Do You Trust Online/Virtual Fitting Apps?

[GolfSpy_APH]

This is somewhat inline with the Vokey Wedge Fit App, but more do you trust the online questionnaire based fittings that seemingly all companies have. Do you think they work based on the information you provide or do you feel they are lacking in one form or another? 

If so where is it that you feel they could improve? Or do you just think they are what they are and a decent starting point, but not something you would solely base a purchase off of?

[mongo312]

I would base a purchase off an app if a fitter was using it but not solely on my own use. 

[Hacker60521]

This is a really timely Q as I have been searching for golf balls. Interestingly, the least “scientific” ball fitting solution in terms of asking questions like driver speed, ball speed, etc is from Titleist. The “better” ones I’ve seen so far are Bridgestone and Callaway. 

[NM01]

Vokey wedge fit is about the only app/tool I trust because it’s about the grind and bounce. 
 

Anything that’s determining shaft, flex, or a club I only considered a starting point and won’t purchase anything based on that recommendation.

 

[Mimzy]

It’s not so much I don’t trust the app as much as I don’t trust myself or the average the user to properly analyze what the app is asking. Unless you have quantifiable data from a reliable launch monitor I think the questions are going to get answers that are way off base. These also aren’t brand agnostic so the “best” fit from one manufacturer may not be the best fit at all for the player. 

[GolferXY]

I've used the LAB putter, Titleist , and Ping fitting apps.  The LAB app agreed 100% with the in-store fitting I got at Club Champion.  This app requires that you take video of your putting stroke and send it to LAB.  I used the app again on my next putter purchase from that brand when I went to a broomstick and it wasn't very helpful with that style of flat stick.  Didn't even need to send in another video.  Just told me that everyone should get the max loft of 79.5 degrees and use your driver to tell how long you want the shaft to be.    So I did that, and when I got the putter I cut the shaft down to my preference, but I didn't need the app to tell me that.  And voila!  Yesterday I mad made 20 putts in a row from 5 to 10 feet around the putting green hole.

I have used the Titleist wedge fitting app online, and played the results in the SM9 52 and 56 last year.  I really liked the M grind on my 56, and the F grind on the 52 fit my game around the green with just enough bounce on delicate chips.  I replaced the sm9's with some sm10's this season: I have the 50.08 F and the 56.12 D but don't get the spin on half shots that I'd like to see, not expecting it to draw back but an occasional hop and stop from 50 yards or limited run out when pitching to a down hill cup location would be on my Christmas wish list. While this may not be the fitting app's fault, it does demonstrate to me some of the limitations of the app as it exists.

I've used the Ping webfit app and have to say it looks great but I have a feeling it is too generic and makes assumptions based on handicap that just aren't accurate.  It fit me into a G430 max driver and while it says it fits the widest range of golfers, I'm definitely NOT one of them.  Can't hit it.  So, beautiful pageantry of illustrated/animated questions ["What is your downswing transition"] and all, I don't trust the accuracy of this one.

AI will change the fitting process in the next few years to where it may be indistinguishable from an in-person fitting.  But until then, I find them more of an assumption than an answer. 

 

[Donn lost in San Diego]

Terminology is pretty confusing in golf so you better know what you are doing.  Shop in person if you can.

[NM01]

1 hour ago, Mimzy said:

It’s not so much I don’t trust the app as much as I don’t trust myself or the average the user to properly analyze what the app is asking. Unless you have quantifiable data from a reliable launch monitor I think the questions are going to get answers that are way off base. These also aren’t brand agnostic so the “best” fit from one manufacturer may not be the best fit at all for the player. 

I agree and reading this forum and others as well as other online groups golfers have some bad perceptions of their swing and their game that can definitely provide bad results from the info entered 

[Cfhandyman]

16 hours ago, GolfSpy_APH said:

This is somewhat inline with the Vokey Wedge Fit App, but more do you trust the online questionnaire based fittings that seemingly all companies have. Do you think they work based on the information you provide or do you feel they are lacking in one form or another? 

If so where is it that you feel they could improve? Or do you just think they are what they are and a decent starting point, but not something you would solely base a purchase off of?

In the majority of cases it will not replace in person fitting, but that is also a function of the quality and training of the fitter.  A lot will depend upon the size of their database for comparison purposes as well as the information requested.  Having your Launch monitor data is much more helpful than basic questionnaire.  E.g. Ping's Ballnamic site for ball fitting is much better if you have launch monitor data.  Some are reasonably good, e.g. L.A.B. as it requires you to send in video of yourself, so the information is reasonably correct and can be used for purchase purposes, but is better if you had a chance to actually try the equipment.  The better ones provide you a good starting point or basis of comparison in helping your narrow the field.  

Having said that, I think we are poised to see major advances in online fitting through the use of AI (artificial intelligence) and large databases.  The limiting factor will be the quality of the input data and which data is critical, as well as the predictive algorithms.  If it includes launch monitor data and video, the better the outcome data.

[NM01]

1 hour ago, Cfhandyman said:

In the majority of cases it will not replace in person fitting, but that is also a function of the quality and training of the fitter.  A lot will depend upon the size of their database for comparison purposes as well as the information requested.  Having your Launch monitor data is much more helpful than basic questionnaire.  E.g. Ping's Ballnamic site for ball fitting is much better if you have launch monitor data.  Some are reasonably good, e.g. L.A.B. as it requires you to send in video of yourself, so the information is reasonably correct and can be used for purchase purposes, but is better if you had a chance to actually try the equipment.  The better ones provide you a good starting point or basis of comparison in helping your narrow the field.  

Having said that, I think we are poised to see major advances in online fitting through the use of AI (artificial intelligence) and large databases.  The limiting factor will be the quality of the input data and which data is critical, as well as the predictive algorithms.  If it includes launch monitor data and video, the better the outcome data.

AI is limited as well because it ignores the feel aspect of the club in the golfers hand. It’s a downside to the Mizuno optimizer. I know many who didnt fit into the top 3 shafts the tool spit out.

[jaskanski]

Not really. They may narrow down your search criteria to some extent, but if you take any 'app' at it's face value, they mostly rely on your own honesty on the input data - and most people have a tendency to over or under estimate their true statistics - mostly over estimate if we're all being honest.

 

[Clubs by Buzz]

I suggest "fitting" for average, can't break 100 golfer is over valued.  You can't buy a game.  Take lessons and practice. Standard off the rack clubs are fine until you develop a repeatable swing.  Just my $0.02. Cheers! 

[cnosil]

18 minutes ago, Clubs by Buzz said:

Standard off the rack clubs are fine until you develop a repeatable swing.  

You would advocate that can’t break 100 golfer  would be fine with small headed muscle back irons?  

[NM01]

2 hours ago, Clubs by Buzz said:

I suggest "fitting" for average, can't break 100 golfer is over valued.  You can't buy a game.  Take lessons and practice. Standard off the rack clubs are fine until you develop a repeatable swing.  Just my $0.02. Cheers! 

And fitters disagree with you as the data from fittings. The data shows that mid to higher handicaps benefit more from a fitting than low caps do.

a low cap can adjust to a not so great fit in equipment and play well. A mid to high handicap struggles to do that and needs equipment fit for them.

Just do some internet searching for yourself and see. The wonderful world of the internet has a ton of information to at has debunked a bunch of old school thoughts like this 

[Clubs by Buzz]

We can disagree.  Working at a golf club closely with teaching pros we see swing changes that change fittings.  Moving your stance to a correct ball  position will impact your lie up or down a degree or two.  So you fix you swing and your lie is off 

It's simple if your just adjusting shaft length based on physical stature.  I customize lengths based on charts. It's not rocket science. 

My concern is again that your can't buy a game.  I've seen club makers charging up to $30 to true a steel shaft. Truing a steel shaft? 

Let's not make the entry point to golf more expensive and complicated than needed.  Learning a good repeatable swing, how to chip and putt are top priorities  IMHO.

With the amount of used game improvement irons available today, choices are varied.  I'm not saying never get fitted. I'm saying get a swing before spending $100s or $1,000s. I know scratch golfers who have never been "fitted".  They play premium off the shelf irons or order them up or down a degree based on 2 minutes hitting off a mat with tape.  

The game needs to get less expensive for the average twice per month hackers. Just saying. 

[Clubs by Buzz]

If they buy "muscle back" irons they didn't have a golfing buddy to help them out.  Folks just learning buy a $100 set. Hopefully a buddy gives them some help.

[cnosil]

3 hours ago, Clubs by Buzz said:

If they buy "muscle back" irons they didn't have a golfing buddy to help them out.  Folks just learning buy a $100 set. Hopefully a buddy gives them some help.

Your statement was standard off the rack clubs are fine.   I can buy a cheap used set of musclebacks.  

https://www.2ndswing.com/golf-clubs/iron-sets/ben-hogan-apex-ii-iron-set/right-handed-stiff-steel-38dot0in-t-52438778456

 

[Clubs by Buzz]

I played golf with a talented young man today who will be a senior at Baylor this fall. He played competitively in HS and a year in college.  He has been fitted twice.  As his swing matured he found the original fitting no longer worked.  No he is struggling with the last fitting as he moves from competitive golf to recreational.  He says while the fittings worked at first, any minor swing changes made the fitting less valuable. 

All I'm saying is that "club fitting" is the latest marketing tool to get in your pocket. If you can afford one, get one.  But don't feel like you need one or a fitting will take you from 100 to breaking 90.

In a nutshell,  if you're swing is terrible, getting fitted to your terrible swing may not solve your problem. 

Obviously this is a passionate subject for those that can afford it. I'll choose to grow the game by refurbished clubs and selling then cheap to new golfers. 

BTW..my weekly playing partner and friend is 66. Has an index of 4 and has never been fitted. When I asked why not he responded why would he waste the money. 

The good news is we all love golf.  If I may suggest. Donate the clubs that didn't work to a new golfer for free.  You don't need them and should never need to hit them again.  Because clubs that aren't custom fit don't work.  Right? 

Cheers and hit them straight. 

PS. I'm working with this young man now to build him a 4HB to fill a gap left by the fitting.  Cost will be less than $100. 

 

[cnosil]

3 hours ago, Clubs by Buzz said:

I played golf with a talented young man today who will be a senior at Baylor this fall. He played competitively in HS and a year in college.  He has been fitted twice.  As his swing matured he found the original fitting no longer worked.  No he is struggling with the last fitting as he moves from competitive golf to recreational.  He says while the fittings worked at first, any minor swing changes made the fitting less valuable. 

I am confused. You previously stated a player can play with any off the rack clubs,  why are the clubs causing him problems and no longer working?   

Yes,  players can pick up off the rack clubs and learn how to hit them.  As you stated earlier if a newbie players buys muscle back irons then he didn't get good advice.  Isn't that part of what fitting does?    Agree, no club will fix a swing, but a club can make it easier to get the ball into the air.  

I hit hundreds of clubs every year and I think I have a decent swing but what I have learned is that clubs perform differently.    

I think you should define what you call a fitting because building a club to fit a gap in the bag is a "fitting"

Edited July 17 by cnosil

[NM01]

32 minutes ago, Clubs by Buzz said:

All I'm saying is that "club fitting" is the latest marketing tool to get in your pocket. If you can afford one, get one.  But don't feel like you need one or a fitting will take you from 100 to breaking 90.

It’s not and fittings have been going on for along time even before launch monitors and fitting carts. They have evolved over time from the persimmon days of here’s a bunch of drivers let me see which one works to having different shafts in clubs to find the right setup using the eye test, to having launch monitors and eventually adjustable clubs.

Fittings are done to optimize one’s ball flight. And yes for some as they grow and get stronger, faster improveme swing and club delivery their shaft profile or weight may change as will potentially the loft on their clubs.

The best in the world get fit and then test, test and test some more. Why? Because they want the best setup for their swing, has zero to do with marketing. 
 

Data literally shows us golfers improving from a fitting. You can believe whatever you want but the data doesn’t lie.

32 minutes ago, Clubs by Buzz said:

In a nutshell,  if you're swing is terrible, getting fitted to your terrible swing may not solve your problem. 

 

Again another school of thought that has been debunked by data. The golfers with bad swings are the ones who need a fitting more than a good golfer. They need the club to work with them. Denying this is just not being honest with those who come here to read and get info

32 minutes ago, Clubs by Buzz said:

BTW..my weekly playing partner and friend is 66. Has an index of 4 and has never been fitted. When I asked why not he responded why would he waste the money. 

As I stated before good golfers can adapt to equipment better than bad golfers. This isn’t justification for telling people not to get fit. It’s bad advice.

No offense but most good advice from an 18 handicap isn’t great. 

Edited July 16 by RickyBobby_PR

[yungkory]

On 7/12/2024 at 5:38 PM, GolfSpy_APH said:

This is somewhat inline with the Vokey Wedge Fit App, but more do you trust the online questionnaire based fittings that seemingly all companies have. Do you think they work based on the information you provide or do you feel they are lacking in one form or another? 

If so where is it that you feel they could improve? Or do you just think they are what they are and a decent starting point, but not something you would solely base a purchase off of?

I like the ones that allow you to enter your own LM data from previous fittings, I've applied results from my iron fitting two years ago, but mostly on golf ball OEM websites to see what ball it thinks I should play. I think it would be a positive for weekend golfers to be able to take quality data from one fitting and apply it to another, without having to drop hundreds more dollars. Surely it is more accurate than just asking questions, especially because not everyone is honest about their game?

[Tom the Golf Nut]

Having been on the rodeo circuit for a while here are my thoughts.

Been in a few video fittings and phone conversation fittings. They are only as good as the information you can provide. You really need to know your game and shot tendencies. Even with great information to the fitter you only going to get 80% correct. Wrist to floor is at best in the 80% range and lie angle is a best guess.

Been to some in store fittings. It’s a hit or miss wheather you get a knowledgeable fitter. They are not going to spend the time to get it right or get you into the right shaft. They will fit you into the standard offerings from the manufacturer or get you into something they are trying to push. I went to a PGA SS in April. I wanted to hit the Wilson Dynapower Forged irons. Asked the fitter and he said they are over on the rack. I said zI saw them but I wanted to hit one. He was annoyed but put together a 7 iron. After a couple swings he asked if I was done. Then said you only hit a 7 iron 100 yards, you need a senior flex and I don't have any. I said no I carry a 7 iron 140 with a regular flex. So something is wrong with your system. He took the club, took it apart, put it away and walked away. A few years ago I had a great fitter at a PGA SS in Florida. He took the time and knew what he was doing. I purchased a G400 driver from him. It was in my bag for quite a few years and is still my backup driver.

Professional fittings from Truspec, Club Champion, or other private fitters. These are by far the best. Your paying to be fit, but nothing is left on the table. They check everything. I prefer the type of studio where you are hitting from inside a studio to an outside range. You get the data, all the shaft choices, head choices,, and you get to see your actual ball flight. Its well worth it. Once you have your specks you can then just relay that info to a club builder or manufacturer. I think you should verify every few years to make sure nothing changed. 

[NM01]

1 hour ago, yungkory said:

I like the ones that allow you to enter your own LM data from previous fittings, I've applied results from my iron fitting two years ago, but mostly on golf ball OEM websites to see what ball it thinks I should play. I think it would be a positive for weekend golfers to be able to take quality data from one fitting and apply it to another, without having to drop hundreds more dollars. Surely it is more accurate than just asking questions, especially because not everyone is honest about their game?

You can’t account for how a recommended setup might feel for a setup and how that’s going to affect the golfer and the delivery of the club.

You can’t account for head design and how it affects launch and spin along with how that is brought about by the above items.

Despite what some on here think feel plays a big role in club performance. I’ve been fit into different loft and shaft in back to back TM releases and titleist releases. I’ve had iron shafts that were recommended not work out for me.

But if one wants to do what you suggest from a system where data entry is used they might as well just buy the same shaft in the next release of rhe club they have 

[yungkory]

1 minute ago, RickyBobby_PR said:

You can’t account for how a recommended setup might feel for a setup and how that’s going to affect the golfer and the delivery of the club.

You can’t account for head design and how it affects launch and spin along with how that is brought about by the above items.

Despite what some on here think feel plays a big role in club performance. I’ve been fit into different loft and shaft in back to back TM releases and titleist releases. I’ve had iron shafts that were recommended not work out for me.

But if one wants to do what you suggest from a system where data entry is used they might as well just buy the same shaft in the next release of rhe club they have 

Surely better than a questionnaire alone? Pros change heads more often than shafts, and most fittings I've ever heard of/seen/been to start at the clubhead. If I know I don't produce a lot of spin, input that into the tool, and it recommends me their low-spinning head, it's probably not going to sell me. I guess they could just program it to lie, lol.

Just have to wait for AI to be able to analyze our swings and club deliveries, and put all of the fitters out of work

[NM01]

54 minutes ago, yungkory said:

Surely better than a questionnaire alone? Pros change heads more often than shafts, and most fittings I've ever heard of/seen/been to start at the clubhead. If I know I don't produce a lot of spin, input that into the tool, and it recommends me their low-spinning head, it's probably not going to sell me. I guess they could just program it to lie, lol.

Just have to wait for AI to be able to analyze our swings and club deliveries, and put all of the fitters out of work

Not really. I’ve been fit for nearly all my clubs by very good fitters. I’m going to use my TM experience as an example for why it doesn’t work. TM m1/2 drivers were great. Loved the 2016 m2 10.5° driver. Had to dialed in by UST with one of their shafts. Everything was optimized.  2027 m1/2 no change in performance. M3/4 went to my fitting and couldn’t find any combo that produced even remotely playable ball flight. Some numbers look great on the launch monitor if you’re chasing pure distance but not playable in real life so I pass on m3/4 play mostly titleist again. Following year m5/6 head come out. Ball speed was 3-5mph less than my m2 and 5-6 mph less than my titleist 917. And couldn’t get spin above 2100 with any of the heads and tried numerous shafts including some labeled by the manufacturer as high spin.

if I put my launch monitor data from any of my past fittings it would have spit out a recommendation for a driver that would be unplayable for me despite having accurate and optimized for my swing numbers. Also was not a fan of the sound of rhe m5/6 driver. Absolutely love the m5 tour 5w. Still in my bag. 
 

As for AI even if it can analyze one’s swing again it can’t account for how something feels and or performs for someone. In person fittings with a qualified fitter is the best option to optimize one’s setup. Even as someone who did fittings for 6 years I went to my preferred fitters to get into new clubs that I had intended to be my primary set. 
 

 

[Clubs by Buzz]

I guess Ricky is the guru. As a newcomer, who is a disabled vet my opinion is worthless. Since you have no idea of my physical constraints, you are not qualified to judge me. 

I thought this was an open minded group.  So let me restate my one main point. Fitters and manufacturers spend a lot of money on adverts. The game has been played for enjoyment for over 100 years.  Stop making entry complex and expensive. 

Fortunately because of the many who served you can have your opinion. There are more like me than you.  Those who just enjoy the game. 

My last post.  Thanks for your opinion. Stats only matter to some. 

I'll cancel my membership to save you from having to put up with the disabled 18 HCP who builds great clubs. 

You are what's wrong with the game and social media.  Your stats and opinion are all that matte.

Cheers and hit them straight

 

[Clubs by Buzz]

4 hours ago, yungkory said:

Surely better than a questionnaire alone? Pros change heads more often than shafts, and most fittings I've ever heard of/seen/been to start at the clubhead. If I know I don't produce a lot of spin, input that into the tool, and it recommends me their low-spinning head, it's probably not going to sell me. I guess they could just program it to lie, lol.

Just have to wait for AI to be able to analyze our swings and club deliveries, and put all of the fitters out of work

We will always have teachers.  I trust a top 100 instructor more than a fitter.  But then they are just pros. Cheers. 

[NM01]

5 hours ago, Clubs by Buzz said:

guess Ricky is the guru. As a newcomer, who is a disabled vet my opinion is worthless. Since you have no idea of my physical constraints, you are not qualified to judge me. 

Has nothing to do with your veteran status(I’m a vet as well) nor your disability when it comes to your opinion.

But as you indicate as a newcomber that has an influence on your knowledge level how that knowledge may be lacking experience in the industry and the game of golf. It’s not just you but in general on certain things a mid to high handicaps advice on golf swing, fittings, etc is usually bad. There are plenty of low handicaps whose advice is bad as well. One of my buddies is a 3-5 handicap depending on how much he plays. He has zero club knowledge or even understanding of launch, spin, golf swing. He’s played long enough that his swing is his swing and his ball flight is what he prefers despite it being based on old clubs and old ball flight laws. His advice would be wrong on pretty much anything club fitting, equipment or swing.

But generally better players have a better understanding of things and can provide better advice. Im not the guru but I’ve worked as a fitter and have been around the equipment side of golf for more than a decade. I’ve read arcticles from fitters, ive seen the information put out by places like club champion on how fittings improved a golfers swing and numbers. I’ve talked to numerous fitters over the years that I’ve learned from. 

 

Edited July 17 by RickyBobby_PR

[IceIce]

The only ones I trust are the wedge fitting apps for bounce and grind. Shafts are impossible to fit without seeing ball flight and dispersion.  Lie angle on irons can’t be done unless you see where the ball strikes the face of the club. Ball fitting may get you close but without seeing ball flight I’d never trust the results. 

[Thomas.r.kasper]

Not for clubs, but I think ball is likely ok to narrow down your options and maybe try a couple out on the course.