Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
  • Interests
    Golf, Bowling, Fishing, Hunting, Model RCs, 3D Printing, Designing, Inventing, Gaming, Learning.
  • Handicap:

clevited's Achievements



  1. Hello, I am new to this forum but I am a big fan of the testing and learning that goes on here about a sport I am obsessed about (like most here I am sure). I have a question and maybe idea for a new test for MGS. I am a big time nerd with all things launch monitors and the dynamics of a golf ball flying through the air. Through much empirical evidence, I am less and less convinced at the accuracy of these big name launch monitors. I am most concerned about how they impact the fitting for people, and to a lesser extent, the unreasonable numbers that people tout unaware that they are wrong in real life. To simply put it, Foresight launch monitors have a flight model that I think highly inflates carry (and total distance) for low spin, high launch conditions which just so happens to be a holy grail for many players to achieve with their drivers. I think that when someone goes to get fit and bring their old driver, a difference of a few hundred RPM of back spin all else equal, will show a large and unrealistic amount of gain thus often convincing these people to buy a new driver. This can be applied to fairway woods and irons as well but I think is a lesser issue the shorter the club. I think Trackman and Flightscope also do not accurately estimate ball carry and total (although I know total is a guess based on a guess at roll distance). They say they track the entire flight of the ball but I know that not to be true. They track a large part of it though. Then you have these cheap radars and camera based launch monitors (R10, Mevos, Skytrak). They have poor algorithms in this regard too (although I find Flightscope stuff to be better than most). Is there any way for my dream to come true of MGS testing this in as controlled of conditions as possible with spotters or some clever way to see landing spot so we can get a good idea of how truly accurate these are? I can help design the test and everything (Sort of my profession, I just don't have access to the things I need otherwise I would do it myself). I would be happy to be found to be right or wrong I just want to test my hypothesis and have some closure for myself and also inform those that go to get fit. Silver lining if major issues are discovered, perhaps these LM manufacturers will be forced to fix their algorithms. Thanks and absolutely love what is done here, wish I could be a part of something like this profession wise!
  • Create New...