|
Post by cwdlaw223 on Dec 25, 2012 21:13:20 GMT -5
Aren't you biased Jeff? You seem to dislike Tman without any rational explanation except you don't want precision re impact conditions.
They didn't have high speed video either and were just fine.
Why not go back to the horse and buggy? Nobody denies you can become great without Trackman, but why would you want to ignore technology that can make practice more efficient?
|
|
|
Post by imperfectgolfer on Dec 26, 2012 1:05:16 GMT -5
cwdlaw223,
I would be more inclined to believe that TM readings can be accurate when I get convincing evidence that there is perfect concordance between the Phantom camera and TM, and if multiple comparative-tests of two TM devices measuring the same swing action always produce the same results. I am still waiting for that "evidence". In the meantime, I will harbor an attitude of healthy skepticism.
Jeff.
|
|
|
Post by cwdlaw223 on Dec 26, 2012 8:51:36 GMT -5
Why aren't you skeptical about one used phantom camera and a line drawing program?
|
|
|
Post by imperfectgolfer on Dec 26, 2012 9:52:57 GMT -5
cwdlaw223,
I am not skeptical of the accuracy of the Phantom camera technique because I cannot identify any potential inaccuracies that could be made in the measurements. If someone can show that the Phantom camera technique is inaccurate, then I may become skeptical.
Jeff.
|
|
|
Post by cwdlaw223 on Dec 26, 2012 10:20:52 GMT -5
Video isn't measuring anything. It's just capturing images.
Here are two problems with video:
(a) parallax, (b) 2D image for 3D properties (ex. AoA, Path, etc.)
How did you identify potential inaccuracies for Trackman without even using the device?
|
|
|
Post by tapiosantala on Dec 26, 2012 11:09:03 GMT -5
Video isn't measuring anything. It's just capturing images. Here are two problems with video: (a) parallax, (b) 2D image for 3D properties (ex. AoA, Path, etc.) How did you identify potential inaccuracies for Trackman without even using the device? AoA and path are both 1D measurements where Phantom camera can give much better information for calculation than any radar device. Do you think Trackman can know 1 or 2 degrees alignment change between players two shots? Or even 4 degrees? So if you get once 2 deg in to out and second 2 deg out to in, do you know what changed between those two shots?
|
|
|
Post by imperfectgolfer on Dec 26, 2012 12:22:01 GMT -5
cwdlaw223,
Your two concerns about Phantom camera measurements are not valid from my perspective.
First of all, the camera is precisely mounted directly above the ball thereby eliminating parallax distortion at impact, and any pre-impact/post-impact parallax distortion can be precisely corrected using a mathematical formulae for every degree of off-axis camera viewing. Secondly, one can get precise measurements of AOA if a second Phantom camera is mounted horizontally so that the camera lens is perpendicular to the ball in the horizontal plane. With two Phantom camera measurements (in both the vertical and horizontal planes), the 3-D path of the clubhead should be precisely measured.
Jeff.
|
|
|
Post by cwdlaw223 on Dec 26, 2012 12:36:58 GMT -5
Then you should be very skeptical of Jeffy's research on AoA since only one phantom camera was used.
Trackman isn't measuring alignment so your question makes no sense. Not sure any device measures alignment.
Do I know what changed with my swing? Yes. It's why I use the machine. Do you know what happens when you hit one shot 20 yards left and the next 3 yards left without any device? I just have more precision in the "what happened" at impact.
Why do you assert path and AoA are 1D?
So Tman's math isn't correct but the math to correct parallax is correct?
|
|
|
Post by imperfectgolfer on Dec 26, 2012 12:46:44 GMT -5
cwdlaw223,
One Phantom camera can get very precise clubface angle and clubhead path readings in the horizontal plane - if the camera is mounted vertically directly above the ball. That's the most important readings. It would be nice to also have another Phantom camera mounted horizontally to measure AoA and path motion in a vertical plane. That is achievable in a future Phantom camera experiment. I believe that two 1-D measurements made at right angles to each other allows for a precise 3-D measurement of clubhead path and clubface angle. Certainly, it is much more accurate than the TM which cannot even see the clubface. TM works backwards from the ball flight pattern to calculate the face angle, and it cannot possibly be accurate for off-center strikes.
Jeff.
|
|
|
Post by imperfectgolfer on Dec 26, 2012 12:58:42 GMT -5
cwdlaw223,
You wrote-: "Do I know what changed with my swing? Yes. It's why I use the machine. Do you know what happens when you hit one shot 20 yards left and the next 3 yards left without any device? I just have more precision in the "what happened" at impact."
I agree that you "know" what happened in your two shots at impact - with respect to path/face (presuming a centered strike). However, you seemingly have no guidelines on how to change your swing action from a biomechanical/mechanical perspective to correct for shots that are 3 yards left and 20 yards left of the target. How do you even know what happened biomechanically to cause those two inaccurate shots - given precise path/face readings from TM - because you routinely use a curved ball flight pattern? If I hit two shots inaccurately (3 yards left and 20 yards left), I simply stick to the same desired swing action of trying to get my FLW/intact LAFW moving straight towards the target through the immediate impact zone. I automatically know that I pulled the ball straight left - if my inaccurate ball flight was straight-left, and I automatically know that my FLW/intact LAFW was not moving towards the target.
Jeff.
|
|
|
Post by cwdlaw223 on Dec 26, 2012 13:00:24 GMT -5
So how does the camera see the face behind the ball?
First touch might be good with video.
|
|
|
Post by imperfectgolfer on Dec 26, 2012 13:10:06 GMT -5
You have never presented any "evidence" that it is important for any device to see behind the ball at impact. You have zero evidence that what is happening behind the ball during the impact interval is affecting ball flight. We will only be able to make judgements about this "theoretical possibility" if accurate Phantom camera measurements of path/face show that these measurements cannot fully account for ball flight. TM is of zero help in this arena of determining whether "behind-the-ball" clubface and ball interactive phenomena are affecting ball flight. You are throwing this "theoretical possibility" into the arena prematurely, and it doesn't help increase the validity of your "TM validity belief".
Jeff.
|
|
|
Post by tapiosantala on Dec 26, 2012 13:10:29 GMT -5
Then you should be very skeptical of Jeffy's research on AoA since only one phantom camera was used. Trackman isn't measuring alignment so your question makes no sense. Not sure any device measures alignment. Do I know what changed with my swing? Yes. It's why I use the machine. Do you know what happens when you hit one shot 20 yards left and the next 3 yards left without any device? I just have more precision in the "what happened" at impact. Why do you assert path and AoA are 1D? So Tman's math isn't correct but the math to correct parallax is correct? Really CW, try to understand even the basics. AoA is 1-dimensional measurement and can be done perfectly with only 1 camera as it is well calibrated. That "chess board" you see in Jeffys photos is the calibration board that gives all the information for calculation corrections as barrel effect and lens distortion. You really want to support Trackman but your problem is that you try to do it to the people who's technical understanding is so much advanced that you only make fool of yourself with every message. Even it would be huge disappointment to you, if you really want to understand and progress, you should listen those who understand that technology. You are free to disagree with me everything about opinions in golf swing, but now you all the the time claim black to white and that puts after a while debate to the level it has been in many threads. So understand that Phantom camera gives better base-ground for calculation of AoA and path than Trackman, because it really sees the face and club head. Flightscope used that to prove that their algorithms are close to right. Another thng you should understand is that Manzella is far far away from any level of science. Those graphs he posted in his forum are the ultimate proof of that. He can't even see when something is measured correctly or not as he don't understand how those devices work. After you understand those basics you can start your own journey toward the light and concentrate to really relevant things to get your game to better level. Trackman is for sure one part of that, but when you understand it better, you get also more out from it.
|
|
|
Post by cwdlaw223 on Dec 26, 2012 13:35:53 GMT -5
Tapio -
There's no need to attempt to personally attack me with "under stand the basics" and "fool of yourself" comments. Jeff doesn't want such posts on this site. I'll defer to Jeff if this warrants you being banned for not following his rules again.
|
|
|
Post by cwdlaw223 on Dec 26, 2012 13:41:12 GMT -5
You have never presented any "evidence" that it is important for any device to see behind the ball at impact. You have zero evidence that what is happening behind the ball during the impact interval is affecting ball flight. We will only be able to make judgements about this "theoretical possibility" if accurate Phantom camera measurements of path/face show that these measurements cannot fully account for ball flight. TM is of zero help in this arena of determining whether "behind-the-ball" clubface and ball interactive phenomena are affecting ball flight. You are throwing this "theoretical possibility" into the arena prematurely, and it doesn't help increase the validity of your "TM validity belief". Jeff. There is clearly a force with the clubhead going into the ball. The force can manifest itself through gear effect. It's not a theoretical possibility. That's why you need a guy like Tuxen to understand the math behind the impact collision. I'm not against video, I just realize it's limitations (just as Trackman has limitations (it's not an alignment device, doesn't give first touch face angle reading).
|
|