball rolled more than 2 club lengths away from where your ball hit the ground, you had to redrop. You had to know all of these 9 areas to know if you needed to redrop or not. So, the new way is simpler, right? Instead of learning 9 different triggers for a redrop, you only have to learn 1. Great! Why am I talking about when you have to redrop? This is why we're dropping from knee height. Generally, under the new Rules, your ball cannot go as far after hitting the ground as it used to without triggering a redrop. Dropping from knee height reduces the chance that a redrop will be necessary. It also means that a ball has less of a chance of embedding in sand when you drop it. It makes a ton of sense, really. Now, you might say, that's all fine, but why not allow dropping a ball from anywhere above knee height? I think you could easily game the rules to be able to place the ball when you really want to by simply dropping from shoulder height instead of knee height. Think about dropping on a side slope, for example. You're much more likely to have to redrop and place if you drop the ball from a higher point. Sure, this is rare, but why take the chance? We're all on the same page, right? Knee-height drops make a lot of sense. (If you want to know more about the changes to dropping, this is an excellent article that talks about this in a bit more detail: https://rulesgeeks.com/2018/12/30-days-of-2019-rules-changes-day-16-procedure-for-dropping-a-ball-in-playing-it-from-a-relief-area/) Now to the point of all of this: golf media, please take 5 minutes to understand the rule before issuing a HAWT TAKE about the rule. The USGA has a one page sheet that explains the rule: http://www.usga.org/content/usga/home-page/rules-hub/rules-modernization/major-changes/new-procedure-for-dropping-a-ball.html. You don't come off very well when you fail to read that. I know it's fun and easy to just mindlessly bash the USGA, but they do get things right. This is one of them. (Oh and by the way, the Rules are actually really good, as a whole. Maybe I'll talk about that in another post later.) -
I’ve got a local indoor golf place with several bays that use Foresight GC2s.The owner (an instructor) told me he sets the altitude/elevation at 1200’ above sea level because it provides results comparable to what we’d normally have mid-summer in Chicago (which sits at about 600’ above sea level).I didn’t think much of it and proceeded to hit there a couple of times and the distances indicated were pretty spot on with my typical yardages. I was feeling good about the accuracy of the GC2 until my last session where I was getting about 10% less distance on every club. I asked the (different) guy who set me up if there was something wrong with that unit, and he said no. The owner overheard us and asked the guy if he changed the elevation setting. Upon checking, the elevation was at the default sea level setting. After it was changed to 1200’, I was back to normal distances. Does it seem right that a launch monitor would need to be set at 1200’ to return the same results that are had in the real world at 600’? Also, it’s been a long time since I’ve played in Florida, but is it accurate to estimate a 10% difference in distance from sea level to 600’ above?I found this on the Titleist website, and it seems to indicate the difference shouldn’t be that much:You can calculate the distance gain you will experience (compared to sea level) by multiplying the elevation (in feet) by .00116. For example, if you're playing in Reno, at 1 mile elevation (5,280 ft.) the increase is about 6% (5,280 x .00116 = 6.1248). If you normally drive the ball 250 yards at sea level, you will likely drive it 265 yards in Reno.Any knowledgeable insight from anyone?
-
Just finished the ordering process for the skytrak, I'm super excited. I've been using an optishot but have been severely disappointed with its ability to even correctly read or predict club path. Now the waiting commences as I sit and stare out the window waiting for the UPS man to get here....
