|
Post by cloran on Jun 11, 2013 18:14:05 GMT -5
Has the Phantom camera/ impact research project that Kelvin M was doing been completed? I can't find the results anywhere and I'm interested in his interpretation of the data.
|
|
|
Post by gmbtempe on Jun 11, 2013 21:11:02 GMT -5
Never been released, I have some guesses but I doubt anything gets released.
|
|
|
Post by cloran on Jun 12, 2013 7:36:31 GMT -5
Hmmm, strange. Very Phil McGleno-esque.
With such a strong build up the lack of results is blue balling.
|
|
|
Post by rj on Jun 12, 2013 20:15:14 GMT -5
Hmmm, strange. Very Phil McGleno-esque. With such a strong build up the lack of results is blue balling. I guess the wait isn't finally over.
|
|
|
Post by virtuoso on Jul 12, 2013 10:54:33 GMT -5
Never been released, I have some guesses but I doubt anything gets released. Greg, why do you think they won't release it?
|
|
|
Post by gmbtempe on Jul 12, 2013 16:50:55 GMT -5
Never been released, I have some guesses but I doubt anything gets released. Greg, why do you think they won't release it? Because its going to get picked apart because there is financial ramifications for the companies involved. Probably not worth it in the long run to release it.
|
|
|
Post by cwdlaw223 on Jul 12, 2013 17:17:56 GMT -5
That's a cop out by them if that's what they're telling you. Maybe they were in over their heads. Maybe they discovered Trackman is horribly wrong. For all of the buildup they let a lot of people hanging.
That's all they tried to do with Trackman.. Pick it apart.
|
|
|
Post by rj on Jul 12, 2013 23:53:10 GMT -5
Teasers! Financial ramifications I wonder to whom that applies? Big hype ending with a little wimper. Much ado about nothing!
|
|
|
Post by teeace on Jul 13, 2013 2:49:51 GMT -5
Teasers! Financial ramifications I wonder to whom that applies? Big hype ending with a little wimper. Much ado about nothing! Just my guess by experience of long time research. It's very complex area and in many cases when we find something, next step is canceling that and we really get confused. After that there is about nothing to say for sure. That's something that has happened to me and so many things I believed were destroyed. All research I have seen are very simplified or even adjusted to the intention. We have seen that in hip threads and in many other places. After long work you only find that there is 10 ways to do it and end up to the same result and it's really impossible to connect all parts together. When we were building up 4Dswing I was many times asked to find our 1-2-3, something similar what TPI is telling. I tried. Many years. There wasn't one.
|
|
|
Post by Richie3Jack on Jul 13, 2013 8:50:34 GMT -5
I don't think they were trying to just pick apart Trackman. They were trying to understand impact to its fullest and part of that was explaining the issues that they and others had with Trackman. I can tell you right now that I've talked to 3 PGA Tour players, well known and on the Trackman 'owners list', who have voiced their issues to me with Trackman's accuracy and don't believe for a second that their margin for error is what they claim.
My point is that Trackman and FlightScope are very helpful tools, but when you have error issues, particularly on off-center hits...can confuse people and lead to inaccurate conclusions. I spoke to a few people that were part of the Research-a-thon who knew Trackman and D-Plane numbers down flat and were surprised with the issues Trackman has with accuracy of data.
As far as writing a book...it's really hard to do on golf. I should know having written 2 books on data and golf. I would imagine it being even more difficult with regards to the swing because there are so many different factors and there is so much shades of gray and possible outcomes or methodologies.
It reminds me of the debate between why people slice. Some say it's due to an open face at impact. Other's say it's the path. I say it can be either depending on the person and then there is a myriad of different reasons why different golfers have either a too open of a face or a path that is too outside-to-in. Sometimes...both may be closely connected and affecting each other.
Try writing that into a book and make it clear and concise so you don't bore the reader.
It's not an easy thing to do.
For me, I wrote Pro Golf Synopsis on the basis that I really didn't care if it was information overload or somebody could not read it in 1 or 2 settings. But, I have another livelihood that supports my life. For a pro golf instructor, I would imagine there is some great fear of providing information that is clear and concise, but doesn't leave out valuable information.
That's why I can see why it's taken so long for guys like SliceFixer, Manzella, Carraher, Mac and others to come out with books they promised and some of them have more or less reneged on their desire to make a book because it's too much of a hassle for them.
3JACK
|
|
|
Post by cwdlaw223 on Jul 13, 2013 12:44:28 GMT -5
Richie -
I disagree with you for a change. They were out to prove Trackman wrong and made a big production of their questioning of Trackman. Disingenuous to question Trackman with such intensity and then not produce your own data for fear/reluctance of similar questioning.
They thought if they beat Trackman the teachers who use Trackman would have their credibility hurt.
|
|
|
Post by teeace on Jul 13, 2013 14:32:53 GMT -5
Richie - I disagree with you for a change. They were out to prove Trackman wrong and made a big production of their questioning of Trackman. Disingenuous to question Trackman with such intensity and then not produce your own data for fear/reluctance of similar questioning. They thought if they beat Trackman the teachers who use Trackman would have their credibility hurt. Sorry CWD but you are wrong. We who understand how those devices works, we know what are problems with those but as there is multiple options to show it, it's pretty complicated and that's huge marketing department can easily attack against that research as they did with quinton That has been the problem with you for years. You accept all BS from "big names" and never listen those who make you think and know about things.
|
|
|
Post by rj on Jul 13, 2013 14:39:12 GMT -5
Richie, said:
"I don't think they were trying to just pick apart Trackman. They were trying to understand impact to its fullest and part of that was explaining the issues that they and others had with Trackman."
The problem with that statement above is " they" never owned a Trackman and never used one by their own admission till one of them purchased a used one after the fact, while making all these attacks on one particular teacher who did use one. " They" hardly golf by their own admission, never mind that Trackman was giving them false info, that's a stretch!
So they had no issues with Trackman, they had issues with that teacher who used Trackman!
|
|
|
Post by rj on Jul 13, 2013 14:45:04 GMT -5
Richie - I disagree with you for a change. They were out to prove Trackman wrong and made a big production of their questioning of Trackman. Disingenuous to question Trackman with such intensity and then not produce your own data for fear/reluctance of similar questioning. They thought if they beat Trackman the teachers who use Trackman would have their credibility hurt. Sorry CWD but you are wrong. We who understand how those devices works, we know what are problems with those but as there is multiple options to show it, it's pretty complicated and that's huge marketing department can easily attack against that research as they did with quinton That has been the problem with you for years. You accept all BS from "big names" and never listen those who make you think and know about things. Lame excuse! They knew that going into it ,they bragged about their scientist and how he was sooo much better than anyone the other side had, you forget the real reason behind all of it.
|
|
|
Post by cwdlaw223 on Jul 13, 2013 15:42:48 GMT -5
Richie - I disagree with you for a change. They were out to prove Trackman wrong and made a big production of their questioning of Trackman. Disingenuous to question Trackman with such intensity and then not produce your own data for fear/reluctance of similar questioning. They thought if they beat Trackman the teachers who use Trackman would have their credibility hurt. Sorry CWD but you are wrong. We who understand how those devices works, we know what are problems with those but as there is multiple options to show it, it's pretty complicated and that's huge marketing department can easily attack against that research as they did with quinton That has been the problem with you for years. You accept all BS from "big names" and never listen those who make you think and know about things. Tapio - Stay on topic which was WHY their data/findings weren't released. They're afraid to submit themselves to the same type of questioning they submit to Trackman? That's ridiculous and a cop out. If that makes them feel good so be it. BUT, what they did is rail against Trackman and they had/have no proof that it's wildly inacurrate. If a marketing department can point out scientific errors I can only imagine what a real scientist would do. You certainly aren't qualified to interpret their algorithms. You only accept yourself which has been the problem with you for years. I know you just got banned at secret in the dirt website and that you're looking for another fight. It's not going to happen here.
|
|