Golf guru experience and major difficulty

[bumgolfr]

I just received my golf guru a week ago and had no problem downloading courses in the Myrtle beach area. GG has about 60% of the MB courses in their list. I had a few questions, and customer service response has been great.

 

I finally used it this past Thurs afternoon, and found that the readings were off by nearly 10% of the correct distance on all holes except a couple of par 3's. That is for a 400 yard hole, it would read 360 at the tee box, and 180 at the 200 yard marker and 90 at the 100 yard marker. I called and talked to the chief mapper and was told the course I played was an old mapping and that they would update it. (the Witch)

 

I mentioned that I was playing the International club on Sat.(yesterday) and was assured that the mapping was current and lots of targets etc. Dejavu the holes were all short by about 10-12 % again and the error got less in yards as i got closer to the green.

 

My comparisons were 2 sky caddies, the golf cart gps system, and course markers. A mismarked green (location) would not exhibit this behavior as the error in yards would be constant. Perhaps their algorithm has a glitch.

 

In a nutshell, using course markers and my eyeballs, i was mor accurate than the guru. I am in the process of returning the unit. I suspect all MB courses will have a similar problem with the Guru.

[h2ohzrd]

I finally used it this past Thurs afternoon, and found that the readings were off by nearly 10% of the correct distance on all holes except a couple of par 3's. That is for a 400 yard hole, it would read 360 at the tee box, and 180 at the 200 yard marker and 90 at the 100 yard marker. I called and talked to the chief mapper and was told the course I played was an old mapping and that they would update it. (the Witch)

 

I mentioned that I was playing the International club on Sat.(yesterday) and was assured that the mapping was current and lots of targets etc. Dejavu the holes were all short by about 10-12 % again and the error got less in yards as i got closer to the green.

 

My comparisons were 2 sky caddies, the golf cart gps system, and course markers. A mismarked green (location) would not exhibit this behavior as the error in yards would be constant. Perhaps their algorithm has a glitch.

 

In a nutshell, using course markers and my eyeballs, i was mor accurate than the guru. I am in the process of returning the unit. I suspect all MB courses will have a similar problem with the Guru.

 

I found that the courses they already had mapped (from the database they bought) weren't quite as up-to-date as they should have been. All other courses that I requested they map have been spot on. I had only one hole that was questionable and I need to play the course again to be sure there's an error.

[puckcoach3]

I just received my golf guru a week ago and had no problem downloading courses in the Myrtle beach area. GG has about 60% of the MB courses in their list. I had a few questions, and customer service response has been great.

 

I finally used it this past Thurs afternoon, and found that the readings were off by nearly 10% of the correct distance on all holes except a couple of par 3's. That is for a 400 yard hole, it would read 360 at the tee box, and 180 at the 200 yard marker and 90 at the 100 yard marker. I called and talked to the chief mapper and was told the course I played was an old mapping and that they would update it. (the Witch)

 

I mentioned that I was playing the International club on Sat.(yesterday) and was assured that the mapping was current and lots of targets etc. Dejavu the holes were all short by about 10-12 % again and the error got less in yards as i got closer to the green.

 

My comparisons were 2 sky caddies, the golf cart gps system, and course markers. A mismarked green (location) would not exhibit this behavior as the error in yards would be constant. Perhaps their algorithm has a glitch.

 

In a nutshell, using course markers and my eyeballs, i was mor accurate than the guru. I am in the process of returning the unit. I suspect all MB courses will have a similar problem with the Guru.

 

Confirm that you have it set for "Yards" and not "Meters".

[bumgolfr]

Bingo- sometimes we super seniors aren't too swift with these hi tech devices. Would have thought the customer support would have thought of this when I described the problem.

 

Thanks so much for the help.

[puckcoach3]

Bingo- sometimes we super seniors aren't too swift with these hi tech devices. Would have thought the customer support would have thought of this when I described the problem.

 

Thanks so much for the help.

 

 

Before I got my Guru, I used my Bushnell Rangefinder all the time. One round, about half way through, I must have pushed a wrong button by mistake and it switched from yards to meters. Needless to say, I was a club short on every approach shot until the 18th hole when I realized the problem -- doh ! Won't make that mistake again ...

[Br7ian]

In fairness to those at Guru, I think this thread should be either edited or locked (I don't work for them). Glad you figured it out, it's a great unit!

[bumgolfr]

So I converted my meter readings to yards on 13 points, and found differences of -20 to + 16 yards with a root mean square error of 13 yards. (1 m = 1.0936 yards). I plan to try it again at the same course which I was promised by GG was the latest most up to date mapping and give it one more test. However when the cart gps and course markers agree with 2 sky caddies (within a yard or 2) I think I have to go with them.

 

I will say that I didn't see anything in the docs about meters and yards choices, but it came from GG set to meters. That's sort of a surprise in the US.

 

BTW-Their customer service is very responsive.

[bumgolfr]

What offends you about this that you would suggest locking or editing? I'm not criticizing GG, in fact they seem like a great groupwith a fine product which has far more capability than my game warrants. I'm only trying to disclose a problem that may be unique to me. I am not calibrating it against my ability to hit a particular club a given distance. My RMS error for any club in my bag is probably 15 yards. (or my 1 sigma).

[labillyboy]

I would be interested in seeing how it checks up with laser measured distance.... maybe it is right and the others are wrong? One of the big selling points for the Guru is it's higher quality GPS chipset...

 

If it is just that the mapping for that course is off it should be easy to fix. I can't imagine their algorithm would be off, it is just taking two GPS co-ordinates, calculating a difference and displaying it in yds or (as we now know) meters.

 

Good luck and thanks for the report.

[BillK9989]

I would be interested in seeing how it checks up with laser measured distance.... maybe it is right and the others are wrong? One of the big selling points for the Guru is it's higher quality GPS chipset...

 

If it is just that the mapping for that course is off it should be easy to fix. I can't imagine their algorithm would be off, it is just taking two GPS co-ordinates, calculating a difference and displaying it in yds or (as we now know) meters.

 

Good luck and thanks for the report.

e

 

 

Based on my experience, the Golf Guru accuracy could actually be put up against a Bushnell. BUT only for a self-mapped course that you mapped with three bars of signal strength. I have been posting to the original Golf Guru thread, and I am here to tell you that the accuracy/repeatability/stability of readings with this device, using self-mapped points and three bars of signal strength, is just unreal for a GPS. I am thinking it is as good as a quality laser, which is saying a bunch.

 

I also do not believe that this thread should be locked. A person had an honest, actual problem and got help. Even a negative thread, which this thread is not, should not be locked as long as a person states his case and reasons. We're trying to learn about and share experience with a new product that cannot possibly be perfect on Day 1, not have a cheerleading society.

[Br7ian]

OK. As one of the owners that hopes nothing but success for the company, I thought the subject "Major Difficulty" was a bit misleading -- that would suggest a major problem with the device. I'm sure our Metric friends love this feature. Either way, it's not a big deal.

[bumgolfr]

I, too, hope for nothing but the best for the company, I have heard from several people from the company about this "problem"/"Major difficulty", including Darryl. I was told that the addition of meters was a recent feature, and since I didn't see anything about it in he documentation, and since I am in the U.S.A, the possibility that the factory shipped a unit in Meters never occured to me, or their help staff. As an ex rocket scientist, I should have recognized the behavior but I had a brain phart.

 

However when I converted to yards, I had errors/disagreements with 4 other measures thet ranged fro on the money to +-15-20 yards in 13 points. Perhaps that indicates a mapping problem or something else like the reference wavelength when they do meters is in yards or something else.

 

In any case, I hope we can resolve this shortly, and that the company is around for the long haul.

[Br7ian]

So you're saying that, once you made the switch to yards, you're still seeing sizable discrepancies from yardages obtained from: other GPS/Sprinklers/Carts?

[labillyboy]

Check it with a laser.

 

Cart GPS systems can be seriously inaccurate from my experience.... some are not GPS but triangulation....

 

Sky Caddies are ususally pretty good, but they are not immune from old mapping or weak GPS signals.

 

If the course is not mapped correctly, THAT you can fix... Can you map something yourself and then compare the measurements with a laser? This will tell you if it is a mapping error or something with the unit...

 

I would be quite surprised if they have the software wrong... pretty simple to calculate distance between GPS waypoints... and the GPS chipset they use is supposed to be the best... I would bet that you have a bad map.

[bumgolfr]

I'm saying that once I converted the meters to yards using 1.0936 yards/meter, I had differences as described. I have not been back to the course with the unit set for yards. I also found that the default settings for each downloaded course were in meters which I find strange in the USA, so when you download a course, check the settings for each course. My guess at this time is mapping differences are the cause.

 

I have a bushnell laser, but I can't use it as I'm not very steady and can't aim at a particular location. So I trust the GPS cart, the course markers and 2 sky caddies. when they all read the same to within 2 yards, I believe them.

 

I will try to go to the course again with new downloads and see what results, and will report on it.

[Gozz]

As I stated in the other thread I had one course that was +/- 20 yards on every hole. I believe it was one of the courses that they farmed out to be mapped. I contacted John T. at Golf Guru and he remapped it in two days. It is now dead on. Mistakes can happen but they are an easy fix.

[bumgolfr]

So does that make us "beta" testers for their maps. The product may be accurate and one of the best out there considering cost, but if the original input is off, do the users have to find and report it. They need better QC or paid field testers accross the country. I like the product, but I hate discovering it's off on a course I may play only once. I can usually eyeball to within +-15 yards using course markers. Why would I want to use a device that gives results in my eyeball range due to poor input info?

[BillK9989]

So does that make us "beta" testers for their maps. The product may be accurate and one of the best out there considering cost, but if the original input is off, do the users have to find and report it. They need better QC or paid field testers accross the country. I like the product, but I hate discovering it's off on a course I may play only once. I can usually eyeball to within +-15 yards using course markers. Why would I want to use a device that gives results in my eyeball range due to poor input info?

 

 

Bumgolfr, I am afraid there may be a difference between your expectations and what the product and service are able to deliver at the moment.

 

As a former rocket scientist, you undoubtedly understand that you have bought into a leading edge device and process. When you are on the leading edge everything is not going to be perfect, of course, and you are going to have to interact with the provider and user community, and put up with some early frustration.

 

Here is my understanding of the situation:

 

This company is offering a device that is of a new, state-of-the-art design for the consumer market that makes it faster, with far more accurate and stable readings and lots of features. (In comparison to the device I formerly had (iGolf), this device also has a much slicker user interface for doing course mapping and upload/download synchronization.) The device also incorporates high capacity for storing a large number of courses and VERY large numbers of target points per hole. The company also offers free access to its data base of courses, and is responsive to requests to map the courses of one's choice. To my way of thinking, this offering, henceforth to be referred to as "the deal", is a pretty good deal. But, as with all deals, it is not a one-size-fits-all deal.

 

As I said, I like the deal. A lot. This device is clearly a better mousetrap than what I had, in terms of performance and convenience. Frankly, there is no comparison. Further, I like the lack of a subscription. My credit card gets bled to death with subscriptions, and I hate it, and here is an opportunity to avoid yet another.

 

The deal is not perfect. The company does not provide courses that have been mapped on the ground and checked by experts. We are getting courses that are mapped from imagery using processes that inherently introduce inaccuracy and have the potential for human error. (We need to understand that the optimal use of this device is to have courses that are mapped on the ground with three bars of signal strength present during the mapping process, then checked for mistakes by subsequent play. If this process is followed, the speed, accuracy, and stability of the device are simply stunning, at least in comparison with what I had).

 

I believe the company strategy for course mappings may be the following: The customer base is provided with a set of pre-mapped courses from which we can make modifications and improvements. Or, we can map our favorite courses from scratch. The customer base is provided with a device that is absolutely slick in terms of the ease with which one can modify or map-from-scratch a course. We will note that the company is providing permanent storage for our user mapped or modified courses *only* in their cloud, *not* on our computers. These facts send a signal to me that the deal will ultimately be for us to upload and share our highly accurate course mappings with the entire community. I expect that eventually there will be multiple user mappings of popular courses, with an Amazon-type user rating system. In other words, the deal will be free access to highly accurate course mappings in exchange for user participation and sharing. In other words, there is no free lunch. In other words, this company cannot afford to pay people to walk and accurately map and check for errors on thousands of courses at no subscription charge to the customer base.

 

As I indicated, I like the deal; I love the attributes of the device and I do not require turn-key/ plug-and-play service. It sounds as though you do. Perhaps your best course of action is to apply for a refund and go for a different deal. Based on my understanding of what you have written, you have requirements that may be fundamentally incompatible with what is offered by Golf Guru at the moment. Golf Guru is leading edge and you require turnkey, with no problems or inaccuracies. I can understand that.

[bumgolfr]

This is a case of GIGO. Garbage in, garbage out. I agree with what you say about the Guru and I like the fact that it is easy to use. However, if the mappings are somewhat inaccurate, rhe yardages will be inaccurate. If other systems have "better" maps, why doesn't Guru have them. My game is such that if their yardages are within +-4 yards, I'm satisfied. As a base I use the course markers and a cart GPS or friends sky caddies. If their is agreement between these other inputs to within a couple of yards, and the Guru is outside this range, then I suspect the mappings are the problem. For the golf vacationer, I suspect he/she will want accurate (+-2 yds) for courses they will play once. If you are locked into one or two courses (or more) for regular play, by all means, map it yourself.

 

I am concerned that if Golf Guru does not have accurate maps, the unit will not sell to the people who take golf vacations. I am communicating with them about several items including documentation, courses closed or sold for RE development which are in their data base, and results I see. What's your proactive undertaking?

[Gozz]

Golf Guru maps are very accurate. They have mapped 25 courses for me since February and all but one has been within +/- 2 yards. That is less than 1% and they have now fixed that course. I would/will put my Guru up against any GPS device on any course in my area especially the GPS units that are on the golf carts. As Bill stated above, this is a new leading edge product and there will be some growing pains. If you are willing to be patient I believe the reward will certainly outweigh the price of the unit.

[bumgolfr]

From what I've read and heard, the re-mappings are accurate, and so are special requests. The vendor from whom they purchased the original 5600 or so left something to be desired. I do understand growing pains, and I'm satisfied that when mapping errors are pointed out, they get on it. I hope I have as much good luck as you have had with your requests.

[GoToTheJoe]

Not sure if I am just lucky or it's just my region (Colorado) but I have used 9 Guru maps so far. A couple didn't have targets but still had the F/C/B and all 9 have been very accurate. The remappings have been amazing though. I played a remapped course last Friday with a friend who has a SG5 and we compared notes on a few holes and the Guru had more targets and seemed to be a little more accurate based on points around the course (about 2 yards difference). The SG5 is nice but not an extra $260 nice! Plus he ended up leaving it in the cart most of the time on the tee boxes because it was too big to fit in a pocket with the protective cover he had on it. So he would take a reading from the cart and then step off the yards from the cart to the tee. :)

[BillK9989]

This is a case of GIGO. Garbage in, garbage out. I agree with what you say about the Guru and I like the fact that it is easy to use. However, if the mappings are somewhat inaccurate, rhe yardages will be inaccurate. If other systems have "better" maps, why doesn't Guru have them. My game is such that if their yardages are within +-4 yards, I'm satisfied. As a base I use the course markers and a cart GPS or friends sky caddies. If their is agreement between these other inputs to within a couple of yards, and the Guru is outside this range, then I suspect the mappings are the problem. For the golf vacationer, I suspect he/she will want accurate (+-2 yds) for courses they will play once. If you are locked into one or two courses (or more) for regular play, by all means, map it yourself.

 

I am concerned that if Golf Guru does not have accurate maps, the unit will not sell to the people who take golf vacations. I am communicating with them about several items including documentation, courses closed or sold for RE development which are in their data base, and results I see. What's your proactive undertaking?

 

 

To answer your question about why Golf Guru doesn't have maps that are as good as others: I suppose that the reason is because others have been in the business longer and tend not to share their intellectual property with their competitors.

 

My proactive undertakings are to offer to participate as a beta tester, to try to understand the device as best I can and to contribute whatever I have learned that I think might help others to the thread in the link below, and to try to avoid whining when I run into a problem:

 

http://www.golfwrx.com/forums/index.php?sh...mp;hl=golf+guru

[bumgolfr]

I'd like to see them find a way to annotate the remapped or correctly mapped courses as opposed to the original bought mapped ones. Then when I go out, I have an idea of what to expect. I sure don't want to request that they remap every course I plan to play especially if someone else has requested it earlier. I spoke to them, and to map/remap a course they need scorecard info (I assume for the handicap system.) . For me this is not a critical function as half the time, I don't keep score, so I hope this requirement doesn't delay adding new courses accurately. I was very surprised to see that they had True Blue in their stable, but not Caldonia, its sister course, both of which are Mike Stranz designs, and both of which are Myrtle Beach must plays if you can afford them. BTW, Caldonia is now in their folder and it took less than a week.

 

The one other thing I'd like to see is a hard copy of their users guide in a 5x7 format at a moderate cost.

 

This is written after my wining.

 

Good luck with your Golf Guru's, and remeber to enjoy the game.

 

Bumgolfr

 

What's in my bag? 15 or 16 assorted no name clubs, about 50 or 60 balls (OP's and Ones I have found, several tees (some broken), sunscreen, OFF, Bandaids, Jack Daniels) Oh yeah-a golf guru.

[phil75070]

I imagine they need the scorecard to also determine how the course is laid out as the aerial/satellite photos won't have any indication of which holes are which. For example, at my course, coming off 1 or 10, just looking at the photos, it would be just as sensible to switch 2 and 11 if one didn't have the scorecard info to refer to. Even if the course is not laid out on the card, knowing the par and yardage helps identify which hole is which.

[bumgolfr]

Well today I did a beta test now that I've sorted out yards and meters and learned a bit more about how the GG works. I took it to Quail Creek, where they have just laser measured Front,Center Back from a large # of sprinkler heads and engraved them on said heads. GG agreement from these spots was excellent (+-2yards). Usually the front was right on and the center and back would be off 2-5 yards. I suspect this is either a remote sensing analysis problem or the Laser measurement reflector holder's position may have been suspect.

 

Some tee box measurements were way off, especially on sharp doglegs but frankly, that reading is not important except on par 3's where it was close to the card distance so i assume it was accurate given various tee placements.

 

I am now convinced that if there are significant differences between the GG and other systems' info regarding yardages, the GG mappings are probably off. So when I see it, I'll let Amanda know.

[bumgolfr]

Phil,

 

I yardage book would be real nice, esp for hazard info. Many courses in the MB area give them out so I assume they'd send them to GG if requested.

[bumgolfr]

I down loaded True Blue in SC, a Mike Stranz course where info would be useful for first time play. The Guru download was totally incomplete (holes 1-3 onl;y) so starting on 10 rendered the Guru useless. Of the 4 courses I have played, only one seemed accurate- 2 others had mapping errors that i found unacceptable and today's 3 hole course hadno hazards but green shapes seemed accurate.

 

Since I do not want to map courses or add info to mapped courses, or enter scores and keep statistics which is what the Guru seems to be designed for, I have concluded that the Guru is not for me.

 

I will admit that customer service has been responsive, but not necessarily effective.

[phil75070]

I down loaded True Blue in SC, a Mike Stranz course where info would be useful for first time play. The Guru download was totally incomplete (holes 1-3 onl;y) so starting on 10 rendered the Guru useless. Of the 4 courses I have played, only one seemed accurate- 2 others had mapping errors that i found unacceptable and today's 3 hole course hadno hazards but green shapes seemed accurate.

 

Since I do not want to map courses or add info to mapped courses, or enter scores and keep statistics which is what the Guru seems to be designed for, I have concluded that the Guru is not for me.

 

I will admit that customer service has been responsive, but not necessarily effective.

 

I had similar issues with downloaded courses and even a course I spent a couple of hours mapping myself. I actually received an RMA, sent the unit back, which they signed for on the 10th. They were supposed to replace it (I have that in writing from the President of the company). As shipments between Austin and Dallas only take a day, on the 20th, I emailed him to just check when I would receive the replacement. He replied, saying he would advise by the end of the day. Again, that was the 20th and I have heard nothing back since despite follow up emails. They have both my unit and my original payment, plus I am out the postage to return it as well.

 

It is easy to create the perception of good customer service answering simple questions and responding to requests for course mappings which they are doing anyway as they know they need to expand their course database. However, as you said, have a problem and they are totally ineffective! I plan to wait another day or two, call to see if they are still in business, then file a complaint with the Better Business Bureau.

[bumgolfr]

Don't wait, Call customer service and talk to Amanda. I got my number with no problem. Of course, I need to see if the followup is any good. I'm going to get a sky caddie 2.5. I think it will do what I want.