Swing Metrics

[fullback]

I know that R3J is not sold on the benefits of launch monitors, but if he and you were in a perfect world and could design a device to measure and record a golf swing, such as the new batch of small sensors coming out that attach to the shaft and display information on a smart device (Swingbyte, Noitom, Skypro, 3bays, etc.), what would you want to see?

If you could make a wish list of swing data or graphical illustration you'd like to be able to see as a player or as a teacher, what would that list look like, other than the usual swing speed, swing path, plane, club face alignment throughout the swing and AoA?

[Richie3Jack]

I'm not anti-launch monitors at all.

I just don't see them as the be all, end all to swing improvement and knowledge. There are a lot of people with that sentiment that treat them like the holy grail.

And the facts are that Trackman's claims for margin of error are just flat out false. Anything that a radar launch monitor calculates can have a very large margin for error.

Lastly, if I *had* to choose, I would take a Hi-Speed camera over a radar launch monitor. The cognitive learning capabilities are very limited with a launch monitor. They are limited with a camera as well, but less so.

I think the radar launch monitors show enough information for the most part. I would like something on Rate of Closure data and see what we can learn from there. I would be interested in seeing acceleration profiles of the clubhead throughout the entire swing. The other things I would be interested in are more motion analysis based and those types of machines provide that. I really like what Swing Catalyst is doing.





3JACK

[teeace]

Richie, do you have time some day to contact me by skype so I can show you what we are doing here?

[fullback]

The new devices I'm talking about are not launch monitors, they track the club in 3 dimensions throughout the entire swing. Face closure rate can be monitored and so can acceleration at any point throughout the swing, so that data can be available. That would be actual data from the inertial motion sensors and not calculated data.

I was wondering about other graphical presentations people may want, such as a virtual laser pointer from the handle that could be toggled in the display of the swing starting from P4 to P6 to trace plane, and things like that.

[cwdlaw223]

Fullback -

What device do you believe has decent rate of closure data? ENSO is the only machine on the planet that I'm aware of that has decent rate of closure data. The potential issue with "rate of closure" is rate of closure relative to what? The path is moving all over the place in space.

I'll take AMM3D any day over video. I'll take Trackman any day for impact data. Video does not show lead wrist angles (AMM3D does and its digitized to the middle of your radius and ulna) or acceleration/deceleration.

It all depends on how much detail you want along with accessibility. AMM3D isn't everywhere and a lot of people that have the system can't interpret the graphs correctly. K-Vest is a decent alternative to AMM3D IMO.

Video is still a staple of any golf instruction. You can't see you physical swing unless you have video.

[fullback]

This is why I shouldn't type anything at 5 a.m. before any coffee...

I'm sorry I misspoke, Richie. I meant that you didn't seem convinced that some average golfers could see benefits or know what to do with launch monitor data.

cwdlaw: I'm talking about measuring the clubface closure rate (horizontal plane capture in dps of the angular differential of the clubface normal to the intended target line starting from P6) using aerospace-grade inertial motion measuring equipment. Club closure rates up to 2000dps are far below the accuracy of these devices. The data capture capability is actually dumbed down for the golf swing.

As in all electronics, higher technology at low costs are always going to become available, and we're on the cusp of seeing motion capture for club and body available at consumer pricing soon.

So, my question was about what data would you like to have that we don't have now, and/or how would you like to see it presented.

[teeace]

Rate of closure has been under discussion for a while, but where do we really need that information.

Every good instructor can see right away by naked eye the style that player is using and if the ROC is high or low. There is no need for exact information of that, because we can't really work with that. It's same with launch monitors numbers as they are +/- 2 degrees way or another. It's just outside of human ability to work those numbers better because we are not machines.

Actaully all exact numbers of any measurement, even body movements are not relevant. We have to see the "big view" and guide players to the style we prefer. I know pretty well what are the differences and how to see those by numbers. Results can be seen from videos, but not the reason.

ROC is very dependent of body joint movement speeds and directions. Lot of hand speed deceleration means high ROC, less decc. means lower ROC in 99% of cases. After that player should understand how to move their body to get lower ROC, still no matter what are the exact numbers.

Discussions of golf swing has gone too exact level IMO. There isn't many things that really matters and specially what one outsider can tell to the player. Movements and impact data is changing all the time between shots as well are those body measurement numbers... specially when we work with guys of hdcp +2 or higher. It still changes all the time with pros and there is not two shots that give similar results.

What teacher and numbers can tell to the player is only the big view. No matter how you take the club back (Eamon Darcy, Jim Furyk...) or what are those exact numbers of impact. Finally those numbers come by instinct after player has achieved decent technical level... and still they miss fairways and greens time to time... and has to PLAY game of golf.

As I have seen, 95% of amateurs, even good ones, got some body joints moving just opposite directions and got totally different speed graphs than best tour pros I have measured. That's the information they need and that got nothing to do with those exact numbers of impact or ROC.

[Richie3Jack]

fullback - don't worry. While I think I have stated my position on launch monitors clearly, I think there are some people who are still confused on my position.

Part of that is because the launch monitor people, be it Trackman or FlightScope, have been some of the sensitive types I've dealt with in the golf blogosphere. Before I had my issues with Trackman, I felt it was far superior to FlightScope (before the X2 model) came out. And there were FlightScope employees who really took me to task over it. I refused to budge on that one...the old FS models were not in the same league as Trackman.

I have talked to enough people that have a lot of credibility with me and I now believe it's different. I believe that as far as actually capturing and calculating data, FlightScope's X2 model is superior to Trackman.

Now I have a lot of Trackman proponents, some of whom are actually paid by Trackman, who take me to task over my criticisms of Trackman.

It really started off with my long held belief that if I had to choose one or the other, I would take a high speed camera over a radar launch monitory (regardless if it's FS X2 or Trackman). In order to achieve 'good numbers' on a launch monitor and to do it permanently, the swing mechanics have to change and golfer either needs to know how to change them themselves or have a teacher instruct them on how to change them.

I just think it's silly to believe otherwise.

But, I started to see some of the flaws in Doppler Radar launch monitors. Particularly when it had me hitting my 4-iron only 182 yards and then actually measuring it myself with Bushnell rangefinder and finding that the carry was actually 206 yards. Perhaps the rangefinder is off, but I doubt that it's that big of a discrepancy and I don't think I've hit a 4-iron only 182 yards since high school.

I started to see other problems as well. And I had actual Trackman owners discuss some of the issues they had. One of which is a well known PGA Tour player and winner who is listed on the TM Web site as one of the TM owners.

It's not that I think a radar launch monitor is bad, but these are things that should absolutely be brought to the attention of people. The radar launch monitor people (both FS and TM) scream that it tells the truth and the truth should be known. But, once the truth works against radar launch monitors they change their tune.

And what happens is they put the blinders on when it comes to their ideas about the launch monitors and when I explain the negatives, they just do not want to read what I have written.

I agree with Tapio for the most part on the Rate of Closure stuff. I don't really need to be told that the best ballstrikers had more stable clubheads going into and thru impact. However, I would love to see accurate RoC data so it can be properly researched and eventually we can learn more about it and how to use it to create better ballstriking.









3JACK

[fullback]

Thanks for your thoughtful answer.

I think that people need a full basket of analogies, illustrations, images and information available when it comes to learning to teaching anything. People are wired so differently that it can take a host of ideas before something clicks for them.

I like the idea of a consumer device having layers of complexity that the user can toggle on or off, using the depth of information that suits them. They're free to disregard layers that don't click for them. So, closure rate can be there and toggled by those who want to see it.

[cwdlaw223]

Richie -

I can guarantee you that Tony Romo can only hit his 4 iron 182 yards!!!

Good comments by everyone and good thread.

Fullback -

Is there a device that you know of that's anywhere close to market?

[fullback]

Sorry for the late reply, I've been traveling.
Yes, cwdlaw, perhaps by the end of the year.

[cwdlaw223]

My interest is piqued. What's the name of the device? Who's the manufacturer?

If you can't disclose I'll understand.

[fullback]

I'd like to defer for at least another month. I'll send you a message after that, if that's OK with you.

[cwdlaw223]

Thanks and please do.