Altitude Adjustment

[orangeman]

Does anyone know if there's a way to set altitude in GC2 so TGC will use it? I want to play a Colorado at elevation and I know there's no adjustment in the game itself.

Thanks,

Steve

[Scottygolf]

I am wondering the same thing but I am using the Quad on TGC. I do know you can adjust the boost settings in the interface for GC2 to get a little more out of each club.

What about the designers of courses? jpotas, can you put an element when you are designing a course that sets the elevation of a course? We played Southern Highlands in Las Vegas and noticed the ball went no further than we play a northern course. I see some guys lock down the settings so you can't make any changes where others allow. Example, some guys lock the morning time of day and others you can change to the afternoon. etc.

Is there a way to adjust? Do I need to adjust my Quad settings manually per course where the ball flight is reflected correctly? This would also apply to the CA and FL courses at sea level where the ball seems to not go anywhere.

Thanks

[jpotas]

There is no elevation input when designing in TGC that I know of. A possible work around might be in the boost settings to gain more distance.

I think my Skytrak allows for elevation changes????? Not positive though and I have no experience with other launch monitors.

Sorry, not much help on this!

[jpotas]

The boost adjustments are in the TGC setting. Here is a screenshot from another post on this forum.

[Scottygolf]

that appears to be Skytrack settings and not TGC or Quad. Was just curious and will play with the Quad settings to see if it affects TGC.

[jpotas]

Those are the settings within the interface for Skytrak and TGC.
From what I understand .....any change you make will have to be within TGC because TGC receives raw numbers from your launch monitor. TGC uses it's own software algorithms to determine ball flight based on the numbers provided.

Does Quad have an interface for TGC?

[Scottygolf]

oh yeah the distances are pretty much nailed from what the Quad reads to what TGC provides as output.

[orangeman]

I have found that you can adjust for elevation in the FSX range, but not at all in TGC.

[Scottygolf]

Yesterday, I had 2 friends over and we were playing Old Corkscrew which in SW FL. Nice design by the way who did this.

Using the Quad and TGC2019, One guy hits and his driver shows a carry on the Quad at 252, the reading on the screen in flight when it hit was 251, so all good with that as his numbers seem accurate all day between what the Quad is showing and then the screen from TGC. When I hit, the Quad will show my carry at 270 but on TGC it shows 255? This happened all day that lower speeds were more accurate. Is this in the interface that might be what is causing the numbers to be off? Anyway to tweak?

I originally thought it was due to sea level as the ball does not carry but being told on this thread that is not something that can be factored in on the course design?

The Course is flat so that really does not come into play. Ideas?

Thanks

[mthunt]

Yesterday, I had 2 friends over and we were playing Old Corkscrew which in SW FL. Nice design by the way who did this.

Using the Quad and TGC2019, One guy hits and his driver shows a carry on the Quad at 252, the reading on the screen in flight when it hit was 251, so all good with that as his numbers seem accurate all day between what the Quad is showing and then the screen from TGC. When I hit, the Quad will show my carry at 270 but on TGC it shows 255? This happened all day that lower speeds were more accurate. Is this in the interface that might be what is causing the numbers to be off? Anyway to tweak?

I originally thought it was due to sea level as the ball does not carry but being told on this thread that is not something that can be factored in on the course design?

The Course is flat so that really does not come into play. Ideas?

Thanks

The quad uses a different algorithm than TGC. Foresight shows a lot more carry for low spin thus less carry in TGC for low spin.

[mthunt]

I’m saying the carry on the quad is calculated differently than the carry in TGC. Which is more accurate depends on the numbers IMO but foresight is a major company so I’m sure they are accurate. foresight likes low spin though.

[Scottygolf]

What other detail do you need for clarity? Launch, ball speed, spin? I can certainly take pictures and send data. We played today again and another guy who moves it. A couple of his carry's were low 280's on Quad at 2400 spin with cuts and they only went 260 ish on TGC. Any info I can provide please let me know. Appreciate it.

[mthunt]

Launch, Spin and Ball Speed.

[Scottygolf]

mthunt
Here are the results. I went back to Old Corkscrew and found a few of the first 5 fairways that were relatively flat to get consistent numbers.

Quad Carry		Launch	Spin	Ball Speed	TGC Carry
Driver 1
274		11.3	1894	156	254
258		10.7	2850	153	254
273		13.3	2250	154	256
261		11	3000	156	258
275		11.5	2034	157	254
Driver 2
261		10.1	2060	155	241
263		11.4	2629	156	261
269		14.9	2109	150	251

Please let me know if you need and other data. How I obtained the data on carry for TGC was just watched the ball flight until it hit the ground. Based on what you said, higher spins rate yield closer accuracy but when hit well, not even close.

Thanks.

[mthunt]

mthunt
Here are the results. I went back to Old Corkscrew and found a few of the first 5 fairways that were relatively flat to get consistent numbers.

Quad Carry		Launch	Spin	Ball Speed	TGC Carry
Driver 1
274		11.3	1894	156	254
258		10.7	2850	153	254
273		13.3	2250	154	256
261		11	3000	156	258
275		11.5	2034	157	254
Driver 2
261		10.1	2060	155	241
263		11.4	2629	156	261
269		14.9	2109	150	251

Please let me know if you need and other data. How I obtained the data on carry for TGC was just watched the ball flight until it hit the ground. Based on what you said, higher spins rate yield closer accuracy but when hit well, not even close.

Thanks.

Using Flightscope Trajectory optimizer, it spits out 250 yards of carry on shot 1, driver 1. Shot 1 on on driver 2 comes up as 243 carry. Shot 5 on driver 1 came up as 252.9 carry but the quad says 274.

The Quad is giving too much carry on low spin. According to FS TGC is pretty close and the quad isn't. I hear this a lot from Pro's that use the quad as well.

[mthunt]

https://trajectory.flightscope.com/

[Scottygolf]

ok - I will go visit my buddy with TM at his store and see if my numbers are more in the 250 range or closer to the 270 range based on launch, spin and ball speeds. This is the first I have heard the Quad is hot on low spinning tee balls.

[Scottygolf]

I pulled Trackman numbers of a tour pro and fed them into the link you shared. Based on what the link stats, FS has his less than 20 yards shorter at 296 Carry than the Trackman?

[Scottygolf]

I also pulled numbers from my GC2 this spring, Ball speed 165, launch 12.4, club head 115 and carry 299. The link states I would only had 271.9 yards.

Not convinced the accuracy from Flightscope knowing that TM and Quad are the industry standards. I appreciate all your help but do you see my curiosity here?

[Scottygolf]

mthunt - any thoughts on the above? thanks!

[mthunt]

mthunt - any thoughts on the above? thanks!

For your GC2 with 165 carry I’d say 165 BS isn’t generating 299 yards of carry. The PGA Tour average is 165 BS and 275 carry according to Trackman data so getting another 25 yards of carry isn’t likely IMO. It is, however, my opinion. Could I be wrong? I don’t think I am.

For the Trackman above it’s hard to know without knowing more. For example, TM tracks the ball until it lands so if it’s downwind it’ll carry more. Here’s a link to Rory with similar numbers. His efficiency is likely the best yet he gets a lot less carry. Rory’s Trackman numbers are close to the flight scope numbers.

https://blog.trackmangolf.com/rory-mcilroy-swing-analysis-and-trackman-numbers/

[Scottygolf]

Based on that link being 7 years old I am going to agree to disagree. The ball has changed in that time and faces are hotter. In your opinion as you believing all fittings that us golfers have gone thru with TM and Foresight they have been leading us misinformation? Utilizing their launch monitors where anything has low spin and high launch really does not go as far as we are being told?

Looking at TXG recent Titleist fitting https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c_zhEFo6Wt4, his Quad numbers at 8:08 of the clip show 165, 11.5,, 1918 spin and carry is 290. According to Flightscope it is only 269.4 carry.

Something is totally amiss here.

This conversation does explain why irons seem accurate (because of the spin) in a play mode but fairways and drivers seem short.

Anyway we can get a boost in the interface to Quad like GC2 has? By taking the sliding dots from zero to just 2 it gets you more accurate, anything more it was greatly inflated.

Again - appreciate the feedback

[Scottygolf]

Appears this is a long going discussion...

https://forums.golfwrx.com/topic/1584818-gc2gcquad-accuracy-high-launchlow-spin-drives/

[preludesam]

Yeah I think it’s known at this point that Foresight loves low spin high launch for increased carry numbers. In my experience my X3 has been more accurate only because I’ve seen it on a range. It translates very well indoors too. They talk about spending a ton of time working on the ball flight algorithm in a webinar. It was requested from tour pros to practice for the next tournament with different weather and elevation changes using the VX app.