|
Post by Richie3Jack on Jul 14, 2013 17:24:04 GMT -5
First off they never even cared about Trackman before all this stuff with Manzella, they were never on one or used one by their own admission. Well all the other stuff i.e. rate of closure etc. were things that " they" and B.M.'s crew also argued about and 85% of a certain forum is all about bashing Manzella and was started because that person running that forum couldn't do that here anymore and decided to start his own forum. I don't see why this is all that important. Their preliminary results were that Trackman's margin of error was much more than what they claim. We have a Quintic Consultancy published report that has yet to be legitimately refuted by Tuxen or any pro-Trackman person that agrees with Kelvin and Jeffy. Paul Wood has said to take their face angle readings with a grain of salt. Andrew Rice, a noted Trackman owner has stated the same thing. I've had several people who attended the research-a-thon that told me that it was a very eye opening experience and that it had more to do with just refuting Trackman. You were not there, so I can only believe what they tell me. IMO, you're arguing motives because you do not like their findings. 3JACK
|
|
|
Post by cwdlaw223 on Jul 14, 2013 17:32:35 GMT -5
Richie -
Ask the Quintic people if they believe their findings are complete. There's more to that story and It has nothing to do with Tman's marketing department.
Preliminary findings are as good as pro forma accounting info. Maybe preliminary was their way of admitting their in over their heads so if someone called them out they could say preliminary and back track. It is a great way of saying something without being pinned down.
|
|
|
Post by Richie3Jack on Jul 14, 2013 19:47:10 GMT -5
To stay on point, I have discussed the research-a-thon with many of the participants who were actually there and they have told me that the stuff pertaining towards picking apart Trackman was only a portion of it. I haven't discussed this with gmbtempe, but he can feel free to refute this here if he pleases.
So when I say that it was only a part of it, I'm basing it off people who were there.
I can understand questioning motives to some degree. But, after a while we need to be able to refute the actual findings and if those findings are incorrect or faulty, then we can use motive to explain why those findings are inaccurate and prove that Kelvin and Jeffy lack credibility on the subject.
I have asked the Quintic group about their work. They fully stand behind what they published in their findings. A 'complete report' is different from being accurate or inaccurate. So I find using that excuse as grasping at straws. I have yet to see a legitimate rebuttal to Quintic Consultancy's report or Paul Wood's claim.
3JACK
|
|
|
Post by cwdlaw223 on Jul 14, 2013 20:26:03 GMT -5
Richie -
Paul bought six Trackmen! That's a big rebuttal. I've been told that Tuxen talked directly with Quintic and they were apologetic.
You keep talking findings, WHAT FINDINGS by team Kelvin?
Talking with people who were there aren't findings! What are the final conclusions? We have nothing final from team Kelvin. Do you believe there are final findings from them? I suspect your answer is no. My next question is why do you take any position from the research a thon unless they post final findings? I have no idea why you would but your posts in this thread indicate you have accepted their preliminary work. That's not fair to either party and you and I both know saying preliminary allows them to state anything without having to back up their claims. It's a cop out given all of their build up for the research a thon.
Furthermore, why people focus of wild, off center hits is beyond me. Would you build a swing pattern off such hits as your dominant patrern? No way. Just as I don't care if Tman told me my path was 21* in to out with a -20* face angle on such a shot. All you are left with is a guess. You really want to guess to improve? I don't.
I have yet to hear someone credible claim that slightly off center hits on Trackman produces wildly inaccurate data. That's like using a camera in the dark and saying it doesn't work correctly.
Contrary to what Tapio says, he thinks so highly of them that his system syncs with Fscope! If the machines are so inaccurate he wouldn't have synced them with his system.
How in the world are Jeffy or Kelvin credible? They bear that burden first, not the other way around. Neither party has any recent education or experience in physics. Kelvin is admittedly biased against the machine and Jeffy has an axe to grind against Brian. What these guys should have done is hired a third party to conduct the research or stop all of the buildup when in the end they produced no final findings. More ego than science in my opinion.
|
|
|
Post by cwdlaw223 on Jul 14, 2013 20:37:33 GMT -5
I wish that Tuxen would refute Quintic in detail. That info raises a legitimate issue. But I also know there's more to that story. I don't have access to what exactly was said between Tuxen and Quintic, however, I was told that Quintic was apologetic to Tuxen after he spoke with Quintic. My info could be completely wrong or right. Just stating what I was told.
|
|
|
Post by rj on Jul 14, 2013 22:02:22 GMT -5
First off they never even cared about Trackman before all this stuff with Manzella, they were never on one or used one by their own admission. Well all the other stuff i.e. rate of closure etc. were things that " they" and B.M.'s crew also argued about and 85% of a certain forum is all about bashing Manzella and was started because that person running that forum couldn't do that here anymore and decided to start his own forum. I don't see why this is all that important. Their preliminary results were that Trackman's margin of error was much more than what they claim. We have a Quintic Consultancy published report that has yet to be legitimately refuted by Tuxen or any pro-Trackman person that agrees with Kelvin and Jeffy. Paul Wood has said to take their face angle readings with a grain of salt. Andrew Rice, a noted Trackman owner has stated the same thing. I've had several people who attended the research-a-thon that told me that it was a very eye opening experience and that it had more to do with just refuting Trackman. You were not there, so I can only believe what they tell me. IMO, you're arguing motives because you do not like their findings. 3JACK What findings are those? They haven't released any findings. And I know that these systems have faults as I posted earlier in this thread saying exactly that, guess you missed that post. You don't have all the facts about why a certain person that never gave a rat's ass about Trackman or any of this all of a sudden is a " scientist" and is doing research on a machine that he never used or cared about before to prove something that's obvious and you yourself said you knew months earlier.... maybe you could have just told them your findings and saved them all that trouble. But that wouldn't fit the agenda of that certain person who has a forum dedicated to trash a certain teacher. It isn't about Trackman for him, I know that for certain and you do not. The important part is that you and Teeace think you know what a certain persons motives are behind the research-a-thon, but you do not, even those that attended have no idea, but I know where all this comes from.
|
|
|
Post by Richie3Jack on Jul 14, 2013 23:24:06 GMT -5
Jeffy has discussed how Trackman consistently understates club head speed because they cannot accurately check the CoG of the club head. This is evident by the fact that Trackman's smash factor readings are astounding too high. IIRC, Tom Wishon says that the legal smash factor can only go to 1.49 (and Wishon owns a Trackman) and we constantly see readings above that. Particularly with amateurs like myself. I also recall Jeffy showing information of shots that read on Trackman as a having the direct opposite of what actually happened.
Paul Wood didn't buy 6 Trackmans. PING bought 6 Trackmans. It's like saying that I like Dell Computers because the company I work for has 500+ of them. And I'm willing to bet that PING's main purpose for using Trackman is based on ball flight data. I have pretty good knowledge on how OEM's use Trackman and FlightScope.
Either way...Wood still stated that you should take face angle data from Trackman with a grain of salt. Trying to refute that with how many Trackman's the company he works for owns is weak. You're better off refuting Paul Wood's actual claim. And when I hear a legitimate rebuttal of Quintic's published work, that will be the first. I think it speaks volumes that Tuxen and company have been mum on it.
I also know that the Golf Evolution guys tested on Trackman vs. FlightScope X2 with a Phantom camera and found the X2 to be much more accurate. That's why they got rid of Trackman and sold it to Jeffy and kept the X2.
Lastly, I've stated repeatedly that I don't believe their work was *just* to pick apart Trackman. Like I said, I have been told by participants that the Trackman measured stuff was only *part* of their work. If picking apart Trackman was their *only* motive, then I would think they would have focused the entire work on...picking apart Trackman. I will take the word of those who participated in the study over those who were not there. It's as simple as that.
3JACK
|
|
|
Post by rj on Jul 15, 2013 0:55:56 GMT -5
That was all discussed at golfwrx about the cog, jeffy didn't even know that the cog was important in this. He dismissed it at the very start when Kelvin did his first phanthom video on impact he was saying what difference does it make when he was told you need to know that info.
Get serious, they used the topline of the driver head to take measurements for cripes sake on the first few posted video's that Kelvin did. Yeah I would consider them leading authorities on the subject matter...lol!
And how many of the participants that attended the research-a-thon are qualified to do that research?how many are scientists? It's a stretch to take that exercise in the desert as competent scientific analysis of any sort!
More like weekend warrior scientist stuff.
But hey some people think the moon is made of cheese.
|
|
|
Post by teeace on Jul 15, 2013 1:05:39 GMT -5
You think Kelvin isn't trying to make a living from teaching....really? I think he has a few items for sale...lol! So spare me the he isn't chasing money routine. He has to make a living and this has nothing to do with that. In regards to the other guy I'll just say you don't have all the facts. Yes, and I also try to make my living from teaching. It doesn't change the case that I'm also more than a teacher. You know, I would make best money if I just do what others do, ask people to keep the eye on the ball, telling ladies how nice shoes they got, have a great smile, lie them how well they have been progressing ... just name it. Kewlvin is producing lot of material to net for free, Kelvin has been helping many guys for free and is always ready to answer questions and use his time for that... for free. He is against Manzella and I understand that really well. Hones guy like Kelvin can't accept that kind of selling where new ideas full of shit are sold to people without slightest understanding how they hurt their game. And when someone points that out and even proves it, he will be thrown out from that place.
|
|
|
Post by teeace on Jul 15, 2013 1:09:44 GMT -5
You hit the nail on the head Tapio. Kelvin was biased against Tman from day one as indicated in your post. Why? This has been explained numerous times so listen up, it's because he didn't take the time to understand the numbers. Gear effect was lost upon him. You keep making all these claims about everyone else not being correct or true and it hasn't dawned on you that you might fall into that camp. State the errors and why Tapio or stop the preaching. It's not about sight, but impact dynamics. Good luck with eyesight and a Casio for detailed impact data. Neither is designed to provide such data. CWD, try finally understand. TM cant see the impact so there is no information about club head at impact. That's just the technical fact, no matter how hard you believe for something. Those devices are made for ball flight tracking and that's what they do. But you didn't answer my question about lining that device to 250yds mark. What is acceptable error in that calibration when setting the thing up?
|
|
|
Post by teeace on Jul 15, 2013 1:20:51 GMT -5
Contrary to what Tapio says, he thinks so highly of them that his system syncs with Fscope! If the machines are so inaccurate he wouldn't have synced them with his system. After all these years you still can't get it, but I tell you one thing directly to this: When we integrated FS to our system I still trusted those numbers and still do in some cases. What I've found after that is that I about stop using that indoors at all. I don't want to see numbers of 12 deg out to in when I know it's bit in to out. That case was the final eye opener for me and specially when I really understand why that happens and why it has to be built like that. CWD, once again and honestly. Stop that childish believe and wake up. There is good parts at those devices, but also something really bad. Just yesterday one new TM owner called me and asked if I can explain few things there. I could
|
|
|
Post by rj on Jul 15, 2013 1:26:25 GMT -5
You think Kelvin isn't trying to make a living from teaching....really? I think he has a few items for sale...lol! So spare me the he isn't chasing money routine. He has to make a living and this has nothing to do with that. In regards to the other guy I'll just say you don't have all the facts. Yes, and I also try to make my living from teaching. It doesn't change the case that I'm also more than a teacher. You know, I would make best money if I just do what others do, ask people to keep the eye on the ball, telling ladies how nice shoes they got, have a great smile, lie them how well they have been progressing ... just name it. Kewlvin is producing lot of material to net for free, Kelvin has been helping many guys for free and is always ready to answer questions and use his time for that... for free. He is against Manzella and I understand that really well. Hones guy like Kelvin can't accept that kind of selling where new ideas full of shit are sold to people without slightest understanding how they hurt their game. And when someone points that out and even proves it, he will be thrown out from that place. You obviously don't read posts carefully enough. Also you were thrown out of SITD because you didn't follow M.M"S warning to stop posting in B.H'S thread. Many people there stated you were a disruptive entity in that thread and they were asking Maves to step in and stop you. I read that thread and you didn't add any substantive information to it. Just kept essentially repeating how you were right and Bradley was wrong, it started to sound like a religious fanatic trying to convert people over to his religion. And of course you always are correct in everything you say, and your ideas are the only correct ones. We know 4dswing is perfect ....right?
|
|
|
Post by teeace on Jul 15, 2013 3:42:59 GMT -5
Yes, and I also try to make my living from teaching. It doesn't change the case that I'm also more than a teacher. You know, I would make best money if I just do what others do, ask people to keep the eye on the ball, telling ladies how nice shoes they got, have a great smile, lie them how well they have been progressing ... just name it. Kewlvin is producing lot of material to net for free, Kelvin has been helping many guys for free and is always ready to answer questions and use his time for that... for free. He is against Manzella and I understand that really well. Hones guy like Kelvin can't accept that kind of selling where new ideas full of shit are sold to people without slightest understanding how they hurt their game. And when someone points that out and even proves it, he will be thrown out from that place. You obviously don't read posts carefully enough. Also you were thrown out of SITD because you didn't follow M.M"S warning to stop posting in B.H'S thread. Many people there stated you were a disruptive entity in that thread and they were asking Maves to step in and stop you. I read that thread and you didn't add any substantive information to it. Just kept essentially repeating how you were right and Bradley was wrong, it started to sound like a religious fanatic trying to convert people over to his religion. And of course you always are correct in everything you say, and your ideas are the only correct ones. We know 4dswing is perfect ....right? Yes I'm right. If someone continues claiming that forearm rotation speeds up the hands, I just don't buy that shit. It's really not my fault that I understand geometry and some others doesn't. And 4DSwing is really far away from perfect, It got lot of issues, but we are honest with those. It can't see the club face direction, It calculates many things instead of measuring those, It can't see the spin of the ball.. many many things are missing and will be. The big point you never seem to understand is that 4DSwing got nothing to do with this. We are not competitors to TM or FS, these devices are totally made to different purposes. We don't see at all what they see, they don't see anything what we see. I see it really funny how some people are supporting everything around those radar devices, when those who got at least some idea how they work can see directly what is missing and why.
|
|
|
Post by cwdlaw223 on Jul 15, 2013 8:02:52 GMT -5
Jeffy has discussed how Trackman consistently understates club head speed because they cannot accurately check the CoG of the club head. This is evident by the fact that Trackman's smash factor readings are astounding too high. IIRC, Tom Wishon says that the legal smash factor can only go to 1.49 (and Wishon owns a Trackman) and we constantly see readings above that. Particularly with amateurs like myself. I also recall Jeffy showing information of shots that read on Trackman as a having the direct opposite of what actually happened. Paul Wood didn't buy 6 Trackmans. PING bought 6 Trackmans. It's like saying that I like Dell Computers because the company I work for has 500+ of them. And I'm willing to bet that PING's main purpose for using Trackman is based on ball flight data. I have pretty good knowledge on how OEM's use Trackman and FlightScope. Either way...Wood still stated that you should take face angle data from Trackman with a grain of salt. Trying to refute that with how many Trackman's the company he works for owns is weak. You're better off refuting Paul Wood's actual claim. And when I hear a legitimate rebuttal of Quintic's published work, that will be the first. I think it speaks volumes that Tuxen and company have been mum on it. I also know that the Golf Evolution guys tested on Trackman vs. FlightScope X2 with a Phantom camera and found the X2 to be much more accurate. That's why they got rid of Trackman and sold it to Jeffy and kept the X2. Lastly, I've stated repeatedly that I don't believe their work was *just* to pick apart Trackman. Like I said, I have been told by participants that the Trackman measured stuff was only *part* of their work. If picking apart Trackman was their *only* motive, then I would think they would have focused the entire work on...picking apart Trackman. I will take the word of those who participated in the study over those who were not there. It's as simple as that. 3JACK Richie - Jeffy is no expert and now discussions or opinions are findings? Opinions are not findings and you know that. Your analogy about Dell is misleading. A more appropriate analogy would be that Dell is taking over Oracle but Michael Dell had nothing to do with it. Paul Wood certainly knew and approved the purchase and you still haven't provided the context of his grain of salt statement. You have no idea how the golf evolution guys conducted their testing. They could be right or wrong and should be subjected to the same level of scrutiny that everyone requires of Tman. Why not choose Flightscope if their motives were true? How can you not see their bias after all the fights on your site on this issue? Would you at least agree they were hoping to find Trackman was inaccurate? If you want to accept opinions as findings that is your choice. But please don't tell us opinions are findings, let alone final findings.
|
|
|
Post by cwdlaw223 on Jul 15, 2013 8:15:21 GMT -5
Tapio -
Most of the cutting edge pros/scientists are using AMM3D (your competitor) to understand the biomechanics of the swing and Tman for impact data. Two different devices and two different purposes.
|
|