Tweet
I do not feel that the distance is accurate from my Skytrak. I know there is a great deal of discussion regarding this topic of the forum. I would like to know what other Skytrak owners have done to try to optimize the results from Skytrak monitor. This would include optimum laser angle, distance of laser dot to the monitor, monitor + or - distance from the golf mat, etc. Any thoughts or tips to improve the performance of the Skytrak monitor would be greatly appreciated. Thanks for your help.
-
-
I would like to hear that also. Only thing what I trust on Skytrak nowdays is launch angle and shot shape. Other things are so way off.
-
I would advise taking your ST to a range so you can see the differences in real time. I was having trust issues too until I did that.
I personally found that most shots were pretty close, say north of 75%. Those were on the shots where I hit it right. For the rest of the 25% the main differences would be distance being off by 10 to 20 yds, but right and left being pretty close. That's still when I hit it right.
However, for the shots I messed up, in any way, the ST was fairly severe with how it punished the mistake. i.e. I didn't hit it well (I tend to hit down on it) and the ball actually went 30 yards short and 20 yards left of average, while my ST was 20 yards shorter than that, and 20 yards further left. For further detail that is to say my Hybrid will go 200 yds on a full shot. It instead went 170 yds and 20 yds left. ST said it went 150 yds and 40 yds left. So short version is it tends to exaggerate your mistakes. Which is what fooled me into thinking it was way off too. Truth is, it is and it isn't.
Like I said... Pretend you're from Missouri, take it to the range, and see for yourself.
As for how to optimally set up your ST. Start with the manual, and supplement that with the search function here on the forum. That's what I did. Your problem will be sifting through all the information, not lack of it. Good luck!
Comment
-
Great points. When I have tested outside I had similar results. I don't think it was quite 75%, but it did fall into "very good" and "not good", not much in between.
There are also some challenges with testing outdoors. Getting level and right height can be a difficult, but not impossible. It has to in a shaded area. There should be no wind. Range ball should be avoided.
Indoors, I give my kids challenges by calling out yardages to hit. They hit within a few yards the vast majority of the time, and when they don't it was due to poor strike. I am very confident in accuracy.
As I am sure you know, the ST range does not take spin decay into account, so hooks and slices will be exaggerated. This is not hardware, and not present in TGC2019. Interestingly, a "friend" may have hit a shank or too, and they actually read like a shank.
As a final point, I do think your good and bad shot observation is very valid. It would be nice if we could set ST for "practice" or "competitive". Internally it surely can determine confidence in read. When in practice mode, read everything it can. When in competitive mode, reject shots it has low accuracy confidence in. It will result in more no-reads, but possible far fewer misreads, which is very important when playing online tournaments.
-
-
The first thing is to differentiate between no-reads and misreads. The distinction is important.
For the ST to read, the ball has to pass in view of the two sensors so that they can get a good image of the ball. That means not too low, not too high. Not too close to the ST, not too far. That simple. The window is bigger than people realize. There is no benefit to "optimize" ball location in that sense. If it sees the ball, it sees it. Obviously the margin for error is a bit smaller for woods (too low) and for high lofted wedges (too high). No worries, just move ball forward and back (respectively). If it sees the ball, all good. Moving the ball around won't do anything to improve accuracy. If will of course lead to no-reads if you move it outside of the window of sensor field of view.
There are other things that matter in setup, but again common sense prevails. The sensors must see the ball. The unit has be approximately the right height, obviously, as otherwise balls fly by too high or too low. If light shines directly into the sensors, they won't see the ball. If there are a lot of reflective objects in the view, it will struggle to pick out the ball. If you use a dark colored ball, it won't see the ball well. And so on. If you solve these, it will read 95% of the time or better.
Misread? Different matter, but fairly straightforward. VLA, HLA, and spin axis are measured relative to the orientation of the sensor. VLA is fairly, easy, unit should be reasonably level. Same for spin axis. HLA is a bit harder. Ideally, the ST's internal alignment would be perfectly aligned to the case, so all you need to do is ensure that the ST's edge is perfectly aligned with target line. But it often isn't. No big deal. Just hang a string off net or put tape on screen as target. Lay down an alignment stick as target line. Eyeball ST parallel to target line. Ensure level. Chip to target and adjust so that shots that hit the target read straight. If ST needs to be put away, mark the spot with marker, tape etc for to save setup time. That is it. All you can really do. Accuracy is now limited only by the ST's internal measurement error and ball flight model errors. These are quite small, and is outside of your control.
A lot of new users complain of draw bias, short distances etc. Most of the time, the read is an accurate reflection of what the shot really looks like. Pulls and pushes can be due to not aligning by trial and error. Another common error is to subconsciously hit towards center of net/screen rather than target line. Another is indoor swing (swing changes due to smaller physical space to swing in). And on occasion, there really are issues with the ST.Comment
-
What us the best remedy to get the aligning perfect? I had issues with this while getting indoor lessons over the winter. ThxComment
-
Originally posted by jabwind51 View Post- Ron at GunghoGolf.com - we specialize in TrackMan, FlightScope, Foresight, Uneekor, SkyTrak, Garmin, Bushnell, TGC, and E6 Connect. 512-861-4151 or email hello AT gunghogolf.com.Comment
-
Originally posted by GungHoGolf View Post
thanks. You’re the man. Trying to locate that DIY mat design video of yours at the moment!Comment
-
Gungho,Originally posted by GungHoGolf View Post
I’m new to the SkyTrak community having just received mine about a week ago. I have been on here lurking for a bit in advance of receiving my unit in order to familiarize myself with the best practices that you and others generously provide. So, of course, I came across your guide for alignment some time ago. In it you mention that SkyTrak themselves have publicly disavowed the internal alignment mode (2 laser dots) of the units. I figured I would come across that statement at some point in my research but I never have. Since I’m not totally familiar with the history of this product, can you please tell me when and where they made this public disclosure?
Thank you for all your time answering questions and helping people have a great experience with this product.Comment
-
I'm sure that somebody can dig up the statement, but just trust us on this. You can't do better than trial and error alignment. It is really only two lasers attached to the unit that are supposed to give a line parallel to the edge case. They may or may not. Even if they did, ST internals maybe not be parallel. All that the lasers share with the rest of the units functionality is connection to the power source. Skytrak did remove access to the function for few versions. That should be a big clue that it is not reliable.Last edited by Morini; 04-06-2020, 10:32 PM. -
What Morini and wbond said. Also, the "dot" isn't a dot - it's an oblique blotch, and really not precise at all (depends on surface of mat, slight bumps, etc). TRUST US. -
Well, I was looking for something else, and stumbled on this thread. Right from the horses mouth (skytrak_seth himself)
-
-
Thank you wbond, gunghogolf, and morini for your responses. Just to clarify, it was never a matter of not believing or trusting the advice on here, but rather my desire to always source information if at all possible. It's just in my nature and a bit of a carryover from my professional life. That in mind, a big thank you for finding the relevant thread discussing the matter.Comment
-
No worries. In case you didn't see, here is a quote from seth. I think he is VP of software development or some such thing:
I would trust the alignment of the unit itself. I think we've seen that those lasers can be knocked out of place slightly, and they really have no tie to the cameras. If the lasers are not matching up to real-life alignment, you can always have it sent in to have the readjusted, but I'm beginning to question the practicality of the alignment mode feature due to this reason.As I said before, the idea behind alignment mode was a good one, but it was not what the lasers were originally intended for. The lasers are only to be used a guide to place the ball on the mat. If RH and LH are off a bit in that capacity, it really doesn't matter and no one would know the difference. But when dealing with alignment mode and the resulting impact on side angle, it becomes a big deal. In my opinion, too big of a deal given the current hardware limitations, which is why I'm taking it out of the next releaseComment
Comment