"Ball Data" vs. "Club Head Data" Which Would You Prefer to Know?

[veryold]

Hi to all

This is probably a stupid question, but if you had to choose between knowing (real measurements, and not calucations):

1) The Ball data, like speed, spin, LA, etc.

2) The Club head data, like Path, Face Angle, etc.

Which would be more valuable to you, as you work on your swings ?

Thanks and cheers.

[goatbarn]

Hah, nevermind then. Soooooooooo sorry I added what I'd want for simulating as well.

[bubba22]

This has been discussed at length before. Read here http://forum.OttawaGolf.com/showthre...Club+ball+data

[veryold]

Hah, nevermind then. Soooooooooo sorry I added what I'd want for simulating as well.

Actually your original post was right on the money, if u ask me !
Thanks.

This has been discussed at length before. Read here http://forum.OttawaGolf.com/showthre...Club+ball+data

AAAhhh, the Search Engine failed me this morning. Any way, that's a great discussion you pointed to.
Many thanks and cheers.

[mthunt]

Foresight says ball data is better and protee says club data is better. Go figure.

[veryold]

Foresight says ball data is better and protee says club data is better. Go figure.

Yes, "confusion" galore

And because of it, I have decided to drop my attempt to buy a "low cost" sim, for now, at least.

Although, if I find something that can give me ONLY these 2 club head parameters, and accurately, and low cost: FACE and PATH, I would jump on it.

Thanks and cheers.

[mthunt]

Yes, "confusion" galore

And because of it, I have decided to drop my attempt to buy a "low cost" sim, for now, at least.

Although, if I find something that can give me ONLY these 2 club head parameters, and accurately: FACE and PATH, I would jump on it.

Thanks and cheers.

Low cost sim = low cost results. That's ok if you're ok with that.

My opinion is having both club and ball data is ideal but having either will give you both in that a pull fade on ball data will at least tell you your club path was out to in and the face was open and conversely a out to in club path with face open on club data will produce a pull fade.

I have GC2/Protee. If I hit a pull fade, the protee shows an out to in path with face open on the club data screen. I know what I'm doing and IMHO it's accurate club data. I'll likely add club data to my GC2 but I'm like that. I don't like not having something.

The GC2 software showed club data as blank without HMT. Bonus

[Stonebattle]

Having both is of course the best.

I have seen just ball info give a false impression of what the club face and path is doing. What I have been doing this year is a good example. I have a driver swing with a face that is typically between 0 and 2 degrees close with a path that is 0 to 2 degrees in to out. Still, I have been hitting my drives weak right. With just the ball info, one might think I had an out to in swing and perhaps a face that is a bit open. What is actually happening is I'm hitting the ball off the heal of the club and the gear effect is over coming the path and face spin effects.

With just club data, it's easy to become dependent on the simulated ball flight results, which can be rather far off of the actual ball flight.

[veryold]

Having both is of course the best.

I have seen just ball info give a false impression of what the club face and path is doing. What I have been doing this year is a good example. I have a driver swing with a face that is typically between 0 and 2 degrees close with a path that is 0 to 2 degrees in to out. Still, I have been hitting my drives weak right. With just the ball info, one might think I had an out to in swing and perhaps a face that is a bit open. What is actually happening is I'm hitting the ball off the heal of the club and the gear effect is over coming the path and face spin effects.

With just club data, it's easy to become dependent on the simulated ball flight results, which can be rather far off of the actual ball flight.

This is just a SUPERB write up - Thank you so much for it !!!
And that's why I asked the question. I leaned towards the sims that provide the club head data, and now, after reading your submission, I am convinced of it.
Best of luck , thanks and cheers.

[Stonebattle]

Thanks veryold:
You know, having said that, I still would rather have ball info rather than club info. The main reason for that is the sims that are the most real world are those with ball info. To me, if one only has one of the two, it's necessary to be very carful with the interpretation of results.

[bubba22]

Stone, that's the gear effect. Well discussed here.

[Stonebattle]

bubba22:
Yes, I have read several posts. So, what are you suggesting?

[bubba22]

I am saying that clubs have a gear effect that will influence the ball spin and direction, that is hard to measure. It's more obvious with woods when hit off the heel or toe. So you can have a push slice based on the ball flight laws but if hit off the toe, it may only slightly fade or even draw depending on the amount of gear effect. So I agree with your above statement. I meant this forum has discussed the gear effect, not this thread.

[veryold]

After "studying" this subject some more, I am convinced that (IMHO) only these two parameters are really important to know:

1) FACE orientation at impact
2) Club head PATH at impact.

For checking the point of impact on a clubface, a bit of Painters Tape will do the job. And in addition, if you are not making contact near the sweet spot on a consistant basis, testing your swing on any simulator is pointless ?

Agree or disagree ?

Cheers.

[bubba22]

Yes veryold they are. But also knowing the position of ball contact on the club (heel or toe), angle of attack and club position (toe up or heel up) at contact are important. That's why I mentioned gear effect in my last post. Face to path is important for sidespin but heel or toe contact will affect spin due to gear effect.

[Stonebattle]

veryold:
Those two are important for sure, but not more important than the point where the face strikes the ball.
I would say, no I don't agree with your statements.

[drcabral]

So which indoor sim give the most accurate data( Trackman and Flightscope aside) club path data P3proswing, Optishot, Protee, GSA or GC2 with HMT?

The reason I ask is that I'm a GC2 owner and would like club head data but the cost for a new HMT Is not cost feasible and I am under the impression that using P3proswing just for club head data would be good enough.

[bubba22]

No right answer here. The ProTee and GSA sensor systems are different than P3Pro or Optishot. P3Pro does a good job with club data and in my experience is better than Optishot. Is ProTee better than P3Pro for pure club data? Hard to say. My brother owns my old P3Pro o I still on occasion whack around with it. GC2 HMT is probably accurate but is expensive. Yes using P3Pro for club data only would be reasonable. The data may not perfectly match the ball data but should be close and reliable. More reliable than the club attach devices, I would think.

[drcabral]

No right answer here. The ProTee and GSA sensor systems are different than P3Pro or Optishot. P3Pro does a good job with club data and in my experience is better than Optishot. Is ProTee better than P3Pro for pure club data? Hard to say. My brother owns my old P3Pro o I still on occasion whack around with it. GC2 HMT is probably accurate but is expensive. Yes using P3Pro for club data only would be reasonable. The data may not perfectly match the ball data but should be close and reliable. More reliable than the club attach devices, I would think.

Bubba you actually are making some arguments for the HMT because it was on of the few units that give you AoA (Trackman and Flightdcope aside). Also, u don't think any technology can account for fear effect, and I think you just have to take it into account when the data doesn't make sense or is not what you expect.

Separately,
I won't beat the club data vs ball data to death. What I will say is that when we r dealing with long irons and drivers, club path, face angle R important, but focusing on this aspect of ur game will not improve your score as much as short game. For short game accurate ball spin and distance R more important because margins for error are greater for swing path and face angle IMHO. This thread is like every other and it's disguised as Protee vs GC2 w/o HMT or Pepsi vs Coke😊

What went into my decision for LM was accuracy of data. I'm the type who uses a laser range finder with slope 50 yrds in. I understand my strong desire to have accurate data and to avoid erroneous assumptions with inaccurate data. I was introduced into the sim world on Vector Pro which for me had too many issues with reliability. I went with GC2 because it was facile and accurate. Also, I could demo it at my local Golf Shop. I think a lot of us may actually lean toward GC2 by the simple fact that they can access it compared to Protee. Lastly, u thought I would use the unit to dial in my wedges like Dave Pelz, but after taking it outside and watching dirt kick up on my $4000 toy, that was quickly out to rest along with my belief that one can truly dial in wedges with Pelz clock system(separate issue).

So how can you get your needs met? It depends on your budget. Assuming one realizes that FSX and forsight software is dead with TGC. Barring Skytrack and other LM that R not on the market.

A.3k-6k Protee/TGC
B.5k-8k Gc2+P3proswing/TGC. If they can b used together without the Gc2 flash interfering with P3P accuracy and assuming you can run TGC and P3P together.
C.8k-14k Gc2+HMT/TGC
D.10-14k Flightscope/TGC(in future?) if u have space
E. 20-25k Trackman/TGC(in future?) if u have space

As always this is IMHO

[bubba22]

I personally wouldn't get the HMT simply because of the cost. Flightscope is cheaper than 10k. If you want club data, then get a P3Pro. It will give you data as reasonable as GC2 at a much lower price. Don't expect the data to be 100% with the GC2 though.

[mthunt]

For $3000, I'd already have it. For $4000, I'd consider it. For what they want, I'd need to be a club fitter. The GC2 has a battery, display, Bluetooth, calculates yardage, and.is a full standalone system. The HMT is an simple accessory. These guys are brutal. It's the same price as a Gc2! No thanks.

You can actually get a full protee with sensors, cameras and protee/tgc software for less than an HMT! Don't get me started on th GC2t. 2 would make a great home permanent sim set up.

[drcabral]

I personally wouldn't get the HMT simply because of the cost. Flightscope is cheaper than 10k. If you want club data, then get a P3Pro. It will give you data as reasonable as GC2 at a much lower price. Don't expect the data to be 100% with the GC2 though.

I agree it's hard to justify the cost. It's even hard to justify the cost at $3000, I know my wife wouldn't understand but you guys would. Issue is, I am not aware of other units for tight space that wil give you AoA.

Only issue with flight scope is you need space and lack of TGC.

[bubba22]

The technology of th HMT is worth no more than $1000. Tak a look at Martins club cam. It's really no different. Their pricing is just too inflated.

Let me ask you, why exactly do you want AoA as supposed to other club data?

[drcabral]

Yes veryold they are. But also knowing the position of ball contact on the club (heel or toe), angle of attack and club position (toe up or heel up) at contact are important. That's why I mentioned gear effect in my last post. Face to path is important for sidespin but heel or toe contact will affect spin due to gear effect.

I was responding to your posting and understood this data point is only found in a select number of LM ( Trackman and Flightscope excluded). I can't pretend I know enough about club face measurement to know fully how this help but I assume that with a driver for instance you may want a flatter or upper ward AoA which I beloved exerts less side spin.

But my point was to look at strength and weaknesses for GC2 and Protee.

[drcabral]

The technology of th HMT is worth no more than $1000. Tak a look at Martins club cam. It's really no different. Their pricing is just too inflated.

Let me ask you, why exactly do you want AoA as supposed to other club data?

Wish we could convince someone( Protee or Martin if your listening) to set up a camera that plugs into side of HMT and can give you the same data as HMT. There is a strong need and opportunity for someone to crest said device and sell it for a reasonable price. I'm sure most GC2 owners would buy it. I'm not suggesting reverse engerniring the HMT but adding an accessory that be plugged and used as you please just as when I purchase a head set, blue tooth Hr monitor etc...for my ipone 6. I know most aware nervous about patent infringement and law suit from foresight. Although I believe that in a court of law, users can do what ever they want with phones or LM,
We already know that they like to overcharge for there products (redchain $1500 for 10 courses vs Protee $2000 for 96). It seems there model is to focus on PGA and golf instructors and establish themselves as the gold standard for LM. They r short sighted because they would likely make more if was more affordable. Look at all the golf stores who use GC2, few of them use the HMT WITH GC2 and won't make that investment partially because of cost and they are likely buying in bulk and Forrsight likely gives them a lower coast but they too don't think it is worth it.

[bubba22]

I agree dcarbral. Not sure there is much in it for others to develop a club add on for GC2.

[mthunt]

How a company decides to go to market determines the price. It's usually market driven. The HMT isn't marketed for us. It's marketed for fitters and teachers. I bet they sell several devices for some kind of an income application for each personal use device (obviously a pro isn't personal use as they are paid). I doubt we'll ever see the prices come down and there isn't enough of a market to make an HMT type product for someone else. It's a pay up or move on deal. Wrong or right, it's their call. I see this all the time in the corporate marketing world.

All IMHO of course.

[golfun]

I would pick hands down club data IF the simulated ball flight results are pretty accurate. I don't want 7-iron data that shows the ball incorrectly flying 25 yards further than it should.

[drcabral]

How a company decides to go to market determines the price. It's usually market driven. The HMT isn't marketed for us. It's marketed for fitters and teachers. I bet they sell several devices for some kind of an income application for each personal use device (obviously a pro isn't personal use as they are paid). I doubt we'll ever see the prices come down and there isn't enough of a market to make an HMT type product for someone else. It's a pay up or move on deal. Wrong or right, it's their call. I see this all the time in the corporate marketing world.

All IMHO of course.

True, but even fitters and teachers aren't buying the price gauge. I live in DC and only know one fitter who has the HMT. Golfsmith, Golftec and Dick's sporting goods all have the GC2 but few, in not none of them use HMT. Why? The club head data. does not warrant the cost. They will have to lower the cost or run the risk of a reverse engineered product. If someone sold a product that provided HMT data for $500-1000 it would sell like hotcakes and Foresight couldn't stop it because it is an attachment port.

[mthunt]

True, but even fitters and teachers aren't buying the price gauge. I live in DC and only know one fitter who has the HMT. Golfsmith, Golftec and Dick's sporting goods all have the GC2 but few, in not none of them use HMT. Why? The club head data. does not warrant the cost. They will have to lower the cost or run the risk of a reverse engineered product. If someone sold a product that provided HMT data for $500-1000 it would sell like hotcakes and Foresight couldn't stop it because it is an attachment port.

I'll take 1 please!