For The Love Of Robots...

[GolfSpy Barbajo]

Came across this while web surfing....

 

http://www.edwinwattsgolf.com/ARC.aspx

 

Edwin Watts apparently conducted robot driver testing. Not necessarily a fan of robots, but this is pretty interesting. Looking forward to seeing how this compares to real live golfers in a real world test from MGS!

[Paul S]

Well THAT was fascinating.

 

I'd like to see the raw data.

[hckymeyer]

Very interesting to see them do this. I do think it's a little weird though if you look through their recommendations. To me is basically says we are not going to be selling many Cobra, Nike or Callaway drivers.

 

Can't wait to see the results of the REAL ultimate driver test and compare the recommendations.

[GolfSpy WD]

The TE really kicked ass huh? Interesting, wish they showed a bit more of how the tests were tuned, such as swing speed/AoA/etc.

[sai-jin]

That's an interesting link, thanks!

 

I'm surprised that Covert TOur isn't there.

And looks like RBZ 1 is beating out RBZ 2.

[The Dansome]

And I thought this was a thread about WD.....

[GolfSpy WD]

And I thought this was a thread about WD.....

 

I was disappointed it wasn't. That's what happens when you let a wookie loose.

[RoverRick]

I am growing concerned about him. With the wife out of town, and all that snow, he fell in love with his reflection, then his avatar and now robots, next thing you know he will be looking up the best looking women in golf. He needs his adult supervision.

[Tony Covey MGS]

We looked at this the other day. It's definitely interesting, and you have to respect Edwin Watts for taking this step.

 

As we've said countless times, we believe humans provide a better indicator of performance (robots are great for determining performance characteristics, which isn't quite the same thing).

 

It's going to be interesting to see how this plays out. Ultimately it could be very useful for the consumer, but if it results in TE and other smaller companies outselling TMaG and Callaway, there will probably be some backroom pushing and shoving that goes on...and then one day you never hear about this testing again.

[Matt Saternus]

I'd be really curious to know about how this testing was done.

[JMiller]

The main thing that is pointless for a consumer to read is a review from a player where the equipment doesn't fit their ability or comments also don't fit the ability.

 

Speaking only for myself as a good player (4 or better handicap from the tips), I really don't want to read a 7+ handicap talking about how the clubs is "consistent and straight" or some other comment you know is based on their 1 to 5 best swings out of 25 swings. I understand where it might be beneficial to have all levels of handicaps test the clubs if you can that way everyone reading can have at least one person close to their ability to base something off of in going to the store to TRY things for themselves.

 

I really only even use reviews for a basis of narrowing down the list of what equipment that I want to try. I'm going to go and hit stuff for myself and get fit for my equipment to maximize my ability. When I hit a shot, I know that a bad result is me and not my equipment.

[GolfSpy WD]

The main thing that is pointless for a consumer to read is a review from a player where the equipment doesn't fit their ability or comments also don't fit the ability.

 

Speaking only for myself as a good player (4 or better handicap from the tips), I really don't want to read a 7+ handicap talking about how the clubs is "consistent and straight" or some other comment you know is based on their 1 to 5 best swings out of 25 swings. I understand where it might be beneficial to have all levels of handicaps test the clubs if you can that way everyone reading can have at least one person close to their ability to base something off of in going to the store to TRY things for themselves.

 

I really only even use reviews for a basis of narrowing down the list of what equipment that I want to try. I'm going to go and hit stuff for myself and get fit for my equipment to maximize my ability. When I hit a shot, I know that a bad result is me and not my equipment.

 

Though I agree that I like having a wide range of skills That seems very close minded. Should I ignore 95% of reviews because the reviewer is a low handicapper? I'd say no, because it can be a good indication of a club that *doesn't* work for me, which can sometimes be as useful as clubs that do. The more reviews you read the better impression you get.

 

All reviews have to be taken with a grain of salt and adjusted to your ability, but unless the review is just a "I love TM" type of thing, then you can get something out of it, even if it's just entertainment or a discussion on the characteristics of the club. Anyone, regardless of skill, who goes out and buys a club without trying it themselves is missing the point.

[Kor.A.Door]

Has anyone actually hit the new xcg6 from TE, it looks a lot more solid than the xcg5,

 

I should just ask WalkerJames, I think he has one and it is lefty as well.

 

Just curious if any one else has hit one, I have a difficult time finding one in LH to hit. I am curious to see how well it compares to the mega market drivers in the human testing.

[JMiller]

Though I agree that I like having a wide range of skills That seems very close minded. Should I ignore 95% of reviews because the reviewer is a low handicapper? I'd say no, because it can be a good indication of a club that *doesn't* work for me, which can sometimes be as useful as clubs that do. The more reviews you read the better impression you get.

WD, that's not what I meant. I meant from MY PERSPECTIVE (as a 4 or better handicap from the tips), I have zero use for someone giving a review that is above a 10 handicap on anything. I'm sorry but most 10-15 are dicey, anyone above a 15 is struggling to keep the s*** in play most the time.

 

Can this player provide me a review of what the club acts like when hit THIN, FAT, TOE, HEEL, PURE? Nope as I haven't found someone that's above a 15 yet that can even tell me where the ball hit the face unless it's really bad. They can't tell the difference between a pure strike and a 1/8" or 1/4" miss. How about distance and accuracy dispersion to a target, the data will be all over the map. How about workability of the head, is it hard to work or easy to work? A high handicap can't tell me that either unless they talk about how much it goes one way or the other. The point I am making is that a 15+ handicap really doesn't have the game to give a decent performance review. Even the 7-15 guys could be dicey about it.

 

The point I am getting at is that it takes a good golfer to be able to FEEL the difference in their swing and the equipment to separate the two for actual performance results. I just don't believe that a 10+ has the game to be able to do that. All the 10+ has to offer is how much the equipment corrected their issues rather then how it can maximize their ability.

 

 

Anyone, regardless of skill, who goes out and buys a club without trying it themselves is missing the point.

I lived in Myrtle Beach from May 2009 to Jan of 2012, I spent a ton of time in Martin's PGA Superstore across from Broadway testing equipment and talking to my friend / builder that used to work there. We would see at least 5 people in a 2 hour span walk up to the TMaG rack or another OEM rack grab a driver or a different club and head straight for the register without hitting it.

 

This happens more often then you think, I hear from High handicaps around the beach that I played with crap like "TaylorMade makes the best drivers" I ask "have you hit anything else to compare it to prove that statement?" more often then not the answer was no.

 

People are brain washed by marketing, and sometimes just don't know any better buying whatever their friends play.

[wade410]

Personally as a hack I look for the higher handicap reviews to read. What good does it do me to read the reviews of someone who swing speed and control is something I can never even get close to copying. WhatI look for is an nice even happy reviews from all skill levels. At the same time I find it important to remember that some ones reveiw is an opinion and you know what they say about those

[furu]

Independent robot testing - http://www.robogolf.com/ German site, I know the guy who runs it. Use google translate

[Super Tuna]

Till I stand across from a bot on the first tee

 

Just you wait until we get to play

 

I'll show you a perfect form water ball shot like nobody's business heh.

[The Artful Duffer]

We would see at least 5 people in a 2 hour span walk up to the TMaG rack or another OEM rack grab a driver or a different club and head straight for the register without hitting it.

 

This happens more often then you think, I hear from High handicaps around the beach that I played with crap like "TaylorMade makes the best drivers" I ask "have you hit anything else to compare it to prove that statement?" more often then not the answer was no.

 

People are brain washed by marketing, and sometimes just don't know any better buying whatever their friends play.

 

I can back this one up. I work for a big box retail sporting goods store. (bear with me and think no ill of me for what I do, it's a job and there may or may not be self loathing involved.) I have no hitting bay or monitor. Not even a mat and a net.(good for me since I'd never get s*** done.) and I truly hate selling equipment to anyone who cares about their game(And as a club ho, I love new anything, hell I prefer the tech stuff to actually playing sometimes) Granted, I take the time and do my own research(I've swung every new club for the past 3 years that we carry) to offer a semi-educated opinion but I can't match my experiences to a swing I've never seen. I sold an R1 to a guys wife today. Don't know a thing about him other that what she told me. I'd have been thrilled to have the ol lady show up with a club like that for me but did I actually do him a disservice? Ramble on ramble on, paint over performance, hype vs hope, whatever you wanna call it, the ads still run what I sell. And to be honest(I'm not just saying this because I've seen my Cally rep a hell of a lot more than my Tmag, and I haven't seen either in months sunsabitches) but I've been pushing the Cally Xhots over the Stage2's just because I feel it's a better product but people still just walk in, grab the TM and go without a single thought or question other than "this thing come with a headcover?" I kind of lost my way with this post and apologize profusely. I'm sure you fine gents and ladies can make sense of it.

[Blade]

The only robot allowed around here is WD!!!

[whiskey golf]

I was surprised at the results. The Tour Edge really did well according to the tests and it's like the less popular drivers are the ones doing the best

[Rosen]

I'm no expert on robots or golf clubs, but it seems to me this testing is flawed from the start and the results are useless with out more data. Naturally Wilson and Tour Edge are going to be at the top of the list, I believe they both have a sub 50g shaft in them. The robot is set to swing the same every time so the only variable is the club. So unless the robots swing is changed to compensate for the different clubs, the robot is not swinging the same. That means the lighter the club the faster the swing. MPH usually translate to more ball speed and more distance. That is the biggest flaw I see with this testing. To really get any useful information out of the testing we as the consumers need to know some more info on how the testing was done and what the results were. How fast was the robot set up to swing? How fast was each club swung? This should change based on weight and length. What flex was used? What are the actual numbers? I want to know how far for each club. The way theses results are printed it looks like Wilson rocks and Nike sucks. There may only be 1 yard difference between the 2 drivers but the printed results tell us next to nothing.

[GolfSpy WD]

I'm no expert on robots or golf clubs, but it seems to me this testing is flawed from the start and the results are useless with out more data. Naturally Wilson and Tour Edge are going to be at the top of the list, I believe they both have a sub 50g shaft in them. The robot is set to swing the same every time so the only variable is the club. So unless the robots swing is changed to compensate for the different clubs, the robot is not swinging the same. That means the lighter the club the faster the swing. MPH usually translate to more ball speed and more distance. That is the biggest flaw I see with this testing. To really get any useful information out of the testing we as the consumers need to know some more info on how the testing was done and what the results were. How fast was the robot set up to swing? How fast was each club swung? This should change based on weight and length. What flex was used? What are the actual numbers? I want to know how far for each club. The way theses results are printed it looks like Wilson rocks and Nike sucks. There may only be 1 yard difference between the 2 drivers but the printed results tell us next to nothing.

 

Best comment yet. Welcome to the forums Rosen!

[GolfSpy Barbajo]

For me, the only value something like this would have would be to consider clubs that may have been off my radar. The usual suspects are the usual suspects.

 

Real golfers hitting real shots carry a lot more weight - but all any of it does is point me in a direction.

[fozcycle]

I find it a little intersting that neither Callaway nor Nike were listed in the top 3 from any robot Category....

[silver & black]

I don't swing like a robot, so.................

 

I never buy anything I don't hit first.

[Tony Covey MGS]

The R&D guys at Callaway told us that robots show 0 distinction between shafts. High launch, low launch, senior, or x-flex, because of the way the machines swing, it all comes back basically the same.

[revkev]

I can't tell you the last time that I bought a driver without being fit for it - wait yes I can - 6 years ago I tried a friend's Rapture and loved it so I bought one on ebay - I loved that, cut the shaft down to 44 1/2" didn't like it as much and set it aside. Bought another one on ebay but this time with a different shaft, similar to the shaft I had in my hybrids. Unfortunately what worked in the hybrids didn't in the driver, launch and spin were way too high and I lost tons of distance - I went to get fit and ended up with something completely different - completely different even from what I thought I'd like - it was a Mizuno with a very light shaft and less loft - ugly as sin but I hit the crap out of it - still I didn't like the way it looked - used it for nearly 3 years and then went for another fitting and ended up with the Adams F11 that I was using when I replaced it with the TMag that I was fit for last fall.

 

I'm convinced that my driver is the best driver for me - so if you are 56, have a moderate swing speed, plus 3 slightly from the inside and hit the ball solidly a high percentage of the time then I recommend the R11s with an Aldila Beta shaft 44 1/2" long. That might be a good starting point for you.

 

Frankly I looked at this test and didn't think twice about it - just another marketing gimmick - I didn't know what swing speed or attack angle or anything else really about what the robot was doing but I'm also not in the market for drivers and didn't look at it too closely.

 

Just go get fit if you want to buy a new driver - it's really not that complicated.

[Walkerjames]

Has anyone actually hit the new xcg6 from TE, it looks a lot more solid than the xcg5,

 

I should just ask WalkerJames, I think he has one and it is lefty as well.

 

Just curious if any one else has hit one, I have a difficult time finding one in LH to hit. I am curious to see how well it compares to the mega market drivers in the human testing.

I don't have any TE clubs although there seams to be a lot of love for them I have just never hit one I'm still baging a Cobra LV4.

[Super Tuna]

The R&D guys at Callaway told us that robots show 0 distinction between shafts. High launch, low launch, senior, or x-flex, because of the way the machines swing, it all comes back basically the same.

 

I agree but Harrison would like you to believe otherwise, or at least they did when they were pushing the Saga. I don't know if they still hold that opinion.

 

Robots take wrist action out of the equation and that alone invalidates all the results for practical application to humands.