Trugolf Technique

[TheGolfer]

It didn't meet my expectations but I wouldn't say it was a bad experience. The product performed just doesn't measure spin and doesn't react well to shaping shots left / right with some shots not registering. They all started on path correct but only 1 out of 5 drew/faded back. I provided my results to Trugolf and they confirmed that is the way the product works. If anyone tells you otherwise I wouldn't believe them. They will sell a lot of these since as one reseller told me they are targetting a higher handicap market more for entertainment versus fittings / training / coaching who are not going to be looking to hitting deliberate draws / fades. They will sell a lot due to the convenience. For that market it is very good. BTW the customer tech support is very good - when we setup the unit we were on the phone twice since the owner recently got it and they picked up the phone realtime and stepped through all the calibrations to insure it was setup correct - no emails, voice mails, just as much time as we needed to make sure everything was calibrated correctly - that was nice.

The owner let me spend over 2 hours on the unit and test all clubs and shots in the bag. Very extensive - not a 30 or 60 minute test. Did the same for all 4 I tested.

Remember, it all depends on hcp and buyer expectations. That is why on the forum when users always talk about the accuracy of some of these systems and recommending them to people without first knowing what kind of player the person is or what their primary use of the system is (ie entertainment, coaching, fittings, etc).

At my club I am guessing over 90% of members are > 10. That 90% would probably be happy with the TruGolf system. The other 10% more than likely would find systems that measure spin like foresight GC2 along with their fitting module more attractive. Niether is right or wrong just different market segments and expectations.

Other issues were that not all shots registered even after we had it fully calibrated with their tech support. This too I reported back to Trugolf after my testing who said they have had some complaints about that. Heard others on the forum say they experienced the same thing.

[bubs3141]

I would be in the 90% over a 10 handicap. I think it has been covered by saying no sim is 100%. But for its cost it should preform for me very well. Another reason why I went with the 6-lite is that it is now 4 people. I did not need an 8 person which is the full version of e6.

[TheGolfer]

congrats, enjoy it!

Very nice feature that it setups within 1 hour. Though I like my custom setup and screen size I am still putzing around with it to complete and it would be nice to unfold everything and be done in 1 hour.

Best of luck,

Regards,

[bubba22]

Good luck Bubs. Do let us know how you make out.

[bubba22]

The other thing I can confirm is that the e6 software is more forgiving with respect to the spin. I have mentioned that to E6 and in fact they have just updated their software spin for ProTee. The spin calculations for the club data is just not enough for E6. ProTee were able to increase that spin amount comparable to the ProTee at and it reacted much better. E6 have just released the new changes so hopefully I will be able to get it next week. Bubs do let us know what your exPerience will be like with the spin measurement and how you feel it fades and draws (or slice and hooks)

[cbear2]

Bubba, forgive me if this is a stupid question but when you spoke with e6 is the updated version to calculate more spin only available with the protee setup? I just checked and they havent shipped mine yet so if its available for the Trugolf I need to make sure I recieve the most current software. I will call them first thing Monday and inquire with the rep.

[cbear2]

The technology that goes into these things is over my head and I want to make sure the rep is being honest with me.

Thanks again for the info and help.

[bubba22]

I made the suggestion to the Protee to increase the spin on the E6, not sure if that will apply to Trugolf but I would hope. I have the Protee with Protee play as well as the E6. They both are good and in my opinion complement one another. Protee has full control of the spin measurement. As you know the spin is estimated based on the clubface to clubpath numbers (sidespin) as well as the club loft, ball speed and launch angle for the backspin. Those numbers are generated in the protee interface and sent to the E6 or Protee play to give a graphical representation. The one thing that I find is that with E6 is that a sidespin of X amount would only curve so much compared to Protee Play. The sidespin number is not the issue, its how E6 showed that amount to actually curve. It was too low. The Protee have the ability to increase or decrease that graphical representation as does any other sim if they want, NOT what is measured/calculated but what the software does with what is measured/calculated. Its the same as adding a distance boost as most sims/launch monitors have. E6 were supposed to increase how much curvature per spin number that one would see. I hope they would have a slider of some sort to allow for the end user to change if needed ie. what if they now have too much curvature? I will keep you all posted what happens. As to whether they will change for their own system, I don't know but I did find the Technique just like my home system with E6 (certainly not Protee Play), just a little forgiving.

[cbear2]

Thats exactly what I thought. The Trugolf sytem is picking up a fairly accurate amount of spin ,launch, and speed data but the software is only allowing the ball path to follow that data to a point certain point before it starts to add some forgiveness. Do I have that correct?

Funny there is a brand new youtube video of a guy using a Trugolf technique. He is playing his approach shot to a green next to a shoreline on the left. He hits his shot and from what i could tell looks like the ball path starts of down th left side toward the water with a slight draw but when the shot nears the green in the air it straightens out and lands on the left side of the green instead of out of bounds left. Sure enough when the club data screen comes up it shows a closed face with inside out swing. Now i dont know if there was wind or other factors that might have made that shot straighten out but did think it was interesting.

[bubba22]

Whats the link to that video cbear2?

[cbear2]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zobkSvMjbXU

watch the the small screen on the right that shows the ball path on the third shot.

[bubba22]

Yep, thats my club where I tested the Technique.

[ZMax]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zobkSvMjbXU

watch the the small screen on the right that shows the ball path on the third shot.

A 6.7 degree closed face and a 1.1 in-out should have been a hook, but if you look at the bottom right corner as the golfer is about to take a swing, you will see that the wind is coming in from the left. The video is not clear enough to see how much wind it was. After watching the first two swings again, the driver had a big draw and the lay up had a slight draw. Both were pushed to the right by the wind. With the approach shot landing on the green despite the hook spin, the wind must have been around 20+mph left to right. If the wind was only 10mph, then we might have a problem.

[bubba22]

Good points Z.

[FaultyClubs]

Zmax: The wind is readable. Around 10mph. (Approach shot varied between 8-11 mph, layup was 11mph, driver 10-11 with a gust to 14). Also fyi the number is 1.8 not 1.1 inside out.

The Driver is 2.9 closed with 0.1 outside-in.
The Layup is 0.4 open with 1.1 outside-in.
The Approach is 6.7 closed with 1.8 inside-out.

Do you still think the shot shapes matched this data?

[ZMax]

Zmax: The wind is readable. Around 10mph. (Approach shot varied between 8-11 mph, layup was 11mph, driver 10-11 with a gust to 14). Also fyi the number is 1.8 not 1.1 inside out.

The Driver is 2.9 closed with 0.1 outside-in.
The Layup is 0.4 open with 1.1 outside-in.
The Approach is 6.7 closed with 1.8 inside-out.

Do you still think the shot shapes matched this data?

No for all three. Driver should have landed near the rocks. Lay up should have landed right edge of fairway and the approach should have landed way left, off the green.

So, what we have here is what bubba22 and I have been saying all along. The E6 is too forgiving. It makes it fun to play but I would not want to work on my game with it. It's fixable and they need to fix it. I noticed this problem nearly a year ago.

[bubba22]

I agree. Yes Z that is exactly what you said with your review a year ago. Its what I see with the Trugolf sim at my course as well as the E6 at home. Thats why I had Protee get Trugolf to increase the curvature of the ball through E6 and not simply increase the spin numbers. The spin numbers generated by Protee are great. E6 just needs to have the ball curve more giving that number. Hopefully they get it increased.

[ZMax]

I'll bet that the E6 has been like this for a long time and was probably done on purpose. Being that the E6 was mainly used in a commercial setting, they wanted to be more fun than realistic.

It would not surprise me if Trugolf were to keep it like this for a while. Apparently, not enough people noticed it or though it was bad enough to complain.

[bubba22]

Well I think you are right. Its always nice to hit a ball and have it go straight. I tested it trying to hit draws, hooks, fades, slices and it was ok but just forgiving. I wonder if Trugolf will change the E6 for their own sim. They probably will get more requests from other companies that may be using E6 such as Trackman etc.

[cbear2]

Talk to the rep and he said there is already a built in feature to adjust the difficulty of the courses on the E6. But I dont think this is what we are discussing. He is going to check and see what kind of updates were made to the protee integration and see if they will be available for their own customers. Just so I know what im talking about you guys are saying the two sims are producing similar data but what the software is doing with the data is two different shots? I guess if they start playing with the software the could make they shots overreact just as much as underreact. Thats SCARY i guess you just have to know your game to really know how accurate these things are.

[bubba22]

Thats the case with any sim cbear2. The raw data needs to get represented as a flight (hooks, draws,fades etc) as well as the roll which is purely software driven. The roll can be affected by the lift and drag as well as the software generated condition of the ground (how hard or soft, how high is the grass). The flight can also be affected by the wind, rain, atmospheric height etc. Thats why the software is as important as the hardware. You can have the most accurate hardware that measures everything club, ball spin etc but if the software representing that hardware is no good, then it will not be accurate. Lets all not overlook the software. Bare in mind different software companies Custom Play, E6, GPS, Simway Golf all have different algorythm's for ball flight. These then get modified by the individual companies like ProTee, GSA, Optishot etc.

[ZMax]

cbear2,

So, the rep didn't know what you were talking about? Not surprised.

The problem is the "spin factor" that is used in the ball flight calculations. As bubba22 pointed out, the E6 appears to have a "spin factor of 1/2 or worst" of the total side spin. For example, if a certain club path and club face produces a side spin of 400 rpm, the E6 appears to be applying a factor of 1/2 to the 400, then using 200 in it's ball flight calculations. Which results in a ball flight that tends to not curve much or be too forgiving.

The Trugolf software guys would know what we're talking about, not the reps.

[bubba22]

I agree with you Z. Bottom line is like my friend RDH always used to say, " the software is an important part of the simulator calculation". Well maybe he didn't say it exactly like that but that is what he taught me and a lot of us here!!!

[cbear2]

Thats what I thought. I will see if I can speak with one of their software guys and see if he can adjust the spin factor to double the settings that are set from the factory. Thanks guys for the help I will let you know how it turns out.

[ZMax]

The factor of 1/2 is what it appears to be but it might not be exactly that. What Trugolf should do is add a spin factor adjust slider to the software. Maybe something from 50% to 300% of side spin.

[bubba22]

ZMx is right. I am hoping Protee will do that in the interface for E6 like they do for Protee Play.

[bubs3141]

Question to those that have played on the Trugolf. Is the sonic triangulation on the frame around the screen or is it in the screen? Just curious as I have not yet received mine. I was wondering because if I choose to make my screen bigger and buy separately.

[TheGolfer]

when i tested trogolfs trutrack system i believe they had microphones on the top frame left, center, right and on the floor right / left. they were not near the screen. they were at the edge of the front cage that comes out just shy of the hitting area. this was on their newport model which is their first portable model that lead to the technique - confirmed with the company that they both use the same trutrack system not modified. just not sure if the microphones are located in the same position.

[bubs3141]

thanks I was not sure. I will wait until I get mine and decide from there.

[rdh]

Back to that video showing a questionable ball flight given the readings... Does E6 apply adjustments for sidehill lies? This sounds like the issue with GSA Golf (not really an issue) that drove me nuts for the first few months. My system worked great, but the odd shot would fade when the swing was clearly a draw (or vice versa). It was intermittent and frustrating. I finally clued one time when I was on an extreme (very obvious) sidehill lie that the software was doing this. On gentle slopes, you had NO WAY to know if you were on a sidehill lie and should adjust accordingly. I got red chain to add a setting to turn off sidehill lie effects, so now the ball does just what it should on every swing based on the actual swing action.