SkyTrak Launch Monitor

[Maverick]

http://www.skytrakgolf.com/

iPad app:

https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/com.sporttrak.skytrak/id876548058?mt=8

[Agolfman]

Thanks for the follow up and explanation. I know I've probably been inconsistently applying range conditions, sometimes changing them manually, other times forgetting to do it, so I can't really say i've done it reliably.

I think you bring up a good point of understanding MoE in the reported results. If you factor in a less than pure strike plus the MoE, we should have slightly degraded expectations of our historical yardages vs a ST practice session, and not worry too much about the details.

A few hundred balls into using it, I realized that trajectories were more interesting than distances anyway. It's a changing paradigm for what one might be working on from one practice session to another (partial shot distance control, trajectories, spin rates, etc....).

[wilson]

Is 400' somewhat standard in terms of validity of the readings? Or just something that's relevant for Wilson? FWIW, I usually set mine to "0", just to keep it constant and be on the low side of carry distances.

I was adjusting for the Range in Florida I was at. Trying to make an apples to apples comparison. So I should set it to 39ft Elevation, 65*F Temperature, 80% Humidity, with 0 Wind. That would be very close to the session conditions at the time. As it warmed up (about 84*F) and the humidity got to near 95% with a slight SW (helping the draw) I got another 5-6 yards.

All this is fiddling though to mimic the day. But I 99% of the time leave it at 500ft, 70F and 50% Humidity for ease of compare. When they get the ability to save session settings i'll set my exact location and general temps for the season and it will stick. Right now i'm too lazy to keep doing it every time. They also may be thinking of adding an option to Geolocate you - so you'll always get todays weather and wind with the right altitude. but i digress....

I guess my point was - in the 60 balls I hit this morning with 8i, 6i and 3H they seemed to be within the margin for error I'd expect based on this past weeks 10 range sessions and multiple rounds.

[SkyTrak_Seth]

Thanks! Good to hear. I was pretty shocked to hear people thinking it was short. I'm the first to admit I lost a little bit of man pride not being able to hit my 6 iron 230 anymore. But seriously, everyone has their "golden" launch monitor or flight model that they use a basis for comparison, but when you look at the whole field, there's quite a bit of discrepancy. Everyone thinks their's is right. When comparing to the real world and you have variables to take into account like wind, other weather parameters, your hitting surface (you spin the ball very differently off a mat than the grass), etc. you'll drive yourself mad trying to match up to the yard every time. It just isn't possible.

[Agolfman]

Is 400' somewhat standard in terms of validity of the readings? Or just something that's relevant for Wilson? FWIW, I usually set mine to "0", just to keep it constant and be on the low side of carry distances.

[wilson]

Yeah, I set to 400ft - but it should actually be 39 feet for Carrollwood says Google. I'll readjust and do it again.
didn't account for wind in real life. But i did also hit early in the morning a few times when it was around 65F, with no wind and I was hitting the front lip of the target green (so around 155Y give or take) which is near as dammit to ST on my session this morning.
I think it's looking pretty good!

[SkyTrak_Seth]

Thanks Wilson for the update. Just FYI, PW shots should be completely unaffected in this version from the last.

Just want to check - is your SkyTrak altitude set to 400ft as well?

Good note about the versioning - Everyone please note: when we went through the Apple rejection mess, the versioning (text) in the profile area reverted to v1.8. So unfortunately, you'll have to live with that...but only for a few weeks.

EDIT - I just ran that shot through optimal flight and it shows 152.6...pretty darn close to 153 if you ask me

[SkyTrak_Seth]

hks888 - please be very careful publishing charts like that. I've been running some of your data and one that jumped out was the line with ball speed of 106. Optimal Flight reports 142.0 when I run those numbers, not 143. Another thing to note is that SkyTrak rounds several of it's numbers, including ball speed and carry...

I really do appreciate the work you are doing by running that data, just need to double and triple check, as I can't have typos working against us, even if it's only 1 yard

[wilson]

Just spent the past week in Florida, pounded Titleist NXT range balls all week into three specific greens on the range there - 162Y / 212Y / 110Y.
Just updated to 1.8.5 (BTW your About Version screen still says 1.8...) and it's definitely solved the excessive distance issue, and the rollout.
If you take the 2% error rate into account, on pure strikes it seems close, on bad ones it's pretty penal!

My 8i was consistently carrying the front of the green at 162Y. On the course it was the same. Using ST it comes out at 153-154 in this version. Using the numbers with FO it comes out to 157.2. At a 2% error rate then you get 154. so pretty close. It feels a tad shorter - the 6i i carry in real life is 178-180 comes out to 174-176 on this version now. And a PW is 140 for me, but barely eeks 132 on this version.
I'll have to crack open some new balls and try again later.

Overall though, good to have an update!

[SkyTrak_Seth]

Guys, this is not as simple as "taking 10 yards off". Tweaking a ball flight model is VERY complex. In our testing for v1.8.5, we hit live alongside Trackman, with someone (me) standing being lasered in the range, and also later ran the data through both Optimal Flight and VSeries. There is rarely a shot that lines up perfectly across all of those ball flight models - everyone is slightly different and it varies on the club being hit. I feel very good about our numbers now. Just please know that it was not "Eh, we'll take some off now". I will say that the natural reaction to coming from super-human mid-iron distances is to say "Ahhh, it's short!" That said, I will continue to take some of your data and run it. Always looking to make our product better.

[Three Putt Pars]

I hit for about an hour last night on V 1.8.5. Hit 8i through 5i. I'm a 3 handicap and feel like I know my distances fairly well and the numbers all seemed a bit short on carry (I never look at total with irons). So I pulled up Flightscope's trajectory optimizer on my phone and typed in the data for about 15 shots as I hit. I made sure the altitude settings on both Skytrak and Flightscope's T.O matched. Skytrak was consistently short on carry by about 5-10 yards. Super frustrating...

[hks8888]

I just had a short session with 1.8.5. Overall, it improved quite a bit, but it is not satisfying. A flight model is not a simple equation, I guess, but if I dare to simplify the situation: if your spin rate goes over 7000rpm you will start noticing the shortage in distance. When Tbernardmd saw 10 yard shortage, I guess the spin rate might have been over 8000 for his (or her) 8 iron shots.

Here is my data (SW thru 7i) and the comparison for carry distance against Optimal Flight and Flightscope Trajectory Optimizer.

[wbond]

I was wondering if it was just me and maybe i wasn't hitting it as well. Looks like i will need to compare some numbers again as i feel they are a little short as well.

[happybob]

I will give version 1.85 a try soon, but if the numbers are now on the lower side, this would be an extremely discouraging news. It makes me wonder if Skytrak is indeed optimizing their flight model, or simply adjusting the distance based on user complaints. When we complained that the wedge shots were too short, they made it longer, then screwed up the mid-iron distance. Then we complained that the mid-iron shots are too long, then they take 10 yards off... I wonder when the distances will be just right. If they take this long just to make the basic distances correct, I wonder how long it would take them to add more features.

BTW, why can't they just use the same algorithm in the flight scope optimizer? Is it due to copyright issue? It's a shame it's take Skytrak this long to get this right.

[Agolfman]

Actually I think the numbers might've too low. I usually hit an 8 iron 150-160. I was only getting 140 and when plugged into flight scope optimizer the numbers were around 10 yards short. Anyone else? Roll out is better though. More realistic for sure

With you in the numbers being a little low at times on V1.8.5. My 8 irons were 7-8 yards shorter tonight than last night and my 5 irons about 15-17 yards. I'd guess that under V1.8 I may have been 5'ish yards too long, now perhaps 5'sh too short. Small sample size, need some more data.

[Tbernardmd]

Actually I think the numbers might've too low. I usually hit an 8 iron 150-160. I was only getting 140 and when plugged into flight scope optimizer the numbers were around 10 yards short. Anyone else? Roll out is better though. More realistic for sure