Issues with New GC2a

[ks-man]

I got my simulator installed on Saturday but have been working through a bunch of issues. My main issue seems to be the calculated distances but I'm trying to get more data and some data from some of my friends and then will work with Foresight.

Two other things that I'm wondering about though has to do with the speaker and the battery. I think I saw somewhere that that it should last 8 hours on a full charge. Does that amount of time assume no backlight or audio? Yesterday I used it fully charged in two different sessions and it only seemed to last about 4-4.5 hours. I was using both the backllight and the audio the whole time and wanted to make sure that was normal.

I like hearing the unit spit our numbers after I hit. Occasionally a couple of words will get a little garbled with static or sound a little muffled. I would say it will occur on average1 time out of every 7-10 strikes however it may happen 3 times in a row and then not again for 15-20 shots. Anybody notice similar issues with their GC2s?

At this point I'm really trying to determine if my device is overall simply defective. I want to focus on the distance issue with Foresight as that is far and away the biggest concern. If these other issues aren't normal then I will want to inform them of that also since it would further point to a defective unit however if these experiences are not abnormal then I don't want to sound as if I'm complaining about everything. The battery life and occasional squawk is definitely secondary to the calculated distance issue.

Thanks for the help.

[ks-man]

Thanks Js and others. Just to clarify I took my GC2 to Golftec for these comparisons so I was using their mat, and also their wide open hitting area for this comparison. That is why I'm giving a little more credibility to how it "felt" to me. Even my less solid shots with their GC2 were carrying 130-135 where those shots with my GC2 (at Golftec) only carried 120-125. Based on how I hit at a course I do feel like 130-135 is more realistic but it is hard to really know for sure how much my shot is carrying at a course vs. how far it is rolling.

Could you run the numbers for these three comparisons? I might look into getting Optimal Flight if you think it is helpful to working on your golf game. Thanks a lot.

Time

Club

GC2

Ball Speed

Launch Angle

Azimuth

Side Spin

Back Spin

Total Spin

Peak Height

Descent Angle

Carry

Total Distance

Offline

2:20 PM 7-iron Golftec 101.4 ------16.4----------- 6 ---------709L ------5947 --5990 ------21 --------39 -------------145
2:32 PM 7-iron Mine -----101 ---------15.4---------- 7.2R----- 684L -----5658---------------------------------------------- 134

and then for these two (two solid strikes - knew they felt good at the time of hit)

2:20 PM 7-iron Golftec ---105---------- 16.9 --------5.8----- 621L---- 5061----- 5100----- 23 --------40 -------------153
2:37 PM 7-iron Mine--------- 104 --------16.5 --------7.6R--- 1071L -- 4463 ----------------------------------------------- 144

and finally these two

3:19 PM 7-iron Golftec------ 99.9 --------16.3---------- 9.8---- 607L---- 5682---- 5715 -----19------- 38 -------------142
2:24 PM 7-iron Mine -----------104 --------15.9---------- 9.7R ---786L--- 5595 ----------------------------------------------141

[ks-man]

Ok, so I might be getting closer to the bottom of this. I downloaded the trial version of Optimal Flight. It is possibly looking like the issue is the software at Golftec. I need a little help in understanding the numbers but I put the first two comparisons I asked about above in it and I've attached the results. I don't know what the black number on the left vs. the blue number on the right mean but wondering if it is sea level. My monitor is very close to the numbers on the left and Golftec is close to the numbers on the right for the comparisons.

JS, could you help me interpret what is the difference between these numbers and what you make of this? Thanks.

[Js1010]

Ks

I will take a look at these other shots later today- i didn't have a lot of time this morning and did this quick but i think that your gc2 readout is giving more representative carry for sea level and their fss version is old or boosted and giving long carry.

[SFR]

Question, when you compared what your GC2 readout was compared to their numbers, were you reading the numbers off their GC2 or off the programs?

Most likely you could not see the readout on their GC2 due to it being plugged in with the USB and thus just having the logo on the readout. The easy way to see if they boosted their settings in the software would have been to click the volume button to on from their GC2, and listen for the GC2 carry and compare to what they display in the software. I would assume they boost the software as every shop seems to do. You would not need to take your unit back there but just hit a shot or two and listen. Even the old FSS software would boost the carry compared to the actual GC2 readout. The one update to the software adjusted that back so it reads the same as the GC2 but still shops boost the settings.

The main reason they boost is that the GC2 calculates its carry based on sea level conditions and most golfers in the world play at higher elevations and in real golf see longer carry than what is calculated.

When you compare your ball speeds to the LPGA charts for average carry and their ball speeds, when yours match close to theirs, your carry on the GC2 was matching close to the avg. carry.

With my GC2 when I match those ball speed numbers of the LPGA my GC2 reads almost exact carry. Most times its the spin rate and LA that may create a few yards difference.

[ks-man]

I didn't think about turning on the audio. As you said b/c the GC2 was plugged in it didn't show numbers on the readout. How much does being above Sea Level impact these numbers? My local town is about 700' above sea level. I'm so frustrated I didn't think to either turn on the audio or at least disconnect the unit from USB. I'm not sure when I'll be able to go back but it does seem like there is some type of setting difference between mine and the Golftec one. What is crazy is I always assumed that the Golftec numbers were good since it is a teaching facility. Also I went to Golfsmith a few months ago to test some new clubs and those numbers were absurdly boosted. They were 15-20 yards higher than what I saw at Golftec with my current clubs. I figured there was something off at Golfsmith and figured it was a marketing tactic to sell new clubs but it further confirmed the numbers I was seeing at Golftec in my mind.

If I have time I might throw all my shots into Optimal Flight to see the numbers. I did a few more and the Golftec GC2 for PW was right inline with Optimal. My GC2 was a few yards shorter. I don't know how accurate Optimal Flight is but JS seems to like it.

Very frustrated that I spent about an hour and a half at Golftec yesterday and didn't do what would have been a far better comparison.

[wbond]

From all the reading and comments i've seen, Optimal flight is supposedly considered one of the best algorithms.

[ks-man]

From all the reading and comments i've seen, Optimal flight is supposedly considered one of the best algorithms.

I've been messing around with it and I don't see anything to specify if you are a righty or lefty and thus understanding if it is a fade or draw (or slice or hook). Obviously hooks and draws will go further than fades/slices. I first thought that perhaps you just enter everything as if the player is a righty but when switching numbers if you have all other data the same and change the side spin from a positive to a negative number it doesn't impact the carry distance at all. That seems virtually impossible as far as I'm aware. I know if I hit a slice there is so much under spin that I lose a ton of distance. The one thing I don't know is if that would be reflected in the back spin number so perhaps simply changing side spin doesn't matter. If anybody that is familiar can comment I'd appreciate it. Thanks.

[goatbarn]

Draws and fades go same distance. Its a myth. It's just a tilting of the spin axis.

[goatbarn]

The myth comes from most "slices" being hit with a glancing blow, which produces less ball speed and more backspin.

But physics is physics, and the ball doesn't care if you're a lefty hitting a draw or a righty hitting a fade. Ball speed, backspin, launch and spin axis determine how far and where the ball goes.

That's it. If the only thing different between the data of 2 different shots is that the axis is mirrored, one will fade and one will draw, but they'll go the same distance.

[wbond]

absolutely correct

[Js1010]

KS - Checked a few more of your shots - All the Golftec shots I tested are long based on Optimal Flight. Your GC2 carry numbers are very close to Optimal Flight. In my testing I have found that Irons shots hit decently the GC2 carry numbers (with recent firmware) are +-2 yards with Optimal Flight. The good thing is your GC2 looks to be working correct because the ball speeds are other measured numbers you are getting from both GC2 are close. I would discard Golftec numbers as something is not right there - either boost or very old FSS software giving bad carry numbers.

I know you like Golftec numbers better but they are not correct based on optimal flight and your GC2 readout numbers matching very closely.

Now the question is why aren't you getting the carry numbers you expect out of your GC2.

- Could be your mat - hitting it a bit fat will lower your ball speed and thus your carry will be shorter. I would try hitting irons on a short tee off your mat and see if carry improves. If it does then you know your catching your mat a bit on your shots.
- Could be hitting indoors - I know I thought my unit was giving me short carry numbers at first. I just wasn't swinging the way I did outdoors.
- Could be you playing in higher elevations - I know in Colorado and places that are thousands of feet high it could be up to a 7-10% difference in carry. I believe there is a way in Optimal Flight to plug in your elevation and it will adjust the carry accordingly.

- Could be you don't know your real "carry" number vs roll out number.

As far as draws and fades - that is really irrelevant to a carry algorithm. Its just telling you how far a ball will go with a certain ball speed, launch angle, and spin under certain conditions like elevation, and temperature,etc

[Vincent_Vega]

So I went to Golftec yesterday afternoon and compared my GC2 to the ones there. Something just feels off with mine and the numbers are suspicious. Even more than what these numbers show is the feeling vs. when I hit a good or bad shot with each one. I did by far the most testing with my 7-iron. When I hit a solid one with both the club would carry about 10-12 yards further with the Golftec GC2. When I hit a bad one the Golftec GC2 would go about 13-15 yards further. I don’t have as much data for poor shots with my GC2 since I didn’t take a picture of the readout as often of the bad ones. If you go to this link of pictures you can see that their GC2 was hooked up to software (I think FSS) but with mine I just took a picture of the GC2 readout.

I’m about an 18 handicap so I don’t hit all my balls cleanly so after I stopped taking pictures of the screen for all my poorer mishits on my GC2. It was a pretty tedious process. With the Golftec screen it was more difficult to filter these out since I would typically take about 3-5 shots before taking a picture of the screen and then clearing out the data. About 6 weeks ago I did a club fitting at Golftec so I included that as well. I ended up purchasing the Callaway XR which is the club I was using for the 7-iron and P-Wedge yesterday.

I don’t consider this data conclusive. It is just more evidence and unfortunately puts my mind more at question if my GC2 has an issue. I will send these numbers to Foresight to get their thoughts but wanted to get people’s thoughts here before I did. Thanks again for all of the help I’ve been getting.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]n47933[/ATTACH]

[ATTACH=CONFIG]n47931[/ATTACH]

I took 2 comparable shots and put them in Flight Scope Optimizer. Here are the results. I'd say your GC2 is performing just as it should. If you're going by the Foresight software to get those readings, it's almost certainly boosted. I've never been in a Golfsmith store that didn't have their software boosted. It sells more clubs, period. Anyway, here you go.

.............................BS......LA......HLA.. ....SSpin......BSpin......Carry
7-Iron.....Golftec....100.9...16.8....7.8.........45 5L........4728........145
7-Iron......Yours......101.....16.2....8.3.........2 17L........4795........137

Flightscope.....Golftec......Carry.....134.1y
Flightscope......Yours.......Carry.....133.8y


Just pay attention to the raw data, not what their Foresight software is showing. As you can see, there's no way there should be an 8 yard gap between those two shots.

[ks-man]

I decided I wanted to mess around with Optimal Flight so I loaded all my numbers into it. Basically what I’m seeing is that most of my GC2 readings are slightly less than Optimal Flight but probably within the acceptable range. The Golftec GC2 (through FSS) is higher although not as much for all clubs. I wonder if that means it is more to do with the carry algorithms of the older software as Js1010 mentioned rather than some boost setting. As you can see in the attached picture their P-Wedge is right on the money. Their 7-iron on average is 5% “boosted” and their Driver is only 1.5% boosted. For my GC2 my P-wedge is 1.7% less than Optimal, my 7 iron is pretty much right on and my driver is actually 3.3% “boosted” compared to Optimal Flight. I’m guessing the driver algorithm is the toughest considering how bad some of my drives were.

One other thing I didn’t mention before was that I did have one of the Golftec teaching pros test both their GC2 and mine. He was a lefty so we had to use a different hitting bay and I wasn’t sure if there were differences with the righty/lefty setup so I didn’t mention it earlier. He is a scratch golfer and was carrying his 6 iron between 190 to 200 on most of his shots. His numbers were .8% “boosted” vs. Optimal on the Golftec equipment (different GC2 and different computer than I hit with) and 1.1% under Optimal Flight data on mine. So it does seem that the current GC2 firmware is perhaps slightly below Optimal Flight’s calculations.

All in all, I’m disappointed I apparently don’t carry the ball as far as I thought I did but I’m glad that my GC2 seems to be functioning properly (other than the missed sand wedges and a few occasional audio hiccups). I can now work on my swing a little more confidently that the numbers I’m seeing are accurate.

Thanks for all the help and hopefully others will find this info helpful in the future if they question if their GC2s are working properly.

[ks-man]

Wanted to post an update. Since I had already recorded all the data and also compared it to Optimal Flight I decided I would still reach out to Foresight and get their thoughts. Foresight's response was that the older firmware was very generous in the carry distances and the new firmware "had been adjusted to match closer to what our tour players would expect".

I'm not sure what firmware version this started with but I'm using 3.10.0.0. This seems to be the reason for my discrepancies vs. what I expected having used Golftec. To me it actually seems like my distances are shorter than what I carry on a course but I'm guessing that has to do with still getting comfortable to swinging in my basement and as others have suggested my hitting mat.

[SFR]

With that last comment by Foresight, I would think what they should have said was the software was showing too much carry and was not showing the same carry as the GC2 read out. They did update the software and now they are the same. I can't see the firmware making a difference in the ball speed of which it picks up the ball. Before this last year when were were still on 3.5 firmware, the ball speed it showed matched the LPGA charts for carry very close if not right on. The new firmware does not give you more ball speed and still the carry numbers compare to those same charts.

When I had asked about the firmware versions it had more to to with the new kiosk and the info that it needed and they had said it had nothing to do with ball flight.

I golf at about 2600 to 3000 feet and with that in real life I am about 5 percent low on the GC2 from what I see with my real life carry. If courses used elevation in their course files and used that info to alter the flight of the shots, you would then see real life carry if you played at your real elevation. Then factor in temperature and humidity. We are dry here and can play into ball flight.

The other thing is that it is now known that lower back spin numbers on Drivers let the ball carry more in real life but I don't know if many of the software have adjusted this as it is talked about a lot more.