Mevo+ accuracy

[kahi]

Depends on how the algorithm analyzing the radar data is built. A good solution takes in everything the radar sees and recognizes the different objects in the ”scene”,
their velocities and directions, even the parts of a single object moving in different speeds (club head) or different directions (spinning ball, top half moving towards the radar and the lower half away from it).

so if the software is any good, it shouldn’t get distracted by a tee, it should ignore that data.

[kahi]

I found an independent lab:

https://www.golflabs.com

They have tested launch monitors, not difficult since they test balls regularly:

https://rapsodo.com/wp-content/uploa...Trackman-2.pdf

I’ll contact them to ask about the Mevo+. Flightscope could order a test from them.

Anyone have more info on them? Or other independent labs?

[pwade3]

No Mevo+ but several of the popular LM.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/319147118_How_valid_and_accurate_are_measurements_of_golf_impact_parameters_obtained_using_commercially_available_radar_and_stereoscopic_optical_launch_monitors

[kahi]

pwade3 Excellent! Pretty much what I was looking for with my thread starter questions!

I emailed Golf Labs asking whether they have tested (with) the SkyTrak or the Mevo+.

Perhaps the Loughborough University researchers would be interested and able to rerun their test with newer launch monitors. I might ask them.

They might have even contributed to the development of the Golf Labs robots:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/235724736_Development_and_evaluation_of_new_control_algorithms_for_a_mechanical_golf_swing_device

And Rory likes them too:

https://youtu.be/Ft2fLuz9mF0

[kahi]

Golf Laboratories responded quickly, Mr. Parente replied personally. They only run tests bought by their clients.

Therefore they do not publish the results. The results I linked to above were published by Rapsodo (the client) and they chose to publish data only on carry distance, probably to try to show that their device beats Mevo in that measurement. It would be interesting to see the other parameters as well.

Perhaps Flightscope would be interested in publishing their results if Mevo+ compares positively to other LMs? Maybe not, in other markets (cars, TVs for example) the manufacturers usually don't publish comprehensive comparisons, that task is performed by magazines and consumer research institutes.

[kahi]

Skytrak has tested with Golf Laboratories, maybe it’s standard practice.

[pwade3]

Good research.

[kahi]

Rapsodo seems confident that their MLM is an accurate device:

https://youtu.be/55qVUNgRwz4

Similar publishing of comparison data by Flightscope would be great!

[Rapsodo]

Rapsodo seems confident that their MLM is an accurate device:

https://youtu.be/55qVUNgRwz4

Similar publishing of comparison data by Flightscope would be great!

We are behind our technology MLM is an accurate launch monitor.

[Bubba22]

I just finished a session at the range and agree that the MLM is a very accurate unit outdoors. The club recognition was a bit finicky but otherwise very accurate. Rapsodo is there any talk on developing an indoor software option for MLM?

[Stetson]

They are in Beta testing right now for indoor/net usage. It won’t have sim capabilities but will give distance, launch and ball speed.

[kahi]

Yes, I checked (and learned) more: the radar in the MLM has only one receiving antenna = no way of detecting spin.

Somehow the Mevo does (hence the metallic stickers) try to detect spin with its radar.

This is an interesting topic. I’ll revisit this issue if I find new information on the devices mentioned here.

[Bubba22]

The fact that the Mevo and Mevo + need club selection indoors to accurately detect spin is a bit of a question mark.

[kahi]

Agree, would be great to know exactly how the calculate it.

[kahi]

Rapsodo Thank you for the comment!

Could you reflect a bit on my original question? At this moment you seem to be the only launch monitor manufacturer that is publishing data from an independent test (by Golf Laboratories). And you don’t publish comprehensive data, just three parameters in the video. Why is that?

A launch monitor is a measuring device and so the absolute accuracy of the device is to me something a consumer should be able to find out easily. Currently the comparative and absolute accuracies are derived from user ”testing”, from the data that individual people publish in discussion forums or Youtube. It’s nice that they do but the consumer launch monitor market would surely benefit if we all got better data from a more scientific testing of absolute accuracy.