Popular Post MaxEntropy Posted October 3, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted October 3, 2019 Back in January, I was very torn on which of these two systems to purchase. The reviews on both here were great and I spent way too much time reading them. Ultimately, the sale Shotscope had at just the right time made the decision for me and I played most of the year using the Shotscope. As part of the #cobraconnectchallenge, I won an Arccos system and have been using it since the last week of August and now have 3 18 hole rounds and 6 9 hole rounds compared to 4 18 hole rounds and 17 9 hole rounds with the Shotscope. My intention here is to describe each system, present what I like and dislike about each (in no particular order), and leave it to potential buyers to decide which might be best for them. Both systems claim to help golfers improve by identifying areas for improvement on their game. I know there are others who have used both systems (@Nunfa0 and @JohnSmalls), so I would invite them to add their input. Obviously, anyone else can provide input on either system if they have something to add. Arccos: The sensors for this system are activated by light, so the act of pulling a club and addressing a ball turns it on (they recommend carrying clubs grip down if you have to walk a fair amount with a club out of your bag to avoid potential false positives). As I understand it, shots are detected by sound, which is the reason you are required to have your phone in your leading front pocket (left front pocket for right-handers). There have been a couple occasions where the system has missed a shot which may be due to light being too low to turn on the sensor – it’s not a huge deal and is noticed quickly since you likely have your phone out for the next shot. Likes: Data presentation on their dashboard – in particular, I really like the breakdown of handicap by individual facet of the game (driving, approach, chipping, sand, and putting). It provides a quick snapshot of how you are trending in each and helps identify which area(s) you need to work on. Using a phone as the GPS interface – this makes getting yardages to things like doglegs, a specific tree, or whatever much easier, which is not possible with the Shotscope. Accounting for slope and “wind” – I really like the “plays like” feature with Arccos. Since I use an old phone as a GPS only, the weather does not update so I have no idea how well the system accounts for the wind. This is a little nit-picky, but the sensors look better to my eye, even though they are substantially larger than the Shotscope sensors. Dislikes: Pin location – Arccos claims to be using AI to help determine the pin location on each hole. In my experience, it is terrible. I have not seen any hole where it was close enough that I did not feel compelled to fix it. Perhaps I walk around the green too much? As a result of the uncertainty in the pin location, presumably Arccos does not feel comfortable providing as detailed putting stats as Shotscope? Just guessing, though. Phone in front pocket – I have gotten used to having my phone in my pocket, but that does not mean I am a fan of it. The Link will get here eventually and render this issue obsolete. Phone battery life – for whatever reason, this system chews through the battery on my phone at a ridiculous rate (Samsung Galaxy S9+). Recently, I pulled out my old phone (Huawei Honor 6X) and have been using it without a SIM card. Its battery life has always been very, very good and I usually still have 70-ish% battery left after playing 18. The GPS on the old phone takes a little longer to settle down than my Samsung, but at least I know I could play 36 in a day without an external charger. Zoom level for hole editing – Shotscope has much better detail when zooming as tight as possible, making it easier to place a shot location more accurately. Arccos view of first green Shotscope view of same green Shotscope V2: The sensors for this system are activated by practice swings (inertial sensor?), which is why Shotscope recommends 2 practice swings along the direction of the shot near the ball. The sensors communicate with the watch you need to wear to tag the location of your shot. I would guess they use some sort of inertial sensor/gyroscope, and I assume the impact with the ball provides enough “shock” up the shaft that the sensor can differentiate the real swing from practice swings. I am not 100% sure on this, just making my best guess. If anyone knows for sure, I welcome the feedback. Likes: Putting stats – Shotscope putting stats are far superior to Arccos, in my view. The ability to see make percentage as a function of first putt distance is great, but you are required to make sure putt locations are accurate for the data to have any meaning! Tagging pin location – in my mind, it is not a big deal to hit a button on the watch to mark the hole location. I have found that if you are too quick to hit the button you can end up with some erroneous results so I started hovering at the hole location just a couple seconds and the accuracy was greatly improved. I also find it easier to get putts placed properly when the pin is in its correct location. Editing shots – as mentioned above, the level of detail at high zoom levels is much better for Shotscope, making editing easier, in my opinion. Editing on a computer is easier than on the phone and I believe the interface for editing is better for Shotscope than Arccos. I prefer editing with Shotscope on a computer and Arccos on my phone. Extra tags – I really like the fact that Shotscope sends 4 extra tags. It makes it much easier to test different clubs and compare the data. As I understand it, for Arccos you need to create a new club, but it seems you have to call it something that is not already in your bag to get the data to be separate (i.e. calling a different 7 iron a 7 wood, or something). Is this true? If not, let me know how as I periodically swap out a few clubs when I feel like it. Dislikes: Dashboard interface – I think the Shotscope dashboard has the biggest room for improvement. Presenting similar to the Arccos breakdown would be great. Big-a$$ watch – like the phone in the pocket, I got to the point where it didn’t bother me, but my preference is to have nothing on my wrist. Also, the cuff of a glove will occasionally advance the hole unintentionally. This only happened to me a few times as I had read warnings about it, so I wore the watch further up my wrist. Battery life of the watch – the battery does not last long, at all. I seriously doubt one could play 36 in a day without a recharge. Even if you tried to charge between rounds, the charging is very slow, so it may not do you any good. Summary Both systems claim to help you improve by identifying areas for improvement. With one exception, neither systems has told me anything I did not already know – I suck off the tee. Both confirmed my short game is pretty stout for my handicap and putting is a relative strength. The one surprise came from Arccos, thanks to it breaking down facets of our game. I have always considered irons a relative strength of my game, but Arccos disagrees with me so far. I believe I have always felt that way because I tend to hit irons solid much of the time, but apparently a solid strike in the wrong direction doesn't really help you score . My left/right misses are higher than they should be and GIR is lower than it should be. Arccos shows my left/right misses as identical at 13.3% and the distribution in Shotscope looks pretty balanced left-to-right. I would suggest this is because my usual “miss” is a fade/slice so I always aim to the left of my target. Sometimes I hit the ball dead straight, resulting in a left miss, others with too much fade, missing to the right. In terms of gapping, they are fairly close considering the number of shots I have with Arccos so far, although I started playing with Arccos in August, so I was getting actual roll from from tee shots instead of stopping where it landed. I find the Shotscope data interesting with 5, 6, and 7 irons, but that is pretty easy to explain. The vast majority of my golf is played at one course, with all 5 par3’s having similar yardages and can range from a 5 to an 8 depending on tee placement, pin placement, and weather. In little to no wind, I would normally use the following clubs (prevailing wind direction also indicated): #3 – 8 iron (cross wind) #5 – 8 iron (downwind) #9 – 7 iron (downwind) #12 – 6 iron (cross/downwind) #17 – 7 iron (into the wind) Also, on this course the par 4’s/5’s rarely call for those clubs to be used so I would suggest the data is a little skewed by when/how I have to use clubs depending on the wind. For example, in little/no wind, #17 is a 7. In light wind it becomes a 6 and when the wind kicks up, it has become a 5, so all three clubs show up as the same distance. In my opinion, both of these systems are good and I would be hard pressed to say one is better than the other – they each have their flaws, we just have to decide which flaws are more tolerable to the individual. More than anything, I have a lot more confidence in what I should hit in a given situation because I have a much better grasp on my distances in “real life” situations rather than making educated guesses. Have either of these systems really identified areas for improvement? Yes, but for the most part I already knew the answer. I’m assuming most avid golfers know their issues, as well. Is it possible I am missing some level of detail (like what you periodically see in the blog)? Maybe, but I’ll worry about it once I get some lessons and figure out why I can’t hit a driver. Neither of these systems are all that hands off, and both require editing to get the most accurate data. Maybe someday one of these will get to the point of being completely hands off, but buyers need to understand what they are getting into, in my opinion, and not just assume they have to do no editing to get the most out of the data. So, which one will I be keeping? Arccos. I do not feel the Arccos is that much better than Shotscope, but ultimately, I like having the GPS interface on a phone so I can see and check yardages to features that are not in Shotscope. I also like the game breakdown they use, I just wish the putting stats were better/more informative. I’m committed now, because I gave the Shotscope to a friend after having the Arccos a couple weeks. Thanks for reading and I welcome any input you may have! STUDque, JohnSmalls, THEZIPR23 and 15 others 14 4 Quote Driver: Epic Speed 9* (set -1) MMT 70X 3W: Tour B JGR Recoil 760ES 3H, 4H: Tour B JGR 19*, 23* Recoil 780ES 4-AW: Tour B JGR HF2 Modus3 Tour 105 SW: RTX Zipcore Black Satin 54* LW: TAIII Black 58* Putter: Scottsdale TR Senita Bag: BigMax Dri Active Lite Ball: TP5x or AVX (yellow) Pushcart: BigMax iQ+ Test Currently In Progress: Fit For Golf 2.0 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnSmalls Posted October 3, 2019 Share Posted October 3, 2019 @MaxEntropy great comparison review! I have played a little less than half as much golf as I anticipated over the past 3 months. Consequently I am a little behind on getting a review done for this. But I'll chime in soon! I share some of the issues you mentioned. The worse is pin placement and having a phone in my pocket for Arccos, but the handicaps for different parts of the game are awesome. I don't want to spoil my thoughts so I'll leave it at that for now. MattF, revkev, cksurfdude and 2 others 5 Quote Gameday Vessel Sunday 2.0/ Ogio Silencer Dynapwr Carbon | Hzrdus Smoke Black Mavrik 3w | Evenflow Riptide FG Tour F5 Hybrid(20,23) | MCA Fubuki Staff Model CB 5-PW | DG 120 Vokey SM7 (50, 54, 58) | DG 120 Studio Stock 15 -ProV1x (left dash) Romans 10:9 Classic Bag Jones Collegiate Clemson Stand Bag Eye 2 Laminate 1973 Staff Dynapower 4-PW Anser DUO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
patrickleeleep Posted October 3, 2019 Share Posted October 3, 2019 (edited) Can you post some screen shots of the putting dashboard. This is one I was wondered about. I had Arccos eventually sold all the sensors because I was tired of having to edit pin location and I didnt like the watch integration with the shot detection they released. I saw the Golfcitiy guys using Shotscope and it always intrigued me. Another thing I didnt like Arccos was some of my yardages were way off with the 'Smart Distance' from punch shots and things like that. I could see a lot of the disatnces and a lot of the shots that were thrown out were the proper distances. I wish there was a manual option you could do and go back over and edit the shots if one was a punch shot, or one out of bushes, etc. Edited October 3, 2019 by patrickleeleep Nunfa0, cksurfdude, MattF and 1 other 4 Quote Driver- 2016 M2 12* Tensei Red Stiff Wood(s)- G400 5 Wood 16.9*/ 7 Wood 21.1* Alta CB Stiff Irons- JPX 900 Forged 6-GW NS Pro 950GH Wedges- RTX 3 54* 588 RTX 2.0 58* RTX 4 64* Putter- Spider Tour Black Instagram- @patrickleeleep Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaxEntropy Posted October 3, 2019 Author Share Posted October 3, 2019 30 minutes ago, patrickleeleep said: Can you post some screen shots of the putting dashboard. This is one I was wondered about. I had Arccos eventually sold all the sensors because I was tired of having to edit pin location and I didnt like the watch integration with the shot detection they released. I saw the Golfcitiy guys using Shotscope and it always intrigued me. Another thing I didnt like Arccos was some of my yardages were way off with the 'Smart Distance' from punch shots and things like that. I could see a lot of the disatnces and a lot of the shots that were thrown out were the proper distances. I wish there was a manual option you could do and go back over and edit the shots if one was a punch shot, or one out of bushes, etc. I'll post some screen shots tomorrow. Unfortunately, the phone app doesn't display the same details for Shotscope compared to a PC. I agree with the smart distances, but didn't think of it as I was writing. The P-ave in Shotscope takes out outliers (good and bad) and you can mark shots as "recovery" when you punch out and they seem to be ignored. Is Arccos smart enough to remove those? I don't think so, because I have used my 3h for a couple punch shots to stay under branches. I think I've really only hit a couple and they were farther than the distance in the in the image above, so the average is being drug down, it appears. downlowkey, MattF and cksurfdude 3 Quote Driver: Epic Speed 9* (set -1) MMT 70X 3W: Tour B JGR Recoil 760ES 3H, 4H: Tour B JGR 19*, 23* Recoil 780ES 4-AW: Tour B JGR HF2 Modus3 Tour 105 SW: RTX Zipcore Black Satin 54* LW: TAIII Black 58* Putter: Scottsdale TR Senita Bag: BigMax Dri Active Lite Ball: TP5x or AVX (yellow) Pushcart: BigMax iQ+ Test Currently In Progress: Fit For Golf 2.0 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
patrickleeleep Posted October 3, 2019 Share Posted October 3, 2019 23 minutes ago, MaxEntropy said: I'll post some screen shots tomorrow. Unfortunately, the phone app doesn't display the same details for Shotscope compared to a PC. I agree with the smart distances, but didn't think of it as I was writing. The P-ave in Shotscope takes out outliers (good and bad) and you can mark shots as "recovery" when you punch out and they seem to be ignored. Is Arccos smart enough to remove those? I don't think so, because I have used my 3h for a couple punch shots to stay under branches. I think I've really only hit a couple and they were farther than the distance in the in the image above, so the average is being drug down, it appears. I never really experienced Arccos being smart enough to detect which is why I always wanted a "recovery" option. I didnt know shotscope had that which is great. I would love to do shotscope but I use my apple watch and wouldnt want to trade off for the shotscope for golf purposes. fozcycle and MaxEntropy 2 Quote Driver- 2016 M2 12* Tensei Red Stiff Wood(s)- G400 5 Wood 16.9*/ 7 Wood 21.1* Alta CB Stiff Irons- JPX 900 Forged 6-GW NS Pro 950GH Wedges- RTX 3 54* 588 RTX 2.0 58* RTX 4 64* Putter- Spider Tour Black Instagram- @patrickleeleep Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PMookie Posted October 4, 2019 Share Posted October 4, 2019 Back in January, I was very torn on which of these two systems to purchase. The reviews on both here were great and I spent way too much time reading them. Ultimately, the sale Shotscope had at just the right time made the decision for me and I played most of the year using the Shotscope. As part of the #cobraconnectchallenge, I won an Arccos system and have been using it since the last week of August and now have 3 18 hole rounds and 6 9 hole rounds compared to 4 18 hole rounds and 17 9 hole rounds with the Shotscope. My intention here is to describe each system, present what I like and dislike about each (in no particular order), and leave it to potential buyers to decide which might be best for them. Both systems claim to help golfers improve by identifying areas for improvement on their game. I know there are others who have used both systems ([mention=74192]Nunfa0[/mention] and [mention=70071]JohnSmalls[/mention]), so I would invite them to add their input. Obviously, anyone else can provide input on either system if they have something to add. Arccos: The sensors for this system are activated by light, so the act of pulling a club and addressing a ball turns it on (they recommend carrying clubs grip down if you have to walk a fair amount with a club out of your bag to avoid potential false positives). As I understand it, shots are detected by sound, which is the reason you are required to have your phone in your leading front pocket (left front pocket for right-handers). There have been a couple occasions where the system has missed a shot which may be due to light being too low to turn on the sensor – it’s not a huge deal and is noticed quickly since you likely have your phone out for the next shot. Likes: Data presentation on their dashboard – in particular, I really like the breakdown of handicap by individual facet of the game (driving, approach, chipping, sand, and putting). It provides a quick snapshot of how you are trending in each and helps identify which area(s) you need to work on. Using a phone as the GPS interface – this makes getting yardages to things like doglegs, a specific tree, or whatever much easier, which is not possible with the Shotscope. Accounting for slope and “wind” – I really like the “plays like” feature with Arccos. Since I use an old phone as a GPS only, the weather does not update so I have no idea how well the system accounts for the wind. This is a little nit-picky, but the sensors look better to my eye, even though they are substantially larger than the Shotscope sensors. Dislikes: Pin location – Arccos claims to be using AI to help determine the pin location on each hole. In my experience, it is terrible. I have not seen any hole where it was close enough that I did not feel compelled to fix it. Perhaps I walk around the green too much? As a result of the uncertainty in the pin location, presumably Arccos does not feel comfortable providing as detailed putting stats as Shotscope? Just guessing, though. Phone in front pocket – I have gotten used to having my phone in my pocket, but that does not mean I am a fan of it. The Link will get here eventually and render this issue obsolete. Phone battery life – for whatever reason, this system chews through the battery on my phone at a ridiculous rate (Samsung Galaxy S9+). Recently, I pulled out my old phone (Huawei Honor 6X) and have been using it without a SIM card. Its battery life has always been very, very good and I usually still have 70-ish% battery left after playing 18. The GPS on the old phone takes a little longer to settle down than my Samsung, but at least I know I could play 36 in a day without an external charger. Zoom level for hole editing – Shotscope has much better detail when zooming as tight as possible, making it easier to place a shot location more accurately. Arccos view of first green Shotscope view of same green Shotscope V2: The sensors for this system are activated by practice swings (inertial sensor?), which is why Shotscope recommends 2 practice swings along the direction of the shot near the ball. The sensors communicate with the watch you need to wear to tag the location of your shot. I would guess they use some sort of inertial sensor/gyroscope, and I assume the impact with the ball provides enough “shock” up the shaft that the sensor can differentiate the real swing from practice swings. I am not 100% sure on this, just making my best guess. If anyone knows for sure, I welcome the feedback. Likes: Putting stats – Shotscope putting stats are far superior to Arccos, in my view. The ability to see make percentage as a function of first putt distance is great, but you are required to make sure putt locations are accurate for the data to have any meaning! Tagging pin location – in my mind, it is not a big deal to hit a button on the watch to mark the hole location. I have found that if you are too quick to hit the button you can end up with some erroneous results so I started hovering at the hole location just a couple seconds and the accuracy was greatly improved. I also find it easier to get putts placed properly when the pin is in its correct location. Editing shots – as mentioned above, the level of detail at high zoom levels is much better for Shotscope, making editing easier, in my opinion. Editing on a computer is easier than on the phone and I believe the interface for editing is better for Shotscope than Arccos. I prefer editing with Shotscope on a computer and Arccos on my phone. Extra tags – I really like the fact that Shotscope sends 4 extra tags. It makes it much easier to test different clubs and compare the data. As I understand it, for Arccos you need to create a new club, but it seems you have to call it something that is not already in your bag to get the data to be separate (i.e. calling a different 7 iron a 7 wood, or something). Is this true? If not, let me know how as I periodically swap out a few clubs when I feel like it. Dislikes: Dashboard interface – I think the Shotscope dashboard has the biggest room for improvement. Presenting similar to the Arccos breakdown would be great. Big-a$$ watch – like the phone in the pocket, I got to the point where it didn’t bother me, but my preference is to have nothing on my wrist. Also, the cuff of a glove will occasionally advance the hole unintentionally. This only happened to me a few times as I had read warnings about it, so I wore the watch further up my wrist. Battery life of the watch – the battery does not last long, at all. I seriously doubt one could play 36 in a day without a recharge. Even if you tried to charge between rounds, the charging is very slow, so it may not do you any good. Summary Both systems claim to help you improve by identifying areas for improvement. With one exception, neither systems has told me anything I did not already know – I suck off the tee. Both confirmed my short game is pretty stout for my handicap and putting is a relative strength. The one surprise came from Arccos, thanks to it breaking down facets of our game. I have always considered irons a relative strength of my game, but Arccos disagrees with me so far. I believe I have always felt that way because I tend to hit irons solid much of the time, but apparently a solid strike in the wrong direction doesn't really help you score . My left/right misses are higher than they should be and GIR is lower than it should be. Arccos shows my left/right misses as identical at 13.3% and the distribution in Shotscope looks pretty balanced left-to-right. I would suggest this is because my usual “miss” is a fade/slice so I always aim to the left of my target. Sometimes I hit the ball dead straight, resulting in a left miss, others with too much fade, missing to the right. In terms of gapping, they are fairly close considering the number of shots I have with Arccos so far, although I started playing with Arccos in August, so I was getting actual roll from from tee shots instead of stopping where it landed. I find the Shotscope data interesting with 5, 6, and 7 irons, but that is pretty easy to explain. The vast majority of my golf is played at one course, with all 5 par3’s having similar yardages and can range from a 5 to an 8 depending on tee placement, pin placement, and weather. In little to no wind, I would normally use the following clubs (prevailing wind direction also indicated): #3 – 8 iron (cross wind) #5 – 8 iron (downwind) #9 – 7 iron (downwind) #12 – 6 iron (cross/downwind) #17 – 7 iron (into the wind) Also, on this course the par 4’s/5’s rarely call for those clubs to be used so I would suggest the data is a little skewed by when/how I have to use clubs depending on the wind. For example, in little/no wind, #17 is a 7. In light wind it becomes a 6 and when the wind kicks up, it has become a 5, so all three clubs show up as the same distance. In my opinion, both of these systems are good and I would be hard pressed to say one is better than the other – they each have their flaws, we just have to decide which flaws are more tolerable to the individual. More than anything, I have a lot more confidence in what I should hit in a given situation because I have a much better grasp on my distances in “real life” situations rather than making educated guesses. Have either of these systems really identified areas for improvement? Yes, but for the most part I already knew the answer. I’m assuming most avid golfers know their issues, as well. Is it possible I am missing some level of detail (like what you periodically see in the blog)? Maybe, but I’ll worry about it once I get some lessons and figure out why I can’t hit a driver. Neither of these systems are all that hands off, and both require editing to get the most accurate data. Maybe someday one of these will get to the point of being completely hands off, but buyers need to understand what they are getting into, in my opinion, and not just assume they have to do no editing to get the most out of the data. So, which one will I be keeping? Arccos. I do not feel the Arccos is that much better than Shotscope, but ultimately, I like having the GPS interface on a phone so I can see and check yardages to features that are not in Shotscope. I also like the game breakdown they use, I just wish the putting stats were better/more informative. I’m committed now, because I gave the Shotscope to a friend after having the Arccos a couple weeks. Thanks for reading and I welcome any input you may have!GPS wise, I have Golfshot, or GolfLogix open when I play so I have yardages, views, etc. Still no phone in the pocket either!Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro MaxEntropy 1 Quote Driver: Ping G430 Max 9*, Ping Tour 70X Fairway: Ping G425 15*, Ping Tour 70X Hybrid: Ping G425 22*, Ping Tour 80X Irons: Ping i230 4-GW, TT DG X100 Wedges: SMS 50D/54V/58DModus 130 stiff, +1” Putter: EAS 1.0 Ball: Titleist 2023 AVX Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fozcycle Posted October 4, 2019 Share Posted October 4, 2019 I never really experienced Arccos being smart enough to detect which is why I always wanted a "recovery" option. I didnt know shotscope had that which is great. I would love to do shotscope but I use my apple watch and wouldnt want to trade off for the shotscope for golf purposes. I’m with you Patrick, I hav3 an iWatch Series 3 bu5 have had multiple issues with Arccos since I got the watch. The system freezes up or quits after 12 or 13 holes......have spoken at length with Arccos Customer Service about this, tried several remedies, but alas, no resolution. Guess I’ll be laying Arccos aside and going back to my Garmin.Sent from my iPad using MyGolfSpyCobra F8(10.5*) w/Mitsubishi Tensei CK Blue Regular; 3-4W(14.5*) & 5-6W(17.0*)w/Mitsubishi Tensei CK Blue Regular; Tour Edge CBX119 22* Hybrid; Ben Hogan PTx 5-PW w/Recoil 460 graphite shafts; Ben Hogan TKt Gw(49*) SW(53*) LW(57*) all w/UST Mamiya Recoil 460 ES regular shafts. Lamkin grips with Arccoss tracking sensors. Putter: Tommy Armour Impact #3 33”. Bag: Cobra Ultralite Cart Bag(Peacoat/Silver). cksurfdude, MaxEntropy and patrickleeleep 3 Quote Driver: 0311 XF 10.5* w/Project X Cypher 40 gram Senior shaft or 0811 XF 12* w/Evenflo Riptide CB Senior shaft Fairways: 0211 5W & 7W w/ Evenflo Riptide CB regular shaft and Tour Edge E521 9W w/Fubuki HD50 regular shaft Hybrid: None in bag at the moment Irons: Titleist T300 5-PW w/Fubuki MV Senior graphite shafts w/Golf Pride Tour Wedges: Edison forged 49*, 53* and 57* wedges with KB PGI Senior shafts(80 grm). Putter: 33” Evnroll ER2 w/Gravity Grip or ER6 or Bellum Winmore Model 707, or Nike Method Core Drone w/Evnroll Gravity Grip Bag: Vice cart bag(Black/Lime). Ball: Bridgestone RXS Mindset, Snell MTB Prime X, Maxfli Tour/S/X CG, Titleist Pro V1x or Titleist TruFeel Using Shot Scope X5 and Pinned Rangefinder Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattF Posted October 4, 2019 Share Posted October 4, 2019 I love my ShotScope but do have a few issues. I find it's not 100% accurate in recording my shots. It'll miss a shot on one hole and add a shot on another, but the score at the end of the round will be accurate. Also, as @MaxEntropy mentioned, the battery life of the watch is poor at best. There's absolutely no way you could play 36 on one charge and that's something ShotScope will HAVE to address. I've never used Arccos but the phone in the pocket is no bueno for me as I've gotten used to not having it there since I stopped using GolfPad. MaxEntropy and cksurfdude 2 Quote In the bag: Driver: Darkspeed X 9° UST Mamiya LIN-Q M40X Blue 7F4 Fairway: Apex UW 19° & 21° Project X HZRDUS Smoke RDX Black 5.5 Irons: JPX 923 HMP 5-PW UST Mamiya Recoil 95 F4 Wedges: T-22 Denim Copper 48°, 52° & 56° UST Mamiya Recoil 95 F4 Putter Sycamore 005 Wide Blade Bag: Fairway 14 stand bag Balls: Chrome Tour Cart: CaddyLite ONE Ver. 8 God Bless America, God save the King, God defend New Zealand and thank Christ for Australia! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaxEntropy Posted October 4, 2019 Author Share Posted October 4, 2019 One other thing I should add about both companies - in the interactions I have had with each, primarily related to errors with mapping, both have been very quick to respond/fix issues I have had with courses, so I would rate both "excellent" for that. The course we play our league on was reconfigured a couple years ago - the 5th used to be a hokey par 5 that was an iron off the tee to a 90 dogleg leaving 200+ up a hill to the green, with the 6th a long par 4. They placed a new green in the landing area of the par 5 and converted it to a par3 and added new tee boxes and made the 6th into a par 5. It is a much better layout that way, imo, but almost no tracking system has it right yet, although Arccos had it the closest. cksurfdude and MattF 2 Quote Driver: Epic Speed 9* (set -1) MMT 70X 3W: Tour B JGR Recoil 760ES 3H, 4H: Tour B JGR 19*, 23* Recoil 780ES 4-AW: Tour B JGR HF2 Modus3 Tour 105 SW: RTX Zipcore Black Satin 54* LW: TAIII Black 58* Putter: Scottsdale TR Senita Bag: BigMax Dri Active Lite Ball: TP5x or AVX (yellow) Pushcart: BigMax iQ+ Test Currently In Progress: Fit For Golf 2.0 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaxEntropy Posted October 4, 2019 Author Share Posted October 4, 2019 15 hours ago, patrickleeleep said: Can you post some screen shots of the putting dashboard. This is one I was wondered about. I had Arccos eventually sold all the sensors because I was tired of having to edit pin location and I didnt like the watch integration with the shot detection they released. I saw the Golfcitiy guys using Shotscope and it always intrigued me. Another thing I didnt like Arccos was some of my yardages were way off with the 'Smart Distance' from punch shots and things like that. I could see a lot of the disatnces and a lot of the shots that were thrown out were the proper distances. I wish there was a manual option you could do and go back over and edit the shots if one was a punch shot, or one out of bushes, etc. Here are some images from the putting stats section of the Shotscope dashboard.... Being able to identify a different putter made the comparison a lot easier for the Stroke Lab test I was a part of this year. The black points are my old Ping putter, the yellow the Stroke Lab, and the grey is an overall average. If you read that review, I started the year on a ridiculous hot streak and was making tons of mid range putts, but the important conclusion I made was the Stroke Lab tech (face and/or shaft) certainly helped with my proximity after first putt from long range (by 1.5 feet), which I think is a big deal. I can also isolate each putter and see that my 3-putt avoidance was better with the stroke lab. I honestly don't know how easy it would be to reproduce this data with Arccos, or if it is even possible. Nunfa0, JohnSmalls, THEZIPR23 and 2 others 5 Quote Driver: Epic Speed 9* (set -1) MMT 70X 3W: Tour B JGR Recoil 760ES 3H, 4H: Tour B JGR 19*, 23* Recoil 780ES 4-AW: Tour B JGR HF2 Modus3 Tour 105 SW: RTX Zipcore Black Satin 54* LW: TAIII Black 58* Putter: Scottsdale TR Senita Bag: BigMax Dri Active Lite Ball: TP5x or AVX (yellow) Pushcart: BigMax iQ+ Test Currently In Progress: Fit For Golf 2.0 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cksurfdude Posted October 4, 2019 Share Posted October 4, 2019 @MaxEntropy .. Great review / comparison; really helpful info! I had a ShotScope earlier this season, and here's a few FYIs I discovered while using it..... 1. Battery - after it's fully charged (at home) turn it OFF. Then don't turn it On until literally a few minutes before you start playing. In other words, don't use it as a "watch". 2. Distances to doglegs, intermediate hazards,etc. - this is supposedly in their development queue and so will be coming out in a future software update. 3. Positional shots - if you remember to mark a punch-out, etc. as "Positional" then it will not be included in the distance metrics for that club. *Important! - (super important imho) - ShotScope considers EVERYTHING after the tee shot as an Approach shot! So... If you're on a Par 5, or long Par 4, or botched your tee shot, or whatever .. and going to hit a layup next then you should mark it as "Positional". Then that shot won't be included in your "Approaches from .." nor "Shots to Finish from.." metrics. Note you can also fix this in post-round editing. Nunfa0, downlowkey, MattF and 2 others 5 Quote WITB of an "aspiring" play-ah ... Driver...Callaway Paradym (Aldila Ascent PL Blue 40/A) 3H .. Cobra King Tec (MMT 70/R) 7W...Tour Edge Exotics EXS (Tensei CK Blue 50/R) 4H...Callaway Epic Super Hybrid (Recoil ZT9 F3) 5H...Callaway Big Bertha ('19) (Recoil 460 ESX F3) 6i-GW...Sub 70 699 V2 (Recoil 660 F3) 54°, 60°...Cleveland CBX2, CBX (Rotex graphite) Putter...EvnRoll ER5 or MLA Tour XDream (P2 Reflex grips) ...all in a Datrek bag on an MGI Zip Navigator electric cart. Ball often, not always, MaxFli Tour. Forum Member tester for the Paradym X driver (2023) Forum Member tester for the ExPutt Putting Simulator (2020) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edingc Posted October 4, 2019 Share Posted October 4, 2019 Thanks for this great review. Maybe I'm in the minority, but I don't understand the whole "no manual tagging" mantra. I love my GAME Golf Live precisely for the manual tagging requirement. It integrates well with any pre-shot routine, and if you miss a tag the sensor is often smart enough to pick that a shot occurred anyway. I almost never miss a tag and instead double tag, which is easy to catch and correct post-round. If I have to go around worrying about exposing the grip end to light too soon, or need to take two specific practice swings to trigger the sensor, isn't that worse than just tapping a tag and making sure the belt clip vibrates? I really fail to see how these newer "touchless" tracking systems are any better (GAME Golf Pro, I'm looking at you...). Of course, GAME's downfall is (in my opinion) less than stellar support and no real vision for the future. The product seems to be stagnant, GAME Golf Pro is a flop, and I question how much longer they'll be around. I've been looking at the Shotscope as a replacement as a result. But I'm not wild on needing to make sure my practice swings are just so. MaxEntropy, MattF and cksurfdude 3 Quote Unofficial WHS Handicap: 5.0 / Anti-Cap: 8.4 (Last Updated June 2, 2024) Driver: Callaway Paradym TD (10.5°), 45.75", Fujikura Motore X F1 6X | Fitting Post 3 Wood: Cobra RadSpeed Big Tour (14.5°), 43", Fujikura Motore X F1 7X 20° Hybrid: PXG 0211 (2020 Model), 40.25", Mitsubishi Tensei AV RAW White 90X 4 Utility: Cobra KING Utility (2020 Model), 38.5", Aerotech SteelFiber i110cw Stiff 5-PW: Ben Hogan PTx Pro, 37" 7 Iron, Aerotech SteelFiber i125cw Stiff | Club Champion Fitting 50°, 54°, 58°: Edel SMS, V Grind, Nippon Modus 125 Wedge| Official Review Thread Putter: L.A.B. Golf DF 2.1, 36", 68°, Black with Custom Sightlines, BGT Stability Tour, L.A.B. Press II 3° | Unofficial Review Grips: Star Sidewinder, Undersized with Custom Tape Build-Up Ball: Snell MTB-X Optic Yellow Tracked By: Shot Scope H4 Bag: Personalized 2020 Sun Mountain Sync Riding On: Bag Boy Nitron | Official Review Thread WITB? | 2022 Reviewer Edel SMS Wedges | 2021 Reviewer Maxfli Tour and Tour X Balls | 2020 Participant #CobraConnect Challenge | 2019 Reviewer Callaway Epic Flash Driver Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaxEntropy Posted October 4, 2019 Author Share Posted October 4, 2019 1 hour ago, edingc said: If I have to go around worrying about exposing the grip end to light too soon, or need to take two specific practice swings to trigger the sensor, isn't that worse than just tapping a tag and making sure the belt clip vibrates? I understand your point, but I was a Golf Pad user for most of last year and I found tagging shots to be more of a disruption to my routine than Shotscope (almost no change in the routine I was already doing). The light activation in Arccos is something I never really think about, it doesn't seem to require that much light and I haven't seen a false positive from carrying a club normally (just repeating manufacturer warning). I did have one particular occasion where Arccos didn't detect a shot that I believe may have been light related. It was getting to be twilight and I was also under a tree, making the light even worse, so I was just guessing the light level may have been too low to activate, but it was also a fairly soft pitch, so maybe it was also too quiet? I'm not really sure if it was one or both effects that caused the missed shot, but I suspect it was light-related because the system has picked up a bunch of similar pitches in full light. cksurfdude and edingc 2 Quote Driver: Epic Speed 9* (set -1) MMT 70X 3W: Tour B JGR Recoil 760ES 3H, 4H: Tour B JGR 19*, 23* Recoil 780ES 4-AW: Tour B JGR HF2 Modus3 Tour 105 SW: RTX Zipcore Black Satin 54* LW: TAIII Black 58* Putter: Scottsdale TR Senita Bag: BigMax Dri Active Lite Ball: TP5x or AVX (yellow) Pushcart: BigMax iQ+ Test Currently In Progress: Fit For Golf 2.0 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattF Posted October 4, 2019 Share Posted October 4, 2019 1 hour ago, edingc said: I've been looking at the Shotscope as a replacement as a result. But I'm not wild on needing to make sure my practice swings are just so. You can just wave the butt of the club around. The practice swings are really to "wake" the sensors up. cksurfdude, edingc and MaxEntropy 3 Quote In the bag: Driver: Darkspeed X 9° UST Mamiya LIN-Q M40X Blue 7F4 Fairway: Apex UW 19° & 21° Project X HZRDUS Smoke RDX Black 5.5 Irons: JPX 923 HMP 5-PW UST Mamiya Recoil 95 F4 Wedges: T-22 Denim Copper 48°, 52° & 56° UST Mamiya Recoil 95 F4 Putter Sycamore 005 Wide Blade Bag: Fairway 14 stand bag Balls: Chrome Tour Cart: CaddyLite ONE Ver. 8 God Bless America, God save the King, God defend New Zealand and thank Christ for Australia! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edingc Posted October 4, 2019 Share Posted October 4, 2019 18 minutes ago, MattF said: You can just wave the butt of the club around. The practice swings are really to "wake" the sensors up. 19 minutes ago, MaxEntropy said: I understand your point, but I was a Golf Pad user for most of last year and I found tagging shots to be more of a disruption to my routine than Shotscope (almost no change in the routine I was already doing). The light activation in Arccos is something I never really think about, it doesn't seem to require that much light and I haven't seen a false positive from carrying a club normally (just repeating manufacturer warning). I did have one particular occasion where Arccos didn't detect a shot that I believe may have been light related. It was getting to be twilight and I was also under a tree, making the light even worse, so I was just guessing the light level may have been too low to activate, but it was also a fairly soft pitch, so maybe it was also too quiet? I'm not really sure if it was one or both effects that caused the missed shot, but I suspect it was light-related because the system has picked up a bunch of similar pitches in full light. Thanks, guys, for the clarification. I'm still definitely interested in the ShotScope, but I might ride out GG a little while longer. MaxEntropy, MattF and cksurfdude 3 Quote Unofficial WHS Handicap: 5.0 / Anti-Cap: 8.4 (Last Updated June 2, 2024) Driver: Callaway Paradym TD (10.5°), 45.75", Fujikura Motore X F1 6X | Fitting Post 3 Wood: Cobra RadSpeed Big Tour (14.5°), 43", Fujikura Motore X F1 7X 20° Hybrid: PXG 0211 (2020 Model), 40.25", Mitsubishi Tensei AV RAW White 90X 4 Utility: Cobra KING Utility (2020 Model), 38.5", Aerotech SteelFiber i110cw Stiff 5-PW: Ben Hogan PTx Pro, 37" 7 Iron, Aerotech SteelFiber i125cw Stiff | Club Champion Fitting 50°, 54°, 58°: Edel SMS, V Grind, Nippon Modus 125 Wedge| Official Review Thread Putter: L.A.B. Golf DF 2.1, 36", 68°, Black with Custom Sightlines, BGT Stability Tour, L.A.B. Press II 3° | Unofficial Review Grips: Star Sidewinder, Undersized with Custom Tape Build-Up Ball: Snell MTB-X Optic Yellow Tracked By: Shot Scope H4 Bag: Personalized 2020 Sun Mountain Sync Riding On: Bag Boy Nitron | Official Review Thread WITB? | 2022 Reviewer Edel SMS Wedges | 2021 Reviewer Maxfli Tour and Tour X Balls | 2020 Participant #CobraConnect Challenge | 2019 Reviewer Callaway Epic Flash Driver Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the_hammer Posted October 4, 2019 Share Posted October 4, 2019 22 hours ago, MaxEntropy said: Back in January, I was very torn on which of these two systems to purchase. The reviews on both here were great and I spent way too much time reading them. Ultimately, the sale Shotscope had at just the right time made the decision for me and I played most of the year using the Shotscope. As part of the #cobraconnectchallenge, I won an Arccos system and have been using it since the last week of August and now have 3 18 hole rounds and 6 9 hole rounds compared to 4 18 hole rounds and 17 9 hole rounds with the Shotscope. My intention here is to describe each system, present what I like and dislike about each (in no particular order), and leave it to potential buyers to decide which might be best for them. Both systems claim to help golfers improve by identifying areas for improvement on their game. I know there are others who have used both systems (@Nunfa0 and @JohnSmalls), so I would invite them to add their input. Obviously, anyone else can provide input on either system if they have something to add. Arccos: The sensors for this system are activated by light, so the act of pulling a club and addressing a ball turns it on (they recommend carrying clubs grip down if you have to walk a fair amount with a club out of your bag to avoid potential false positives). As I understand it, shots are detected by sound, which is the reason you are required to have your phone in your leading front pocket (left front pocket for right-handers). There have been a couple occasions where the system has missed a shot which may be due to light being too low to turn on the sensor – it’s not a huge deal and is noticed quickly since you likely have your phone out for the next shot. Likes: Data presentation on their dashboard – in particular, I really like the breakdown of handicap by individual facet of the game (driving, approach, chipping, sand, and putting). It provides a quick snapshot of how you are trending in each and helps identify which area(s) you need to work on. Using a phone as the GPS interface – this makes getting yardages to things like doglegs, a specific tree, or whatever much easier, which is not possible with the Shotscope. Accounting for slope and “wind” – I really like the “plays like” feature with Arccos. Since I use an old phone as a GPS only, the weather does not update so I have no idea how well the system accounts for the wind. This is a little nit-picky, but the sensors look better to my eye, even though they are substantially larger than the Shotscope sensors. Dislikes: Pin location – Arccos claims to be using AI to help determine the pin location on each hole. In my experience, it is terrible. I have not seen any hole where it was close enough that I did not feel compelled to fix it. Perhaps I walk around the green too much? As a result of the uncertainty in the pin location, presumably Arccos does not feel comfortable providing as detailed putting stats as Shotscope? Just guessing, though. Phone in front pocket – I have gotten used to having my phone in my pocket, but that does not mean I am a fan of it. The Link will get here eventually and render this issue obsolete. Phone battery life – for whatever reason, this system chews through the battery on my phone at a ridiculous rate (Samsung Galaxy S9+). Recently, I pulled out my old phone (Huawei Honor 6X) and have been using it without a SIM card. Its battery life has always been very, very good and I usually still have 70-ish% battery left after playing 18. The GPS on the old phone takes a little longer to settle down than my Samsung, but at least I know I could play 36 in a day without an external charger. Zoom level for hole editing – Shotscope has much better detail when zooming as tight as possible, making it easier to place a shot location more accurately. Arccos view of first green Shotscope view of same green Shotscope V2: The sensors for this system are activated by practice swings (inertial sensor?), which is why Shotscope recommends 2 practice swings along the direction of the shot near the ball. The sensors communicate with the watch you need to wear to tag the location of your shot. I would guess they use some sort of inertial sensor/gyroscope, and I assume the impact with the ball provides enough “shock” up the shaft that the sensor can differentiate the real swing from practice swings. I am not 100% sure on this, just making my best guess. If anyone knows for sure, I welcome the feedback. Likes: Putting stats – Shotscope putting stats are far superior to Arccos, in my view. The ability to see make percentage as a function of first putt distance is great, but you are required to make sure putt locations are accurate for the data to have any meaning! Tagging pin location – in my mind, it is not a big deal to hit a button on the watch to mark the hole location. I have found that if you are too quick to hit the button you can end up with some erroneous results so I started hovering at the hole location just a couple seconds and the accuracy was greatly improved. I also find it easier to get putts placed properly when the pin is in its correct location. Editing shots – as mentioned above, the level of detail at high zoom levels is much better for Shotscope, making editing easier, in my opinion. Editing on a computer is easier than on the phone and I believe the interface for editing is better for Shotscope than Arccos. I prefer editing with Shotscope on a computer and Arccos on my phone. Extra tags – I really like the fact that Shotscope sends 4 extra tags. It makes it much easier to test different clubs and compare the data. As I understand it, for Arccos you need to create a new club, but it seems you have to call it something that is not already in your bag to get the data to be separate (i.e. calling a different 7 iron a 7 wood, or something). Is this true? If not, let me know how as I periodically swap out a few clubs when I feel like it. Dislikes: Dashboard interface – I think the Shotscope dashboard has the biggest room for improvement. Presenting similar to the Arccos breakdown would be great. Big-a$$ watch – like the phone in the pocket, I got to the point where it didn’t bother me, but my preference is to have nothing on my wrist. Also, the cuff of a glove will occasionally advance the hole unintentionally. This only happened to me a few times as I had read warnings about it, so I wore the watch further up my wrist. Battery life of the watch – the battery does not last long, at all. I seriously doubt one could play 36 in a day without a recharge. Even if you tried to charge between rounds, the charging is very slow, so it may not do you any good. Summary Both systems claim to help you improve by identifying areas for improvement. With one exception, neither systems has told me anything I did not already know – I suck off the tee. Both confirmed my short game is pretty stout for my handicap and putting is a relative strength. The one surprise came from Arccos, thanks to it breaking down facets of our game. I have always considered irons a relative strength of my game, but Arccos disagrees with me so far. I believe I have always felt that way because I tend to hit irons solid much of the time, but apparently a solid strike in the wrong direction doesn't really help you score . My left/right misses are higher than they should be and GIR is lower than it should be. Arccos shows my left/right misses as identical at 13.3% and the distribution in Shotscope looks pretty balanced left-to-right. I would suggest this is because my usual “miss” is a fade/slice so I always aim to the left of my target. Sometimes I hit the ball dead straight, resulting in a left miss, others with too much fade, missing to the right. In terms of gapping, they are fairly close considering the number of shots I have with Arccos so far, although I started playing with Arccos in August, so I was getting actual roll from from tee shots instead of stopping where it landed. I find the Shotscope data interesting with 5, 6, and 7 irons, but that is pretty easy to explain. The vast majority of my golf is played at one course, with all 5 par3’s having similar yardages and can range from a 5 to an 8 depending on tee placement, pin placement, and weather. In little to no wind, I would normally use the following clubs (prevailing wind direction also indicated): #3 – 8 iron (cross wind) #5 – 8 iron (downwind) #9 – 7 iron (downwind) #12 – 6 iron (cross/downwind) #17 – 7 iron (into the wind) Also, on this course the par 4’s/5’s rarely call for those clubs to be used so I would suggest the data is a little skewed by when/how I have to use clubs depending on the wind. For example, in little/no wind, #17 is a 7. In light wind it becomes a 6 and when the wind kicks up, it has become a 5, so all three clubs show up as the same distance. In my opinion, both of these systems are good and I would be hard pressed to say one is better than the other – they each have their flaws, we just have to decide which flaws are more tolerable to the individual. More than anything, I have a lot more confidence in what I should hit in a given situation because I have a much better grasp on my distances in “real life” situations rather than making educated guesses. Have either of these systems really identified areas for improvement? Yes, but for the most part I already knew the answer. I’m assuming most avid golfers know their issues, as well. Is it possible I am missing some level of detail (like what you periodically see in the blog)? Maybe, but I’ll worry about it once I get some lessons and figure out why I can’t hit a driver. Neither of these systems are all that hands off, and both require editing to get the most accurate data. Maybe someday one of these will get to the point of being completely hands off, but buyers need to understand what they are getting into, in my opinion, and not just assume they have to do no editing to get the most out of the data. So, which one will I be keeping? Arccos. I do not feel the Arccos is that much better than Shotscope, but ultimately, I like having the GPS interface on a phone so I can see and check yardages to features that are not in Shotscope. I also like the game breakdown they use, I just wish the putting stats were better/more informative. I’m committed now, because I gave the Shotscope to a friend after having the Arccos a couple weeks. Thanks for reading and I welcome any input you may have! This is a great review. I have used Game Golf in the past and actually stoped using it this year to focus more on the feel and not tracking my shots. Did you look at Game Golf at all? Thanks MaxEntropy and cksurfdude 2 Quote Driver: M2 9.5° 3 Wood: Jetspeed Irons: RocketBallz Wedges: Mill Grind 2 50° - Tour Preferred EF 54° & 60° Putter: Ghost Tour Black Maranello Ball : ProV1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaxEntropy Posted October 4, 2019 Author Share Posted October 4, 2019 14 minutes ago, the_hammer said: Did you look at Game Golf at all? I did not. Part of my reason was I did not know much about it and since MGS had a bunch of official and unofficial reviews for both Shotscope and Arccos, I narrowed it down to those two. cksurfdude 1 Quote Driver: Epic Speed 9* (set -1) MMT 70X 3W: Tour B JGR Recoil 760ES 3H, 4H: Tour B JGR 19*, 23* Recoil 780ES 4-AW: Tour B JGR HF2 Modus3 Tour 105 SW: RTX Zipcore Black Satin 54* LW: TAIII Black 58* Putter: Scottsdale TR Senita Bag: BigMax Dri Active Lite Ball: TP5x or AVX (yellow) Pushcart: BigMax iQ+ Test Currently In Progress: Fit For Golf 2.0 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaxEntropy Posted October 5, 2019 Author Share Posted October 5, 2019 10 hours ago, cksurfdude said: Important! - (super important imho) - ShotScope considers EVERYTHING after the tee shot as an Approach shot! So... If you're on a Par 5, or long Par 4, or botched your tee shot, or whatever .. and going to hit a layup next then you should mark it as "Positional" This is a great observation, that I had never considered, thanks for adding that info! cksurfdude 1 Quote Driver: Epic Speed 9* (set -1) MMT 70X 3W: Tour B JGR Recoil 760ES 3H, 4H: Tour B JGR 19*, 23* Recoil 780ES 4-AW: Tour B JGR HF2 Modus3 Tour 105 SW: RTX Zipcore Black Satin 54* LW: TAIII Black 58* Putter: Scottsdale TR Senita Bag: BigMax Dri Active Lite Ball: TP5x or AVX (yellow) Pushcart: BigMax iQ+ Test Currently In Progress: Fit For Golf 2.0 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nunfa0 Posted October 5, 2019 Share Posted October 5, 2019 On 10/4/2019 at 8:40 AM, MaxEntropy said: Back in January, I was very torn on which of these two systems to purchase. The reviews on both here were great and I spent way too much time reading them. Ultimately, the sale Shotscope had at just the right time made the decision for me and I played most of the year using the Shotscope. As part of the #cobraconnectchallenge, I won an Arccos system and have been using it since the last week of August and now have 3 18 hole rounds and 6 9 hole rounds compared to 4 18 hole rounds and 17 9 hole rounds with the Shotscope. My intention here is to describe each system, present what I like and dislike about each (in no particular order), and leave it to potential buyers to decide which might be best for them. Both systems claim to help golfers improve by identifying areas for improvement on their game. I know there are others who have used both systems (@Nunfa0 and @JohnSmalls), so I would invite them to add their input. Obviously, anyone else can provide input on either system if they have something to add. Arccos: The sensors for this system are activated by light, so the act of pulling a club and addressing a ball turns it on (they recommend carrying clubs grip down if you have to walk a fair amount with a club out of your bag to avoid potential false positives). As I understand it, shots are detected by sound, which is the reason you are required to have your phone in your leading front pocket (left front pocket for right-handers). There have been a couple occasions where the system has missed a shot which may be due to light being too low to turn on the sensor – it’s not a huge deal and is noticed quickly since you likely have your phone out for the next shot. Likes: Data presentation on their dashboard – in particular, I really like the breakdown of handicap by individual facet of the game (driving, approach, chipping, sand, and putting). It provides a quick snapshot of how you are trending in each and helps identify which area(s) you need to work on. Using a phone as the GPS interface – this makes getting yardages to things like doglegs, a specific tree, or whatever much easier, which is not possible with the Shotscope. Accounting for slope and “wind” – I really like the “plays like” feature with Arccos. Since I use an old phone as a GPS only, the weather does not update so I have no idea how well the system accounts for the wind. This is a little nit-picky, but the sensors look better to my eye, even though they are substantially larger than the Shotscope sensors. Dislikes: Pin location – Arccos claims to be using AI to help determine the pin location on each hole. In my experience, it is terrible. I have not seen any hole where it was close enough that I did not feel compelled to fix it. Perhaps I walk around the green too much? As a result of the uncertainty in the pin location, presumably Arccos does not feel comfortable providing as detailed putting stats as Shotscope? Just guessing, though. Phone in front pocket – I have gotten used to having my phone in my pocket, but that does not mean I am a fan of it. The Link will get here eventually and render this issue obsolete. Phone battery life – for whatever reason, this system chews through the battery on my phone at a ridiculous rate (Samsung Galaxy S9+). Recently, I pulled out my old phone (Huawei Honor 6X) and have been using it without a SIM card. Its battery life has always been very, very good and I usually still have 70-ish% battery left after playing 18. The GPS on the old phone takes a little longer to settle down than my Samsung, but at least I know I could play 36 in a day without an external charger. Zoom level for hole editing – Shotscope has much better detail when zooming as tight as possible, making it easier to place a shot location more accurately. Arccos view of first green Shotscope view of same green Shotscope V2: The sensors for this system are activated by practice swings (inertial sensor?), which is why Shotscope recommends 2 practice swings along the direction of the shot near the ball. The sensors communicate with the watch you need to wear to tag the location of your shot. I would guess they use some sort of inertial sensor/gyroscope, and I assume the impact with the ball provides enough “shock” up the shaft that the sensor can differentiate the real swing from practice swings. I am not 100% sure on this, just making my best guess. If anyone knows for sure, I welcome the feedback. Likes: Putting stats – Shotscope putting stats are far superior to Arccos, in my view. The ability to see make percentage as a function of first putt distance is great, but you are required to make sure putt locations are accurate for the data to have any meaning! Tagging pin location – in my mind, it is not a big deal to hit a button on the watch to mark the hole location. I have found that if you are too quick to hit the button you can end up with some erroneous results so I started hovering at the hole location just a couple seconds and the accuracy was greatly improved. I also find it easier to get putts placed properly when the pin is in its correct location. Editing shots – as mentioned above, the level of detail at high zoom levels is much better for Shotscope, making editing easier, in my opinion. Editing on a computer is easier than on the phone and I believe the interface for editing is better for Shotscope than Arccos. I prefer editing with Shotscope on a computer and Arccos on my phone. Extra tags – I really like the fact that Shotscope sends 4 extra tags. It makes it much easier to test different clubs and compare the data. As I understand it, for Arccos you need to create a new club, but it seems you have to call it something that is not already in your bag to get the data to be separate (i.e. calling a different 7 iron a 7 wood, or something). Is this true? If not, let me know how as I periodically swap out a few clubs when I feel like it. Dislikes: Dashboard interface – I think the Shotscope dashboard has the biggest room for improvement. Presenting similar to the Arccos breakdown would be great. Big-a$$ watch – like the phone in the pocket, I got to the point where it didn’t bother me, but my preference is to have nothing on my wrist. Also, the cuff of a glove will occasionally advance the hole unintentionally. This only happened to me a few times as I had read warnings about it, so I wore the watch further up my wrist. Battery life of the watch – the battery does not last long, at all. I seriously doubt one could play 36 in a day without a recharge. Even if you tried to charge between rounds, the charging is very slow, so it may not do you any good. Summary Both systems claim to help you improve by identifying areas for improvement. With one exception, neither systems has told me anything I did not already know – I suck off the tee. Both confirmed my short game is pretty stout for my handicap and putting is a relative strength. The one surprise came from Arccos, thanks to it breaking down facets of our game. I have always considered irons a relative strength of my game, but Arccos disagrees with me so far. I believe I have always felt that way because I tend to hit irons solid much of the time, but apparently a solid strike in the wrong direction doesn't really help you score . My left/right misses are higher than they should be and GIR is lower than it should be. Arccos shows my left/right misses as identical at 13.3% and the distribution in Shotscope looks pretty balanced left-to-right. I would suggest this is because my usual “miss” is a fade/slice so I always aim to the left of my target. Sometimes I hit the ball dead straight, resulting in a left miss, others with too much fade, missing to the right. In terms of gapping, they are fairly close considering the number of shots I have with Arccos so far, although I started playing with Arccos in August, so I was getting actual roll from from tee shots instead of stopping where it landed. I find the Shotscope data interesting with 5, 6, and 7 irons, but that is pretty easy to explain. The vast majority of my golf is played at one course, with all 5 par3’s having similar yardages and can range from a 5 to an 8 depending on tee placement, pin placement, and weather. In little to no wind, I would normally use the following clubs (prevailing wind direction also indicated): #3 – 8 iron (cross wind) #5 – 8 iron (downwind) #9 – 7 iron (downwind) #12 – 6 iron (cross/downwind) #17 – 7 iron (into the wind) Also, on this course the par 4’s/5’s rarely call for those clubs to be used so I would suggest the data is a little skewed by when/how I have to use clubs depending on the wind. For example, in little/no wind, #17 is a 7. In light wind it becomes a 6 and when the wind kicks up, it has become a 5, so all three clubs show up as the same distance. In my opinion, both of these systems are good and I would be hard pressed to say one is better than the other – they each have their flaws, we just have to decide which flaws are more tolerable to the individual. More than anything, I have a lot more confidence in what I should hit in a given situation because I have a much better grasp on my distances in “real life” situations rather than making educated guesses. Have either of these systems really identified areas for improvement? Yes, but for the most part I already knew the answer. I’m assuming most avid golfers know their issues, as well. Is it possible I am missing some level of detail (like what you periodically see in the blog)? Maybe, but I’ll worry about it once I get some lessons and figure out why I can’t hit a driver. Neither of these systems are all that hands off, and both require editing to get the most accurate data. Maybe someday one of these will get to the point of being completely hands off, but buyers need to understand what they are getting into, in my opinion, and not just assume they have to do no editing to get the most out of the data. So, which one will I be keeping? Arccos. I do not feel the Arccos is that much better than Shotscope, but ultimately, I like having the GPS interface on a phone so I can see and check yardages to features that are not in Shotscope. I also like the game breakdown they use, I just wish the putting stats were better/more informative. I’m committed now, because I gave the Shotscope to a friend after having the Arccos a couple weeks. Thanks for reading and I welcome any input you may have! Excellent stuff @MaxEntropy, I will add something to this soon... MaxEntropy, JohnSmalls, PMookie and 1 other 4 Quote In my cart Bag: Driver: King F9 9° - LH - Atmos Blue TS 6 Stiff Woods: King F9 - LH - 3/4 Wood - Atmos Blue 7 Reg Z U85 2 Iron Irons: T200 4 Iron AMT White S300 T100S - LH - 3-48* - AMT White S300 Wedges: Indi FLX- LH - 52° 56° 60° - True Temper Spinner Wedge shafts Putter: 2 Bar Hybrid Ball: Pro V1x Testing: Haywood CB/MB Combo Iron Set, 4-7 Cavity backs, 8-PW Muscle Backs, True Temper Dynamic Gold 105 Stiff, 2 Degrees stronger lofts. Tracked By: Follow me on Twitter @ham12_hampton and on Instagram @Nunfa0 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
revkev Posted October 7, 2019 Share Posted October 7, 2019 Thanks so much for opening this thread - just the information that I needed - I have Shot Scope but Ping is now offering sensors and three months of Accros free for anyone who purchased certain equipment (I bought a qualifying club.) My gut is that I would not like the phone in my front pocket although I would get used to it. Having written that it is at times so hot in Florida that my phone will go to sleep - I could see that becoming an issue - that may also be the reason why Foz is missing shots with Accros. I'd love to have the greater amount of GPS data that Accros offers as well as the relative handicaps for each part of my game - I don't know how much I'm willing to pay for it or what other issues I might experience with it. I have had absolutely no issues with Shotscope missing shots - it may have happened once in 20 or so rounds that I have data for. I don't consciously need to take practice swings either so I must be active enough with my clubs that I'm waking the censor up - I do take some practice swings but not always. I don't think I hit a drive 220 yesterday (wet and cross winds all day) and shot 76 - how's that for making the most out of one's game. sirchunksalot, MattF, PMookie and 5 others 8 Quote Driver: Taylor Made Xi10 10.5 Diamana S plus 60 R flex - 44.25 Fairways: Ping G410 5, 7, 9 wood Alta CB red 65 R flex Hybrid: Ping G410 26 degree Alta CB Red 70 R flex Irons: Ping G430 7-PW, 45, 50 Alta CB black 65 soft R flex Wedges: Ping 195 S54, E58 Wedges and irons are - 1/2” and one degree flat Putter: Sacks Parente Duke 32.5” Ball: Titleist Pro VI or Callaway Chrome Soft X ls While not at the same time I was fit for every club in my bag as well as the Pro VI ball. I use the chrome soft x ls on my league course. It has much softer softer greens than the club that I belong to. I’m on a mission to shoot my age - lifetime lowest round is 66 and I’m currently 67. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nunfa0 Posted October 11, 2019 Share Posted October 11, 2019 Right, I shall now share some thoughts. I actually did a comparison during the CCC3 pre chatter so I thought I would rehash that. First up I have to give a win to Shot Scope for the greens and putting. It gives you more accurate data for the second putts and so forth, is easier to accurately plot the pin with a click of a button and doesn't miss as many short putts. Both lots of sensors are easy to install but the Arccos sensors fit and sit soooo much better on top of the grip. They just look better and not as fragile as the Shot Scope ones do on grips with a rounded top. Both systems are easy to use but Arccos for me is by far easier. The ability to check if your shot registered and edit the hole as you play is a massive win for Arccos. No more editing the round later that night for me . I was even able to finish a round in virtual darkness, when the sensors wouldn't work, by adding shots as I hit them. Being able to look at a map of the hole as you play is fantastic so another win for Arccos. Yes Shot Scope gives yards to the front, middle and back of the green no matter what angle you are on and distance to hazards but to see the layout of the hole really helps me visualize the shot. Both systems give fantastic stats and can really help focus your mind on the problem areas of your game but the way Arccos present the data makes so much sense to me. I love the handicap presentation for each category and after just a couple of rounds it has already pointed out the areas I knew I had to work on. Good grief my chipping sucks Having my phone in my front pocket was very easy to get used to and ended up being far more comfortable than the watch. In fact the position I had to wear the watch on my wrist to ensure it recorded shots correctly was causing pain in my hand. I had reached the point where I had to stop wearing it and stop using Shot Scope because of the pain. Since changing to Arccos the pain has gone completely. So there are a few thoughts and I think we know who the winner is . I have to say that I still love the Shot Scope and think it is a fantastic product. I would definitely recommend it to anyone looking for a good, solid, easy to use tracking system. But now I am sold on Arccos. To me Shot Scope is the solid analogue system and Arccos is digital all the way. THEZIPR23, downlowkey, HardcoreLooper and 4 others 7 Quote In my cart Bag: Driver: King F9 9° - LH - Atmos Blue TS 6 Stiff Woods: King F9 - LH - 3/4 Wood - Atmos Blue 7 Reg Z U85 2 Iron Irons: T200 4 Iron AMT White S300 T100S - LH - 3-48* - AMT White S300 Wedges: Indi FLX- LH - 52° 56° 60° - True Temper Spinner Wedge shafts Putter: 2 Bar Hybrid Ball: Pro V1x Testing: Haywood CB/MB Combo Iron Set, 4-7 Cavity backs, 8-PW Muscle Backs, True Temper Dynamic Gold 105 Stiff, 2 Degrees stronger lofts. Tracked By: Follow me on Twitter @ham12_hampton and on Instagram @Nunfa0 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seancgmartin Posted October 17, 2019 Share Posted October 17, 2019 On 10/3/2019 at 8:40 PM, MaxEntropy said: Back in January, I was very torn on which of these two systems to purchase. The reviews on both here were great and I spent way too much time reading them. Ultimately, the sale Shotscope had at just the right time made the decision for me and I played most of the year using the Shotscope. As part of the #cobraconnectchallenge, I won an Arccos system and have been using it since the last week of August and now have 3 18 hole rounds and 6 9 hole rounds compared to 4 18 hole rounds and 17 9 hole rounds with the Shotscope. My intention here is to describe each system, present what I like and dislike about each (in no particular order), and leave it to potential buyers to decide which might be best for them. Both systems claim to help golfers improve by identifying areas for improvement on their game. I know there are others who have used both systems (@Nunfa0 and @JohnSmalls), so I would invite them to add their input. Obviously, anyone else can provide input on either system if they have something to add. Arccos: The sensors for this system are activated by light, so the act of pulling a club and addressing a ball turns it on (they recommend carrying clubs grip down if you have to walk a fair amount with a club out of your bag to avoid potential false positives). As I understand it, shots are detected by sound, which is the reason you are required to have your phone in your leading front pocket (left front pocket for right-handers). There have been a couple occasions where the system has missed a shot which may be due to light being too low to turn on the sensor – it’s not a huge deal and is noticed quickly since you likely have your phone out for the next shot. Likes: Data presentation on their dashboard – in particular, I really like the breakdown of handicap by individual facet of the game (driving, approach, chipping, sand, and putting). It provides a quick snapshot of how you are trending in each and helps identify which area(s) you need to work on. Using a phone as the GPS interface – this makes getting yardages to things like doglegs, a specific tree, or whatever much easier, which is not possible with the Shotscope. Accounting for slope and “wind” – I really like the “plays like” feature with Arccos. Since I use an old phone as a GPS only, the weather does not update so I have no idea how well the system accounts for the wind. This is a little nit-picky, but the sensors look better to my eye, even though they are substantially larger than the Shotscope sensors. Dislikes: Pin location – Arccos claims to be using AI to help determine the pin location on each hole. In my experience, it is terrible. I have not seen any hole where it was close enough that I did not feel compelled to fix it. Perhaps I walk around the green too much? As a result of the uncertainty in the pin location, presumably Arccos does not feel comfortable providing as detailed putting stats as Shotscope? Just guessing, though. Phone in front pocket – I have gotten used to having my phone in my pocket, but that does not mean I am a fan of it. The Link will get here eventually and render this issue obsolete. Phone battery life – for whatever reason, this system chews through the battery on my phone at a ridiculous rate (Samsung Galaxy S9+). Recently, I pulled out my old phone (Huawei Honor 6X) and have been using it without a SIM card. Its battery life has always been very, very good and I usually still have 70-ish% battery left after playing 18. The GPS on the old phone takes a little longer to settle down than my Samsung, but at least I know I could play 36 in a day without an external charger. Zoom level for hole editing – Shotscope has much better detail when zooming as tight as possible, making it easier to place a shot location more accurately. Arccos view of first green Shotscope view of same green Shotscope V2: The sensors for this system are activated by practice swings (inertial sensor?), which is why Shotscope recommends 2 practice swings along the direction of the shot near the ball. The sensors communicate with the watch you need to wear to tag the location of your shot. I would guess they use some sort of inertial sensor/gyroscope, and I assume the impact with the ball provides enough “shock” up the shaft that the sensor can differentiate the real swing from practice swings. I am not 100% sure on this, just making my best guess. If anyone knows for sure, I welcome the feedback. Likes: Putting stats – Shotscope putting stats are far superior to Arccos, in my view. The ability to see make percentage as a function of first putt distance is great, but you are required to make sure putt locations are accurate for the data to have any meaning! Tagging pin location – in my mind, it is not a big deal to hit a button on the watch to mark the hole location. I have found that if you are too quick to hit the button you can end up with some erroneous results so I started hovering at the hole location just a couple seconds and the accuracy was greatly improved. I also find it easier to get putts placed properly when the pin is in its correct location. Editing shots – as mentioned above, the level of detail at high zoom levels is much better for Shotscope, making editing easier, in my opinion. Editing on a computer is easier than on the phone and I believe the interface for editing is better for Shotscope than Arccos. I prefer editing with Shotscope on a computer and Arccos on my phone. Extra tags – I really like the fact that Shotscope sends 4 extra tags. It makes it much easier to test different clubs and compare the data. As I understand it, for Arccos you need to create a new club, but it seems you have to call it something that is not already in your bag to get the data to be separate (i.e. calling a different 7 iron a 7 wood, or something). Is this true? If not, let me know how as I periodically swap out a few clubs when I feel like it. Dislikes: Dashboard interface – I think the Shotscope dashboard has the biggest room for improvement. Presenting similar to the Arccos breakdown would be great. Big-a$$ watch – like the phone in the pocket, I got to the point where it didn’t bother me, but my preference is to have nothing on my wrist. Also, the cuff of a glove will occasionally advance the hole unintentionally. This only happened to me a few times as I had read warnings about it, so I wore the watch further up my wrist. Battery life of the watch – the battery does not last long, at all. I seriously doubt one could play 36 in a day without a recharge. Even if you tried to charge between rounds, the charging is very slow, so it may not do you any good. Summary Both systems claim to help you improve by identifying areas for improvement. With one exception, neither systems has told me anything I did not already know – I suck off the tee. Both confirmed my short game is pretty stout for my handicap and putting is a relative strength. The one surprise came from Arccos, thanks to it breaking down facets of our game. I have always considered irons a relative strength of my game, but Arccos disagrees with me so far. I believe I have always felt that way because I tend to hit irons solid much of the time, but apparently a solid strike in the wrong direction doesn't really help you score . My left/right misses are higher than they should be and GIR is lower than it should be. Arccos shows my left/right misses as identical at 13.3% and the distribution in Shotscope looks pretty balanced left-to-right. I would suggest this is because my usual “miss” is a fade/slice so I always aim to the left of my target. Sometimes I hit the ball dead straight, resulting in a left miss, others with too much fade, missing to the right. In terms of gapping, they are fairly close considering the number of shots I have with Arccos so far, although I started playing with Arccos in August, so I was getting actual roll from from tee shots instead of stopping where it landed. I find the Shotscope data interesting with 5, 6, and 7 irons, but that is pretty easy to explain. The vast majority of my golf is played at one course, with all 5 par3’s having similar yardages and can range from a 5 to an 8 depending on tee placement, pin placement, and weather. In little to no wind, I would normally use the following clubs (prevailing wind direction also indicated): #3 – 8 iron (cross wind) #5 – 8 iron (downwind) #9 – 7 iron (downwind) #12 – 6 iron (cross/downwind) #17 – 7 iron (into the wind) Also, on this course the par 4’s/5’s rarely call for those clubs to be used so I would suggest the data is a little skewed by when/how I have to use clubs depending on the wind. For example, in little/no wind, #17 is a 7. In light wind it becomes a 6 and when the wind kicks up, it has become a 5, so all three clubs show up as the same distance. In my opinion, both of these systems are good and I would be hard pressed to say one is better than the other – they each have their flaws, we just have to decide which flaws are more tolerable to the individual. More than anything, I have a lot more confidence in what I should hit in a given situation because I have a much better grasp on my distances in “real life” situations rather than making educated guesses. Have either of these systems really identified areas for improvement? Yes, but for the most part I already knew the answer. I’m assuming most avid golfers know their issues, as well. Is it possible I am missing some level of detail (like what you periodically see in the blog)? Maybe, but I’ll worry about it once I get some lessons and figure out why I can’t hit a driver. Neither of these systems are all that hands off, and both require editing to get the most accurate data. Maybe someday one of these will get to the point of being completely hands off, but buyers need to understand what they are getting into, in my opinion, and not just assume they have to do no editing to get the most out of the data. So, which one will I be keeping? Arccos. I do not feel the Arccos is that much better than Shotscope, but ultimately, I like having the GPS interface on a phone so I can see and check yardages to features that are not in Shotscope. I also like the game breakdown they use, I just wish the putting stats were better/more informative. I’m committed now, because I gave the Shotscope to a friend after having the Arccos a couple weeks. Thanks for reading and I welcome any input you may have! This is a great review @MaxEntropy - thanks for doing it. I am a ShotScope user, and this is the review I'd have loved before buying. In honesty, after reading this, I'm glad I went for shotscope. It's interesting to hear that the UI is better on Arccos - I agree, the ShotScope one could be presented better. Granted, the data that shotscope provides is great, just not presented too well. Totally agree on shotscope battery life, definitely needs improved. I honestly don't mind the watch, and quite like that it shows distances to the front and back of hazards like water and bunkers. Though I do find it annoying that if your left wrist weakens at all (I do this when playing a cut), your glove sometimes presses the hole skip button! I personally find the putting on shotscope pretty ropey when using a tag. On getting a new counterbalanced putter, I don't want to drill a tag into the grip, so I've moved onto the manual tagging of putts, and I've found that really helpfull in improving accuracy. I even do that when I have a putter with a tag in now - the stats are much more precise. The hovering you do, I've also learned is very helpful. Thanks so much for taking the time to do this. downlowkey, MaxEntropy and MattF 3 Quote Driver: Proto X 9° - Graphite Design Tour AD TP 6S Fairways: 0341X Gen 2 13° - Graphite Design Tour AD IZ 6S; 0341X Gen 2 15° - VA Drago 65 S 1&2 iron: 0311X - Graphite Design Tour AD IZ 95 X (1) S (2) Hybrid: 0317X Gen 2 19° - Accra Tour Z Xtreme Hybrid M4 Irons: 0311X Gen 1 4; 0311T Gen 2 4-PW - Oban CT115 S Wedges: Sugar Daddy Gen 2 - 50°, 54°, 58°- Oban CT 115 S; KBS Hi-rev 2.0 Putter: Directed Force 2.1 35" with 135 shaft Ball: TP5 Pix Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim418 Posted October 22, 2019 Share Posted October 22, 2019 My 2 cents.... I bought a used set of the original Arccos sensors. They did a good job of picking up shots (they were not light activated). But having my phone in my pocket was not for me. Tried putting the app on a smaller phone but it was too old for their app. So I stopped using them. The other reason I stopped using them was I got a set of Skygolf game tracker sensors. They had a thing you put on your belt to register each club before you used it, which seemed much better for me than the phone in the pocket. For the life of me I could not get it to work. They sent a replacement and it wouldn't work either. So I bought a ShotScope v2. I really like it. The watch is not attractive but I don't find it a problem or obtrusive. I like having the front/middle/back yardages (as well as hazards) on my wrist. With that and my Bushnell rangefinder I get everything I need. I have trouble remembering to mark the pin placements but it is very easy to do. Just need to build the habit. I find editing the round afterwards easy. I've had 2 support issues and both were resolved very well. One was a mapping issue on my course. The other was a faulty seal on my watch (fogged up after a round in the rain). They acknowledged the issue and sent me a new watch promptly. It seems most of the differences of opinion boil down primarily to whether you prefer the phone in your pocket or watch on your wrist. When the Arccos offer for free sensors came up I jumped on it. I haven't used the sensors yet but am wondering why I did that since I still don't want a phone in my pocket! Just got caught up in the "Free" I guess. MattF 1 Quote Driver: Titliest TSi3 - Tensei white stiff Wood: PING G425 LST 14.5* - Tensei orange stiff Hybrid: PING G425 19* - Tensei orange stiff Irons: PING i525 - Project X I/O 5.5 - 4-W Wedges: Taylormade MG3 52* and HiToe 56* Project X I/O 6.0 Putter: TM Spider X HYDROBLAST (33", 3* upright) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
as1440 Posted October 22, 2019 Share Posted October 22, 2019 Very interested in review - In UK shotscope has reduced price down to around $160. I currently use a Garmin X40 which does generally a good job in club tracking - activated by motion (X40 also does fitness stuff as well). It can track clubs used but you can manually enter on band after making shot or can update afterwards on PC (or phone - but PC better). I was after something that did it completely without my need to do anything. Also the stats from Garmin are not the best and cant track putts. (I think you can buy sensors to fit on clubs like arccos/shotscope - but more expensive than either and still have issue with quality of stats). If anyone has feedback? I have used it for 2+ years (playing 1-2 times per week) so has been very helpful but the interpretation has been more manual. It works as just a standard GPS distance tool. (There are watch versions available but I just wanted a fitness band size. Alan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
newballcoach Posted October 23, 2019 Share Posted October 23, 2019 I think price is a huge consideration in this discussion. Shotscope is much more affordable than Arccos, shotscope is $160 US versus $250 for arccos and another $80 for the link device if you can get it. I would love to get a shot measuring system and these are the two best, but the dollar bottom line is a big part of the review I think. Based on these reviews it certainly doesn't seem to me the arccos is worth double what the shotscope is. Especially considering you could buy another wedge (or play more golf) with the savings. PMookie, MattF, HardcoreLooper and 2 others 5 Quote WITB Driver- PING G400 LST w/ Project X Evenflow Black Fwy- TM Aeroburner 16.5HL Irons- Callaway Steelhead XR (3-PW) Wedges- Callaway MD3 (50,54,58) Putter- Cleveland TFI Satin Cero Ball- Snell MTB-X Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seancgmartin Posted October 25, 2019 Share Posted October 25, 2019 Another point I forgot to mention, is that the ShotScope customer service is absolutely outstanding. I had a couple of small issues with software that they replied to and helped within 24 hours. Furthermore, I had a bit of a hardware issue in that playing in the rain, some moisture got under the screen - shotscope replaced the entire system immediately - absolutely top notch. @as1440I have both a Garmin watch and the shotscope. Depends what you want - if you want distances and basic tracking, the garmin is fine, and does that job pretty well. If you're after shot tracking, there's absolutely no question that the shotscope is superior. They're a Scottish company too, so customer service in the UK is fantastic. You could buy the Garmin tags, but for the money, I'd go for the dedicated system. Don't think you'll be disappointed. JohnSmalls, MaxEntropy and MattF 3 Quote Driver: Proto X 9° - Graphite Design Tour AD TP 6S Fairways: 0341X Gen 2 13° - Graphite Design Tour AD IZ 6S; 0341X Gen 2 15° - VA Drago 65 S 1&2 iron: 0311X - Graphite Design Tour AD IZ 95 X (1) S (2) Hybrid: 0317X Gen 2 19° - Accra Tour Z Xtreme Hybrid M4 Irons: 0311X Gen 1 4; 0311T Gen 2 4-PW - Oban CT115 S Wedges: Sugar Daddy Gen 2 - 50°, 54°, 58°- Oban CT 115 S; KBS Hi-rev 2.0 Putter: Directed Force 2.1 35" with 135 shaft Ball: TP5 Pix Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
revkev Posted December 1, 2019 Share Posted December 1, 2019 Time for me to weigh in here as I've now played four rounds with ARCOSS after four months or so with Shot Scope. I will preface to saying that I like both systems. Neither the watch nor the phone in the pocket present an issue for me although it's a pain to remember to charge the watch and the watch seems to take a bit longer to get up and running prior to the start of the round. I have to say that I wonder about ARCOSS accuracy at times - not in the GPS yardages but the recorded ones. The last hole that I played the other day was a good example. It gave me 147 middle, 170 back and I shot the pin at 154 with my bushnell - I'm confident that all of those yardages were accurate. My shot ended up just past pin high, 15 feet left of the hole, on the green. There's no way the ball didn't travel in excess of 154 (in fact the ball mark was just past the pin about 5 feet left) but I was credited with 141 yards on the shot. I'm wondering if it didn't pick up my shot as my walking or putting the club back in the bag. I think this has happened a few times and it skews yardages with so few rounds. I also end up on the wrong screen occasionally - no big deal just an observation. My only real complaint about Shot Scope is that I sometimes forget to click the watch at the pin. I don't mind editing shots post round as I like to review my round at some point anyway and that process never takes more than 15 minutes. I wonder if the editing feature on the phone doesn't lead to undo delays or more than likely isn't a bit of an annoyance to my playing partners. They've yet to complain and I've yet to be in a group that is holding people up - I'm just wondering though. Given that I own the ShotScope with no additional fees and would have to pay an annual subscription for ARCOSS I think that my choice will be for the ShotScope. Either one of these systems is a great upgrade over keeping track of fairways, greens hit, up and downs and number of putts which was for the longest time the best method that we had. MattF, MaxEntropy, dhartmann34 and 1 other 4 Quote Driver: Taylor Made Xi10 10.5 Diamana S plus 60 R flex - 44.25 Fairways: Ping G410 5, 7, 9 wood Alta CB red 65 R flex Hybrid: Ping G410 26 degree Alta CB Red 70 R flex Irons: Ping G430 7-PW, 45, 50 Alta CB black 65 soft R flex Wedges: Ping 195 S54, E58 Wedges and irons are - 1/2” and one degree flat Putter: Sacks Parente Duke 32.5” Ball: Titleist Pro VI or Callaway Chrome Soft X ls While not at the same time I was fit for every club in my bag as well as the Pro VI ball. I use the chrome soft x ls on my league course. It has much softer softer greens than the club that I belong to. I’m on a mission to shoot my age - lifetime lowest round is 66 and I’m currently 67. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edingc Posted December 6, 2019 Share Posted December 6, 2019 Hopped on the ShotScope bandwagon since it was $119 for Cyber Monday. On my small wrists, the band is huge. I have it to the smallest clasp and still need to move it up my forearm a bit for it to be secure. Very light, however, and in taking some practice swings I can tell it won't bother me at all. Excited to get it out on the course! I didn't hate my GAME Golf Live, but their stats were lacking, and I have the feeling they may not be around much longer. HardcoreLooper, PMookie, MattF and 3 others 6 Quote Unofficial WHS Handicap: 5.0 / Anti-Cap: 8.4 (Last Updated June 2, 2024) Driver: Callaway Paradym TD (10.5°), 45.75", Fujikura Motore X F1 6X | Fitting Post 3 Wood: Cobra RadSpeed Big Tour (14.5°), 43", Fujikura Motore X F1 7X 20° Hybrid: PXG 0211 (2020 Model), 40.25", Mitsubishi Tensei AV RAW White 90X 4 Utility: Cobra KING Utility (2020 Model), 38.5", Aerotech SteelFiber i110cw Stiff 5-PW: Ben Hogan PTx Pro, 37" 7 Iron, Aerotech SteelFiber i125cw Stiff | Club Champion Fitting 50°, 54°, 58°: Edel SMS, V Grind, Nippon Modus 125 Wedge| Official Review Thread Putter: L.A.B. Golf DF 2.1, 36", 68°, Black with Custom Sightlines, BGT Stability Tour, L.A.B. Press II 3° | Unofficial Review Grips: Star Sidewinder, Undersized with Custom Tape Build-Up Ball: Snell MTB-X Optic Yellow Tracked By: Shot Scope H4 Bag: Personalized 2020 Sun Mountain Sync Riding On: Bag Boy Nitron | Official Review Thread WITB? | 2022 Reviewer Edel SMS Wedges | 2021 Reviewer Maxfli Tour and Tour X Balls | 2020 Participant #CobraConnect Challenge | 2019 Reviewer Callaway Epic Flash Driver Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yungkory Posted December 7, 2019 Share Posted December 7, 2019 7 hours ago, edingc said: Hopped on the ShotScope bandwagon since it was $119 for Cyber Monday. On my small wrists, the band is huge. I have it to the smallest clasp and still need to move it up my forearm a bit for it to be secure. Very light, however, and in taking some practice swings I can tell it won't bother me at all. Excited to get it out on the course! I didn't hate my GAME Golf Live, but their stats were lacking, and I have the feeling they may not be around much longer. If you end up hating it, and want to try Arccos, you know who to PM for a good deal on some barely used sensors w/ caddie subscription MattF, edingc and JohnSmalls 3 Quote Driver: Rogue ST Max LS Tensei AV Blue S 3w/5w: TSi2 Tensei AV Raw Blue S 4h: CLK 22* Hybrid Tensei CK Pro Blue 80HY S Irons 5-PW: 223 Steelfiber PR 95 S Wedges: RTX Zipcore Tour Rack 50, 54, 58 Steelfiber PR 105 Putter: LAB Link.1 Ball: Z-Star Diamond Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dhartmann34 Posted December 7, 2019 Share Posted December 7, 2019 Hopped on the ShotScope bandwagon since it was $119 for Cyber Monday. On my small wrists, the band is huge. I have it to the smallest clasp and still need to move it up my forearm a bit for it to be secure. Very light, however, and in taking some practice swings I can tell it won't bother me at all. Excited to get it out on the course! I didn't hate my GAME Golf Live, but their stats were lacking, and I have the feeling they may not be around much longer. Really enjoy mine. The size was a little bit to get used to, but after a handful of rounds, I don't even notice anymore. The thing to get used to is tapping for pin location and if you hit an extra shot/putt, having to go back and fix that. Sidenote... You can use the "provisional shot" option if you want to hit an extra full swing shot... And then just say "ball not lost". Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk JohnSmalls, MattF and edingc 3 Quote Driver: G400 (8*) with Diamana Kai'li X-stiff Fairway: G400 (14.5*) with Diamana Kai'li X-stiff Irons: Crossover 3 iron (19*) with TT Dynamic Gold 120 S400 shaft AP3 (4/5) and AP2 (6-PW) with TT Dynamic Gold 120 S400 shafts Wedges: Scor 50*, 54*, and 58* with TT Dynamic Gold 120 S400 shafts Putter: Pro Platinum Newport 2 Midslant Handicap: 3 Location: Illinois...until i can get my wife to move to a warmer climate Right Handed: Although sometimes I wonder if left handed would suit me better Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.