Strange Trackman numbers indoors

[barnum1]

Hi,

 

Me and two friends went to an indoor Trackman simulator centre, and tried all their three "Trackmen" at three different occasions.
We all experienced much lower club head speed than expected with the driver, but slightly higher with the irons.
My driver club head speed measured this summer on another Trackman was 93-95 mph, at the indoor centre it was 85-88. 
My 7i club head speed this summer was 74. at the indoor centre it was 76-78. 

(The calculated shot length was accordingly short with driver and longish with irons.) 

And similar for my friends.

 

We talked to the staff but they were confident that the Trackman numbers were correct.
They had maybe a theory that it could be a mental thing when hitting driver indoors.

 

So, anybody experienced anything similar? Could it be a mental thing? 
Can it be faulty setup of Trackman? Any thoughts? Thanks!

[eth4and]

On 12/18/2020 at 12:46 PM, barnum1 said:

Hi,

 

Me and two friends went to an indoor Trackman simulator centre, and tried all their three "Trackmen" at three different occasions.
We all experienced much lower club head speed than expected with the driver, but slightly higher with the irons.
My driver club head speed measured this summer on another Trackman was 93-95 mph, at the indoor centre it was 85-88. 
My 7i club head speed this summer was 74. at the indoor centre it was 76-78. 

(The calculated shot length was accordingly short with driver and longish with irons.) 

And similar for my friends.

 

We talked to the staff but they were confident that the Trackman numbers were correct.
They had maybe a theory that it could be a mental thing when hitting driver indoors.

 

So, anybody experienced anything similar? Could it be a mental thing? 
Can it be faulty setup of Trackman? Any thoughts? Thanks!

This is a common occurrence with Trackman's especially with respect to measuring driver club head speed. Since the unit is set up behind the ball it's not necessarily capturing the true club speed at the exact point of contact with the ball in the same way say a high-speed camera-based system (e.g. GCQuad) is able to being set up right next to the ball. Further, because of the 3D geometry of a driver vs. an iron, the Trackman camera is taking a measurement at some point on the rear of the club (rather than the clubface). This can be problematic if the point measured on the backside of the driver head is closer to the heel vs. the toe since the heel is moving through space rotationally slower relative to the toe (i.e. slower club head reading). This issue is largely mitigated with irons because the 3 dimensional space between the club face and backside of an iron are so much closer together. Hope this helps! 

[barnum1]

15 hours ago, eth4and said:

This is a common occurrence with Trackman's especially with respect to measuring driver club head speed. Since the unit is set up behind the ball it's not necessarily capturing the true club speed at the exact point of contact with the ball in the same way say a high-speed camera-based system (e.g. GCQuad) is able to being set up right next to the ball. Further, because of the 3D geometry of a driver vs. an iron, the Trackman camera is taking a measurement at some point on the rear of the club (rather than the clubface). This can be problematic if the point measured on the backside of the driver head is closer to the heel vs. the toe since the heel is moving through space rotationally slower relative to the toe (i.e. slower club head reading). This issue is largely mitigated with irons because the 3 dimensional space between the club face and backside of an iron are so much closer together. Hope this helps! 

 

Thanks for the feedback!

 

I wonder why the Trackman numbers from this summer (outdoors) were so different for the driver?

I guess the things you are describing could also give wrong numbers outdoors?
Or is there a difference in how Trackman measures club speed indoors vs. outdoors?

[Stuart_G]

20 hours ago, eth4and said:

This is a common occurrence with Trackman's especially with respect to measuring driver club head speed. Since the unit is set up behind the ball it's not necessarily capturing the true club speed at the exact point of contact with the ball in the same way say a high-speed camera-based system (e.g. GCQuad) is able to being set up right next to the ball. Further, because of the 3D geometry of a driver vs. an iron, the Trackman camera is taking a measurement at some point on the rear of the club (rather than the clubface). This can be problematic if the point measured on the backside of the driver head is closer to the heel vs. the toe since the heel is moving through space rotationally slower relative to the toe (i.e. slower club head reading). This issue is largely mitigated with irons because the 3 dimensional space between the club face and backside of an iron are so much closer together. Hope this helps! 

 

First oof all, it really isn't relevant to the OP's question since he's asking about comparing TM numbers to TM numbers,  not TM to some other LM.

 

However, it's true TM measures at the geometric center of the club and not the point of impact - but many would argue that's more accurate than at the point of contact.  Many think that swing speed numbers shouldn't be dependent on the impact location.  When it is, you can get inconsistent numbers for the exact same swing.   But that's really a matter of personal preference, not right or wrong.

 

But front vs back of the club head doesn't make any difference.  The radar unit 'sees' the velocities of the whole head from heel to toe.  The fact that it does uses the velocity at the geometric center means that it doesn't matter if it's measuring the front or back of the head.  Both the front and back of the head move at the exact same speed.   In many cases (such as with the carbon fiber heads), the radar return from the face is going to be stronger than that of the back side of the head so will be measured directly.

 

 

 

5 hours ago, barnum1 said:

 

I wonder why the Trackman numbers from this summer (outdoors) were so different for the driver?

I guess the things you are describing could also give wrong numbers outdoors?
Or is there a difference in how Trackman measures club speed indoors vs. outdoors?

 

No, it doesn't measure the club parameters any different indoors vs outdoors.  The main difference is the spin numbers - specifically spin axis and ball flight numbers (distances, decent angle, height, etc..) since they are measured through the whole flight outdoors but calculated indoors.

 

Yes, many people do swing differently indoors vs outdoors and there is no reason to doubt the accuracy of the numbers.  Some people swing differently when they are focused on the fact that they are being measured - instead of maybe focusing on something else during a lesson with the instructor monitoring the numbers.   And some people actually loose a noticeable amount of club head speed in the driver during the winter months when not playing as much - or even wearing more cloths or just different ambient temperatures.   There are other reasons but those are the more common ones that come to mind.

 

Edited January 5, 2021 by Stuart_G

[eth4and]

7 hours ago, barnum1 said:

 

Thanks for the feedback!

 

I wonder why the Trackman numbers from this summer (outdoors) were so different for the driver?

I guess the things you are describing could also give wrong numbers outdoors?
Or is there a difference in how Trackman measures club speed indoors vs. outdoors?

 

Barnum - although you noted the SS discrepancies in your OP, the punchline of it was that your shots were "traveling accordingly short with driver and longish with irons" so I'm going to assume you care more about the results vs. the inputs. I've found TMs to be extremely accurate in outdoor settings where its radar has the benefit of the entire ball's flight. I've personally not had as good of luck with TMs indoors when the ball flight calculation is derived from an algorithm based on just the first +/-15-20ft of ball flight. To those ends, I do have a couple of additional questions that could help explain the resulting distance discrepancies you noted: do you happen to remember if the spin numbers presented after each swing were italicized and/or if the ball(s) you were hitting indoors had a small silver dot on them? If not, the resulting spin #'s are estimates rather than actuals and could be throwing off your distances. 

 

That said, I don't want to discount what Stuart said. He's absolutely correct that some people swing differently indoors, are consciously focused on their numbers, and/or simply aren't playing as much in the offseason. I do want to note though that if any one of those things were true for you and your 2 friends I find it surprising that you were seeing faster & longer irons. 

 

3 hours ago, Stuart_G said:

 

First oof all, it really isn't relevant to the OP's question since he's asking about comparing TM numbers to TM numbers,  not TM to some other LM.

 

However, it's true TM measures at the geometric center of the club and not the point of impact - but many would argue that's more accurate than at the point of contact.  Many think that swing speed numbers shouldn't be dependent on the impact location.  When it is, you can get inconsistent numbers for the exact same swing.   But that's really a matter of personal preference, not right or wrong.

 

But front vs back of the club head doesn't make any difference.  The radar unit 'sees' the velocities of the whole head from heel to toe.  The fact that it does uses the velocity at the geometric center means that it doesn't matter if it's measuring the front or back of the head.  Both the front and back of the head move at the exact same speed.   In many cases (such as with the carbon fiber heads), the radar return from the face is going to be stronger than that of the back side of the head so will be measured directly.

 

 

 

 

No, it doesn't measure the club parameters any different indoors vs outdoors.  The main difference is the spin numbers - specifically spin axis and ball flight numbers (distances, decent angle, height, etc..) since they are measured through the whole flight outdoors but calculated indoors.

 

Yes, many people do swing differently indoors vs outdoors and there is no reason to doubt the accuracy of the numbers.  Some people swing differently when they are focused on the fact that they are being measured - instead of maybe focusing on something else during a lesson with the instructor monitoring the numbers.   And some people actually loose a noticeable amount of club head speed in the driver during the winter months when not playing as much - or even wearing more cloths or just different ambient temperatures.   There are other reasons but those are the more common ones that come to mind.

 

 

Stuart - as it relates to your comments re: TM SS calculus based on the geometric center of the club vs. point of impact it appears we'll just have to agree to disagree. The point of impact is literally the only point SS matters. A SS measurement taken a split second before or after contact is irrelevant since what really matters is the amount of stored energy that's able to be transferred to the ball, which only occurs at impact. 

 

Further - saying that a club head is traveling at the same speed across the entire face through a swing is factually incorrect. Here's a simple example back from my university days: like a golf club, the blade of a ceiling fan is moving at the same speed, however, the outside edge of the fan blade travels further than the inside edge during the time of one revolution. The further a point is from its center axis, the faster it travels. Obviously a fan is an extreme example relative to the face of a golf club, but the principal's the same none the less; thus the toe of a club is traveling faster than the heel (most prominently in the driver since it's the largest faced club). This helps explain why shots off the toe tend to be much "hotter" than shots off the heel (obviously club/face geometry is also responsible for the resulting ball speed discrepancies). 

 

All this being said, I should probably note that I'm not a huge proponent of SS. It's a relevant input, and one that all golfers should actively train in an attempt to increase their theoretical max ball speed & distance. But the resulting ball speed/launch/spin/etc. are far more important factors relative to SS. It doesn't really matter how a sausage is made so long as it tastes delicious! 

 

[Stuart_G]

1 hour ago, eth4and said:

I do want to note though that if any one of those things were true for you and your 2 friends I find it surprising that you were seeing faster & longer irons. 

 

The difference really wasn't all that much, not like the driver numbers.  But some people can swing more or less freely with irons because of something as simple as hitting off of a different type of mat or even using a premium ball indoors instead of a range rock outdoors.   Short steel shafts can provide much more harsher feedback from the ball and hitting surface than long graphite shafts in a driver.

 

 

1 hour ago, eth4and said:

Stuart - as it relates to your comments re: TM SS calculus based on the geometric center of the club vs. point of impact it appears we'll just have to agree to disagree. The point of impact is literally the only point SS matters.

 

Actually, I said it was personal preference.  If you're saying you prefer to get it at the point of impact or that's the only thing that matters to you - that's fine, I don't have a problem with that at all.   If you're trying to imply that those that prefer it at the geometric center are somehow wrong to have that preference then that seems to me a bit short sighted to me.

 

 

Quote

 

Further - saying that a club head is traveling at the same speed across the entire face through a swing is factually incorrect.

 

I never said it was the same across the entire face.  I said it was the same at the back as it is at the front.   Every point on the head on an equal radius from the center of rotation is moving at the exact same speed.  Doesn't matter if it's on the face (front) or on the back of the head.   So getting a reading on the back vs the front is irrelevant to the accuracy of the resulting numbers.

 

 

Quote

All this being said, I should probably note that I'm not a huge proponent of SS. It's a relevant input, and one that all golfers should actively train in an attempt to increase their theoretical max ball speed & distance. But the resulting ball speed/launch/spin/etc. are far more important factors relative to SS. It doesn't really matter how a sausage is made so long as it tastes delicious!

 

It's a number.  One of many.  But bottom line is how it's used.  Depending on that, It can both be helpful or hurtful, useful or detrimental.   I personally find club data much more useful than ball data in the context of monitoring swing changes and improvements.   They are much more indicative of the progress and consistency of the changes since even poor mechanics can generate good ball numbers.  And in fitting they provide important insight into the reason the ball numbers may be different in the context of an equipment change and be much more helpful in guiding the iterative process to find what's best for a player.

 

Edited January 5, 2021 by Stuart_G

[barnum1]

Interesting discussion. I appreciate all input!

 

@eth4and I didn't notice if the numbers were in italic, but the balls were my own (so no silver dot).
I'll check the font of the numbers next time.

 

@Stuart_G Thanks for the info that TM measures the same indoors and outdoors. I thought as much, but good to know.
A related question: if the TM is setup wrong, for example not correctly aligned, would that affect measure of club head speed? I found a video on how to setup TM, and I will double-check next time I go there. 
 

[eth4and]

1 minute ago, barnum1 said:

Interesting discussion. I appreciate all input!

 

@eth4and I didn't notice if the numbers were in italic, but the balls were my own (so no silver dot).
I'll check the font of the numbers next time.

 

@Stuart_G Thanks for the info that TM measures the same indoors and outdoors. I thought as much, but good to know.
A related question: if the TM is setup wrong, for example not correctly aligned, would that affect measure of club head speed? I found a video on how to setup TM, and I will double-check next time I go there. 
 

Next time you're at the TM simulator center ask the staff for some of the metal dot stickers and affix them to your balls; dramatically improves accuracy of indoor applications. If they don't have them available you can order your own from TM for pretty nominal price ($20): https://shop.trackmangolf.com/products/metallic-stickers 

 

Good luck!

[Stuart_G]

1 hour ago, barnum1 said:

 

@Stuart_G Thanks for the info that TM measures the same indoors and outdoors. I thought as much, but good to know.
A related question: if the TM is setup wrong, for example not correctly aligned, would that affect measure of club head speed? I found a video on how to setup TM, and I will double-check next time I go there. 
 

 

Not having the proper alignment will effect some of the numbers like horiz launch (start line) and face to target line but not the club head speed as long as it's vaguely reasonable.

[barnum1]

Small update:

I went to the same simulator centre today. 
We had to adjust alignment a few degrees, but the speed numbers were pretty much the same.

 

I did notice that I hit the spoon (15 degree PING G400) with a club head speed around 85 mph. The driver club head speed was - as last time - around 88. I have never measured spoon swing speed before, what would be a "normal" relation between spoon and driver swing speed?

[mgoblue83]

As others have said Trackman measures the center of the club head and typically reports slower swing speed than camera based monitors at identical ball speeds. Which one is more accurate doesn't really matter as they are all very consistent shot to shot. There is absolute no reason to doubt the swing speed number being reported by the Trackman and your slower speed could have something to do with "indoor swing syndrome" or being out of golf shape compared to the summer. 

 

One other possibility is if you changed driver heads from the summer. Trackman will report slightly different numbers with different shaped heads because of the way radar sees the head. 

[Konsta]

It's the case of the infamous "indoor swing syndrome". Basically you fear (without knowing it yourself) hitting it hard and ease up on it. You can swing irons quite fast but driver will activate it. Just hitting more indoors will help. Calculating it on your iron swing speed, your estimated driver swing speed is around 95 mph. This will also depend on your technique. If you tend to early release, you don't get much gap between your driver and irons (usually around 10 mph gap). If you hold the lag angles long enough, you'll be able to get a 15-20 mph gap between your driver and iron swing speed. How big was the space you were hitting at?

[Konsta]

On 1/10/2021 at 11:27 PM, barnum1 said:

Small update:

I went to the same simulator centre today. 
We had to adjust alignment a few degrees, but the speed numbers were pretty much the same.

 

I did notice that I hit the spoon (15 degree PING G400) with a club head speed around 85 mph. The driver club head speed was - as last time - around 88. I have never measured spoon swing speed before, what would be a "normal" relation between spoon and driver swing speed?

The gap between my 3 wood and driver is around 5 mph. I hit 3 wood 105 mph and driver 110 mph on Trackman.

[barnum1]

1 hour ago, Konsta said:

It's the case of the infamous "indoor swing syndrome". Basically you fear (without knowing it yourself) hitting it hard and ease up on it. You can swing irons quite fast but driver will activate it. Just hitting more indoors will help. Calculating it on your iron swing speed, your estimated driver swing speed is around 95 mph. This will also depend on your technique. If you tend to early release, you don't get much gap between your driver and irons (usually around 10 mph gap). If you hold the lag angles long enough, you'll be able to get a 15-20 mph gap between your driver and iron swing speed. How big was the space you were hitting at?

 

Thanks for the insight! The space was very small (in all dimensions actually). Nice to hear that this ("indoor swing syndrome") is something others have experienced. 
I will soon have an indoors pro lesson, I will probably focus on my driver swing.
(And I also think a 20 mph gap sounds right between 7i and driver.)

[B18mpc]

I went to a indoor trackman sim today, and googled the reason for indifference in numbers, as whilst some numbers of mine where absolutely bang on, others just didn’t make any sense, normal 8 iron distance is around the 165yds area, yet not once did my 8 iron get over 140 on the sim, but my normal 5 iron is 205ish , on the trackman it was reading from 161 to 229. But never hit a 5 iron that far in my life. Nice to know it’s not just me who had lost their distance overnight though

[Goingyard88]

I am having significant issues with the TM indoor. Numbers are all over the map and ball flight is especially inconsistent - distance numbers with driver are fairly close although flight path is horrifically wrong. Irons are so awful that I am thinking of no longer playing in my league. Last 2 weeks 9 iron normally 155 yards goes anywhere from 105 - 220 yards and all my irons 2 - 7 go anywhere from 30 yards short of normal to over 100 yards short I've been hitting a wedge longer than my 3 iron. However outdoor TM numbers seem fairly close albeit about 10% short of actual (verified with laser range finder). I've ordered 2 dozen Titleist rct balls in hopes that it works if not I'm just going to show up to the league and have some beers with my buddies and not play cause its flat out awful. Sad that my optishot 2 at my house with foam balls gives more consistent readings than TM with my irons (driver and putter are a different story)

[Goingyard88]

Update to some of my research on why my TM results are so inconsistent. It appears for those indoor where the distance to the screen is not over 10' those that have a higher ball speed with higher spin rates along with a little steeper swing path (those that take good divots) have less consistency on TM. Suggested solutions - 1) move as far away from screen and yet stay with in TM ideal hitting area 2) Try and hit the ball clean with as little as possible strike on the mat 3) Hit the ball high and 4) I've ordered Titleist RCT golf balls that are made for Simulators (supply side delivery is taking a long time) and I've ordered the TM specific stickers to put on a ball and see how it goes. I may even post a video on youtube with my struggles and what I've done to try and achieve consistency with TM. 

[Stuart_G]

13 hours ago, Goingyard88 said:

Update to some of my research on why my TM results are so inconsistent. It appears for those indoor where the distance to the screen is not over 10' those that have a higher ball speed with higher spin rates along with a little steeper swing path (those that take good divots) have less consistency on TM.

 

The inconsistencies that come from not enough ball flight will only happen for total spin and only if the combination of distance and spin result in less than 2 full rotations of the ball before it impacts the screen/net.      So it's the low spin rates that lead to this, not higher.

 

Same problem results from not using the metalic dot on the ball (or not using it properly) even if one does have enough ball flight to get the 2 revs.

 

The other case where TM can have problems indoors is in the determination of the spin axis when the face impact location is off center since it's proper handling of the gear effect contribution is either non-existent or a rough approximation.

 

Then there are setup and potential environmental (RF interference) issues.

 

 

[Goingyard88]

2 hours ago, Stuart_G said:

 

The inconsistencies that come from not enough ball flight will only happen for total spin and only if the combination of distance and spin result in less than 2 full rotations of the ball before it impacts the screen/net.      So it's the low spin rates that lead to this, not higher.

 

Same problem results from not using the metalic dot on the ball (or not using it properly) even if one does have enough ball flight to get the 2 revs.

 

The other case where TM can have problems indoors is in the determination of the spin axis when the face impact location is off center since it's proper handling of the gear effect contribution is either non-existent or a rough approximation.

 

Then there are setup and potential environmental (RF interference) issues.

 

 

Thanks for the info, it's been a challenge to say the least. I've spent 3 weeks trying to get something that is playable on TM and nothing so far has worked. Wildly inconsistent! I do know that a few of us that have higher ball speeds and lower ball flight on long irons have numbers that have a huge variance. Mine however seems to be the worst with readings all over the map and I am questioning whether it is worth continuing to tinker with a swing to at least enjoy playing a round on TM. I'll let you know how some of the fixes work out.

[Goingyard88]

Solution - somewhat. For those that have read my posts know of my struggles with indoor TM reading my shots. After tons of research and conversations with those that set up TM we came up with a short-term solution until I can get my hands on the RCT golf ball. I purchased the TM stickers to put the ball. Here is what I did - I grabbed 3 different balls a Prov1, Prov1x and a high spin high launch golf ball, put the sticker on each one and moved towards the back of the optimal hitting zone on track man. Before this most of my numbers were italic now only about 20% of the time do I get italic numbers. Hitting the ball higher helps, not striking the mat even slightly post contact. Driver and 3 wood were exceptional - all the numbers came very close to true. Long irons 2 - 6 were ok - they are flying between 10- 20% of the distance to my true numbers but this is where I get the most italic read out. 7 - 9 pretty solid just about 15% shy of normal distance and wedges short on fairway flew long in rough and especially long out of the sand (flew over the green into water a few to many times). We had 6 players last night - all felt as though the TM Sticker gave them more true numbers than without. Now I patiently wait for the RCT ball to arrive but I can certainly enjoy a round with the TM sticker and Prov1x. Hope this helps you!

 

[Stuart_G]

3 hours ago, Goingyard88 said:

Long irons 2 - 6 were ok - they are flying between 10- 20% of the distance to my true numbers but this is where I get the most italic read out.

 

 

Try teeing them up slightly.  It might increase the spin and reduce the number of italic's.   Hitting directly off the mat can reduce the spin generated by irons and therefore increase the amount of flight you need to get the two revs TM wants for the spin measurement.

 

e.g. something like the Senna low profile tees.   www.sennagolftee.com  (I think also available on amazon)

 

Also, just in case they didn't mention it,  where the dot is pointing when you place the ball (prior to impact) does matter.

Edited December 21, 2021 by Stuart_G

[Goingyard88]

1 hour ago, Stuart_G said:

 

Try teeing them up slightly.  It might increase the spin and reduce the number of italic's.   Hitting directly off the mat can reduce the spin generated by irons and therefore increase the amount of flight you need to get the two revs TM wants for the spin measurement.

 

e.g. something like the Senna low profile tees.   www.sennagolftee.com  (I think also available on amazon)

 

Also, just in case they didn't mention it,  where the dot is pointing when you place the ball (prior to impact) does matter.

Stuart - I use a tee when I can but when playing in a league they won't allow tee usage other than on the tee. For the dot - we tried it all ways and the ones that seem to work best were pointing up or pointing towards target. 

[Stuart_G]

5 hours ago, Goingyard88 said:

Stuart - I use a tee when I can but when playing in a league they won't allow tee usage other than on the tee.

 

I know the league may not accept them.  But FWIW, the senna tees are not the same as teeing it up on a par 3.  They are actually designed to make the firmer mats play more like normal turf.

 

5 hours ago, Goingyard88 said:

 

For the dot - we tried it all ways and the ones that seem to work best were pointing up or pointing towards target. 

 

Good.  Pointing toward the target is the recommended way but both should be pretty close to each other.

Edited December 22, 2021 by Stuart_G

[Goingyard88]

Further update after RCT golf balls arrived. Nice improvement over the trackman dot but still not perfect. Misreads are now about 10% of my shots but significantly closer to reality. Here are 2 swings with the RCT golf ball - similar results however look at the read outs. Prior to RCT golf ball all those that are blank with RCT were in italics with regular ball which produced horrific numbers (that one with poor read outs would give me about 170 yard carry and 20 - 25 yards right or left). So to some up the difference - regular ball - over 70% of my shots had poor reads, with Trackman dots about 20-25% and with RCT so far about 10% (however the poor reads result in significantly better results). If you can't get the RCT (shipping took almost 2 months) get the Trackman dots and you'll see significant improvement in the trackman numbers. 

[Knotworkin]

On 1/5/2021 at 6:47 AM, Stuart_G said:

 

First oof all, it really isn't relevant to the OP's question since he's asking about comparing TM numbers to TM numbers,  not TM to some other LM.

 

However, it's true TM measures at the geometric center of the club and not the point of impact - but many would argue that's more accurate than at the point of contact.  Many think that swing speed numbers shouldn't be dependent on the impact location.  When it is, you can get inconsistent numbers for the exact same swing.   But that's really a matter of personal preference, not right or wrong.

 

But front vs back of the club head doesn't make any difference.  The radar unit 'sees' the velocities of the whole head from heel to toe.  The fact that it does uses the velocity at the geometric center means that it doesn't matter if it's measuring the front or back of the head.  Both the front and back of the head move at the exact same speed.   In many cases (such as with the carbon fiber heads), the radar return from the face is going to be stronger than that of the back side of the head so will be measured directly.

 

 

 

 

No, it doesn't measure the club parameters any different indoors vs outdoors.  The main difference is the spin numbers - specifically spin axis and ball flight numbers (distances, decent angle, height, etc..) since they are measured through the whole flight outdoors but calculated indoors.

 

Yes, many people do swing differently indoors vs outdoors and there is no reason to doubt the accuracy of the numbers.  Some people swing differently when they are focused on the fact that they are being measured - instead of maybe focusing on something else during a lesson with the instructor monitoring the numbers.   And some people actually loose a noticeable amount of club head speed in the driver during the winter months when not playing as much - or even wearing more cloths or just different ambient temperatures.   There are other reasons but those are the more common ones that come to mind.

 

Actually there is a big difference indoors vs outdoors.  The outdoor units are measuring actual flight distance of the ball whereas the indoor units are estimating distance using a lot of algorithms.  And the indoor units aren’t able to accurately measure spin in the distance they have unless you are using balls specifically designed for an indoor simulator like the Titleist ProV1 RCT.  
 

My indoor Trackman driver yardages are 30-40 yards shorter than I get at a local range that has Toptracer with limited flight range balls, and it’s 50-70 yards shorter than I get on real course measurements with my SkyCaddie SX500. 
 

the more I read and research it appears the indoor Trackman estimates seem to do a better job for high swing speed players but struggle with slower swing speeds.  
 

As I showed the attendant, the simulator claimed I hit my driver only 160-170, but would consistently hit my SW 100-110 no matter how hard I swung it.  

[barnum1]

Yes, I think you are right. My driver distances with indoor Trackman is much shorter than in real life. Foresight GCQuad does a much better job. 

 

And I also think that indoor Trackman does better for higher swing speeds. I'm at 90 mph with driver. The pro at the Trackman studio had much better "indoor distance" compared to his "outdoor distance". 

[Stuart_G]

4 hours ago, Knotworkin said:

Actually there is a big difference indoors vs outdoors.  

 

For ball flight data and results yes.  But I was only specifically referring to club data being measured the same, not ball data or distance calcs.  I even specifically mentioned some of the differences when it came to ball and flight data.

 

4 hours ago, Knotworkin said:

And the indoor units aren’t able to accurately measure spin in the distance they have unless you are using balls specifically designed for an indoor simulator like the Titleist ProV1 RCT. 

 

That's the only ball developed specifically for that purpose but there are others for which TM can take advantage of how the seem effects the radar return.   Also,  basic metallic dots can be used on any ball to allow accurate spin numbers being measured.  

 

Of course that's all assuming that the ball will have at least two rotations before it impacts the screen.    So a high ball speed combined with a short distance to screen can cause issues regardless of what ball is used or if there is a metallic dot.

 

 

4 hours ago, Knotworkin said:

the more I read and research it appears the indoor Trackman estimates seem to do a better job for high swing speed players but struggle with slower swing speeds. 

 

That's may be the case (I use flightscope not TM).   But keep in mind there are two sources for that type of error - one is in getting accurate raw ball flight data and the second is in calculating the ball flight from that ball data.   So bad distance numbers don't always mean bad ball data.    Foresight is a good example.  It does a great job of measure ball data but tends to overestimate driver distance when the spin is low.  The problem is in the distance calculations, not the raw ball data.

 

 

Edited November 29, 2022 by Stuart_G

[TaggartNC]

I am having ball speed issues with my Trackman 4.  Indoor simulator setup.  I have mapped identical shots tracked inside and outdoors.  Major variances in ball speed and smash factor.  Trackman support has no solution and not very helpful.  I don't think Trackman is a good system for indoors.  Outdoors, yes, maybe the best.