Indoor Golf Facilities

[StrikurJim]

  Recently played in an indoor Golf League.  Had some real fun once I figured out the simulators.  It was very well organized and the prizes were fantastic.  The point I am trying to make is, are all the simulators the same or similar?  Also, what does everyone think of Golf Simulators?

[vandyland]

56 minutes ago, StrikurJim said:

The point I am trying to make is, are all the simulators the same or similar?

On the high end it seems there are radar based (trackman) and camera based (foresight GCQuad) launch monitors and the general opinion is that both are highly accurate (they have to be for the price they charge) but that Foresight GCQuad is better indoors than Trackman and Trackman is better outdoors since it is reading the entire flight of the golf ball. I think you will see a high degree of accuracy from both. 

[cnosil]

29 minutes ago, vandyland said:

On the high end it seems there are radar based (trackman) and camera based (foresight GCQuad) launch monitors and the general opinion is that both are highly accurate (they have to be for the price they charge) but that Foresight GCQuad is better indoors than Trackman and Trackman is better outdoors since it is reading the entire flight of the golf ball. I think you will see a high degree of accuracy from both. 

Then there is everything down to consumer grade products that provide simulation capabilities.   

[StrikurJim]

  I did have one complaint about the golf sim… it would rarely pick up my 58* wedge on a full swing or on lofted shots!  Is this something that’s common?

[cnosil]

5 minutes ago, StrikurJim said:

  I did have one complaint about the golf sim… it would rarely pick up my 58* wedge on a full swing or on lofted shots!  Is this something that’s common?

Yes/no.   There are lots of things that could be going one.  Knowing the launch monitor would help, but setup/alignment  is a very important part of accuracy and picking up the clubs.   Wedges launch higher and if the LM is radar based it has to be aligned properly or it might miss the ball flight.  Higher end radar do a better job than consumer grade  because they have a larger Doppler radar system.   I am one of the MGS most wanted testers and there are clubs that the GC quad struggles to pick up the club data.  We have to move the ball around within the hitting area to get it to pick up.  Their assessment  seems to correlate the shininess of the face on whether club data is picked up.  Some just do a terrible job of picking up the shot unless the reflective dots are on the ball.   Basically lots of possible reasons 

[StrikurJim]

  Did move the ball around a lot.  Talked to one of the staff there this evening when I picked up my prize package.  He said that the camera has trouble picking up his 56* SW at times.  Guessing that launch monitors would be much more accurate.

[cnosil]

56 minutes ago, StrikurJim said:

Guessing that launch monitors would be much more accurate.

Again,  depends on the launch monitor and what you are trying to measure.   If you have a doppler system and space to see full ball flight it will be pretty accurate.   Hit into a net/screen with partial ball flight it has to do some calculation.  Camera based systems are accurate measuring launch conditions but don't understand ball aerodynamics and don't see full ball flight so things are calculated.   Some people don't hit the ball on an indoor sim.  People also overestimate what they do outside and assume LMs are wrong.  

[StrikurJim]

   I can see how that could happen.  I started to figure out how the camera/ machine worked and adapted.  I am just really trying to figure out if all Golf Sims are the same?  I do understand the fact that launch monitors are much more accurate.

[cnosil]

6 minutes ago, StrikurJim said:

   I can see how that could happen.  I started to figure out how the camera/ machine worked and adapted.  I am just really trying to figure out if all Golf Sims are the same?  I do understand the fact that launch monitors are much more accurate.

All the golf sims use a launch monitor.    You could have one from Flightscope, ProTee, Uneekor, Foresight, skytrak, or others; this is what determines the ball flight.   Then you have the simulator software like FSX, TGC, E6, GSPro, Awesome Golf which display the course graphics.  

 

[StrikurJim]

Thanks CNOSIL!!!

[Cfhandyman]

In the winter months, I’ve primarily used Trackman or GCquad as the launch monitor to either work on my game or play rounds. Trackman 4 is a duel doppler radar based system and captures data for the entire ball flight.  Indoors, it requires sufficient distance (min 12’) to get the most accurate value  GC quad uses infrared object tracking in conjunction with 4 high speed, high resolution camera system.  Both are excellent, but have subtle differences.  GC quad measures at the face of the club, whereas Trackman, measures centre of mass.   So, there will be slight differences with respect to club head speed, ball speed between the two (1-3 mph).  For fitting purposes, GCquad is excellent because of the club face data it provides, but requires reflective dots to be placed on club face.  I have also used Flightscope, but for playing rounds, I prefer Trackman as visual and graphics tend to be better. All need to be calibrated on a regular basis and set up correctly to work optimally.  If you know your numbers, it’s pretty easy to tell when it’s out of sync  

[Indy_Oz]

The place I practice at uses Flightscope rear-positioned radar launch monitors. A friend nearby has a Bushnell (I think) camera-based launch monitor for his garage setup. For an indoor sim, I definitely prefer the camera-based systems (Bushnell/ GC Quad etc) for the info they give you on ball impact, club path etc and their accuracy with wedges and putting. Greenside chips and putting are definitely a weak point for the FLightscope systems I practice with. To the point I select "computer decides" for putting as there's really no point bothering. It fails to detect quite a few putts too.  For chipping I have to really under-hit chips and hope it doesn't over-estimate strength of shot. Sometimes I'll hit a chip that doesn't reach the screen and the FS says I've hit it >20ft.

I'm very happy with the system for anything beyond 30 yards though. Those feel right and match up with my on-course and outdoor range experience pretty well.

[Madden B]

I got a SkyTrak+ for Christmas and it is seriously great to have at home. I took it to the indoor golf place I used to go to with a Trackman setup to compare the data and it was really, really close across the board. The swing speed, ball speed, spin rates, smash factor, flight path of the ball, were all spot on, especially with wedges and irons. My dad estimated that everything was within 1-2%, which is pretty fantastic for a device that I can have at home. The driver carry distance was a little bit off and more in the 2-4%, which could equate to 10-20 yards so it isn't a small amount, but other than that we are pretty amazed. We are running GSPRO with it and it is a blast.

We don't have room in our garage for a projector setup so we back out the cars and have a TV mounted to the wall now. But I have always had a net setup all winter long so I can hit balls everyday, this just makes it even better for me to get my practice in and see where my ball is flying and how much I am progressing with my game. And I know it isn't quite as good as a Trackman or GCQuad (my golf team has one at our school we practice on), it does a real close approximation and the data is really pretty close, so I am thrilled with the setup. Club path and face data isn't bad either, and you don't have stickers on the face of the club and don't have to use special balls. Overall, I think that this is going to make a huge difference for me in the spring because I will have been able to play daily all winter long, which is saying something for a Utah-based golfer. Anyways, I am doing a closest to the pin daily challenge with my dad on YouTube which has been really fun, here's a link -