Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1,655 Excellent

1 Follower


  • Rank
  • Birthday 04/13/1987

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
  • Handicap:

Contact Methods

  • Instagram

Recent Profile Visitors

1,930 profile views
  1. The "screen protector" you're referring to is only meant to reduce the likelihood of damage during shipping and handling so you're unlikely to get another one from Sky Caddie. You can typically find similar films in the electronics department at Walmart that are cut-to-fit. It won't help you too much if you drop the device on concrete or asphalt (depending on how it lands), but it will save the screen from light scuffs and abrasions from being in your pocket or golf bag. For reference though, I peeled that thing off as soon as I got the SX400 and have had zero issues. EDIT: Just for good measure, I checked the Sky Golf store and see that they do have some sort of screen protector on the horizon, but no idea if it will be any better than what I just mentioned. I'd recommend checking this link periodically for any updates: https://shop.skygolf.com/c-61-lens-covers.aspx
  2. WHOOP won't "encourage" you to be active like some wearables will, but it does track all activity throughout the day including workouts without you ever having to do a thing - if you wish. The algorithms they've worked up for this are fairly impressive. They do also have a Strain Coach built into the app which is a useful way to both challenge yourself on days when you're fully recovered, and to help prevent injury on days when your body just needs more time off. It's usefulness as a recovery tool is largely a way for WHOOP to distinguish itself in the marketplace. I could see that being the case for some devices, but not so much for WHOOP. In fact, depending on what specific type of device you're referencing to be placed under the pillow or mattress, I would argue that WHOOP is very accurate - though not perfect by any means - because WHOOP is always tracking your heart rate and also looking at a metric called heart rate variability (HRV). It does still get things wrong from time-to-time, but typically aligns with how well I think I slept and how refreshed I feel to go out and tackle a tough workout, etc.
  3. Lol. Well glad I could help you discover something that you’ve found so useful! The battery pack thing is definitely weird and frustrating the first few times you go to charge the strap and can’t. I did have a chat with WHOOP Tech Support and they said they recommend letting the strap run down to at least 20% before charging so now I just wait until I reach that point, charge the battery pack and then charge the strap. At 20% the strap is usually still good for about a day or so.
  4. Good review! I've been using WHOOP since early December and have to agree with your assessment. The battery life in particular is a bit puzzling, but given the size of the device does make some sense. You have to remember that while it does not have a screen it is powering a heart rate sensor that measures heart rate over 100 times per second, and it is also constantly syncing data to your smartphone via Bluetooth so 5~ days isn't bad IMO. There are a number of professional athletes who use WHOOP including a decent stable of professional golfers, Rory McIlroy, Justin Thomas, Xander Schauffele, Scott Stallings, and Maria Fassi. Rickie Fowler was also spotted with the wearable at the Sentry Tournament of Champions according to this Golfweek article: https://golfweek.usatoday.com/2020/01/01/rory-mcilroy-justin-thomas-wear-whoop/ I've listened to a few different Will Ahmed (the founder of WHOOP) interviews and have also listened to the WHOOP podcast. It's very interesting to hear the company's backstory as well as the stories told by the various athletes who have managed to leverage the device to increase performance.
  5. So I've attempted to use shot tracking on a couple rounds now, but have struggled with missed shots (because I didn't tag them). Anyone figure out how to add shots? I did at least figure out how to delete shots after the device auto-advanced to the next hole before I was done.
  6. It's easy to get caught up in resolution, ppi, and display technologies. Ultimately, it all boils down to usage. In this case, the SX400 is more than adequate for its intended purpose. Part of the reason for the higher resolution on the SX500 (I suspect) is because it has the ability to take and display images and video (I think) taken on the course. As @JohnSmalls stated above, the graphics used for displaying the hole and providing distances are likely vector images otherwise they'd have serious trouble with scaling across numerous devices and have to duplicate efforts. To summarize, the screen looks great and is not something I'd be concerned with whatsoever. Unless taking pictures and videos on the course - sans smartphone - is important to you, save the extra $$$ and get the SX400. The size of the device is much more practical as well IMO.
  7. I received the email about V3 as well. Very tempting to purchase, but ultimately decided not to. My brief experience with V2 simply wasn't good enough for me to consider this an option when I already have Arccos and have been fairly happy with it. If something happens to my Arccos or I eventually reach the point that I have to start paying the subscription fee, I'll give ShotScope another look. It's also possible I just won't care by that point though. Shot tracking is simply an easy way for me to gather club distances. Other than that, I don't too much care anymore - I know where my strengths and weaknesses lie.
  8. Welcome to life in 2020. Everyone wants to give you their opinion without trying to identify and relate with what it is you're saying because doing so requires too much of their time and attention. To be clear (and fair to my fellow spies) this is not not an MGS problem, but a much larger societal issue.
  9. I get what you were trying to say with your first post. Game Improvement and Super Game Improvement irons are designed to do exactly what they say (doesn't mean it always works). Large heads with wide soles and low and back CG all work to mitigate the damage done by a poor swing. Indeed, they are often well-suited for the golfer who doesn't want to, like to, or have time to practice. Less forgiving clubs demand more of the golfer swinging them and there have been many accounts of people finding some sort of "magic" by making the switch from GI/SGI clubs to less forgiving designs. Of course, this is all a bit of a generalization and individual results will vary. However, I think it's important to note that many practice/swing training clubs are designed to be extremely unforgiving in order to force the golfer into a better position at impact or risk being ridiculed forever at the driving range. All that said, I don't think I'd recommend golfers such as yourself to simply go buy a bladed iron and learn how to hit the ball better. Having received and benefited from many lessons myself, I'd suggest you reach out to a qualified and reputable instructor for assistance in understanding what it is you're doing incorrectly and how to go about fixing it. It's entirely possible for the problem to be 100% swing related, but it's also possible that 100% of the problem originates from some aspect of club fitting - the more likely scenario is that it's a bit of both. I always like to toss in some personal experience on topics like this to illustrate what I'm saying: Back in 2016, I snagged some Vokey SM5's for a good price on eBay followed shortly thereafter by a set of Nike Vapor Pro Combo irons (my current gamers). They performed fairly well, but I noticed I was missing left A LOT, and I decided to schedule a lesson with a local pro. While he did identify swing faults, he also took a look at the lie angle and recommended a fitter to verify what he was seeing. I ended up getting everything adjusted 2-degrees flat and learned that the SM5's were 2-degrees upright from what the eBay seller claimed when I purchased them - so they were 4-degrees off from what I needed!!! Hope this helps.
  10. It was. Too bad GG is so terrible now. I'm happy with Arccos now though and can't wait for the Link to be available.
  11. Heading out in a few hours to play another new course. Plan on trying to focus on tracking each shot with the SX400 utilizing some of the other features I haven’t really messed with. Curious to see if I run into an issue like @Quigleyd. One thing that I haven’t seen mentioned yet is that this device appears to have excellent battery life. I always make sure I’ve got a full charge when I go play, but I haven’t yet been less than about 75%.
  12. I think #10 at Riviera is a good example. It's short at only 302 yards and 67% of all scores come in at par or worse because it presents a unique challenge. For starters, there are bunkers and deep rough long and short, the green doesn't have much depth when approached on a straight line from the tee, and the fairway slopes right-to-left away from the green on the left-side which makes threading that needle more difficult. Basically, unless you hit the perfect shot, you won't find the green or get close enough in the fairway for an easy birdie. The other thing that comes to mind when looking at this hole is that it is probably one of the smallest greens on tour - I'm sure there are smaller, but I'm not familiar enough with all the tour courses to provide a better example. How many tour setups offer large greens where playing from the rough is even less penal?
  13. Don't get me wrong. I enjoy watching the pros drive the ball - it's what most amateurs envision themselves doing in their wildest dreams. What's wrong with seeing that come to life? However, it does present an issue for courses as they try to figure out how to lure pro events and maintain the integrity of the course. I think the idea to simply add length to a course is just that - a simple idea. It's "easy". It isn't overly thought provoking, and it doesn't always require significant redesigns. We have seen and will continue to see a small handful of "short" courses on tour and in the major rota that present a fair challenge for all players. Those courses should become the model instead of the current tiger-proofing model as you suggested.
  14. I'll try to keep my points on this discussion simple and brief. 1) Distance seems to only be a real issue on the professional tours. 2) Rolling back equipment from its current state would merely reduce the enjoyment of golf by amateurs. 3) Reducing the amount of roll out on tour courses would go a long way toward curbing distance. 4) The USGA and R&A care far more about optics than they do about growing the game.
  15. Been a bit since my last post. The past couple of weeks have been up and down health wise so I haven't been making it to the gym. Trying to focus on the things I can easily control though and watch my eating. Hopefully I can get back at it once this cold clears up.
  • Create New...