Jump to content

Awesome Golf vs Garmin App


Longdriver295
 Share

Recommended Posts

I don't do a whole lot of simulator stuff, Most of mine is Range practice sessions with my outdoor setup into net. For those that have used both of these, which one is the more Accurate Software? I used the RCT balls today for first time on both And the actual spin was read much better Pro V1x RCT. The Garmin App seemed a little Short but hard to tell if it was more accurate than AG or not.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have Awesome Golf and since buying it I never use the Garmin Golf App. I just find the Awesome Golf app far superior in all aspects, graphics, features, training modes, target practice, drills etc

 

In terms of accuracy I've heard that the Garmin Golf App has improved a lot, especially with the RCT balls and is now also pretty accurate but I just find the user experience and interface far superior with AG.  

 

There is a guy in Australia named David Maxfield who has done a lot of YouTube videos on this very topic. He is a massive proponent of Awesome Golf. See the links below. He has evolved from hitting into a net to an indoor screen but he is a big fan of AG. The 3rd link is a recent one he did proving that the Garmin app is now similarly accurate but he just loves using AG for his range practice. I've found his videos excellent so hope they help you too. 

 

 

 

 

Cobra King F9  Driver 10.5° Atmos Blue 6 stiff
17° Callaway X Hot 4 wood
20.5°& 23° Cleveland DST Launcher hybrids
Srixon ZX5 5 - PW Modus 105 Regular 

Cleveland CBX 2 50°/10°, RTX 2 54°/12, RTX 3 58°/9°
Ping Anser Sigma 2 putter

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It will be in the R10 thread, but I did do a similar head to head with Awesome golf after the original David Maxfield video, both bench marked against TopTracer, because I was a bit surprised him claiming it was way more accurate (this was before the spin update in September). 

The figures Awesome generated were definitely different to Garmin, but statistically the accuracy levels were the same - e.g. if the R10 was reading 2% short of reality, Awesome might be reading 2% longer (just a made up example), etc. etc.

 

I can see that the user experience with Awesome, being able to have a big laptop screen, clicking through numbers and averages, is far better suited to a studio setup than the mobile Garmin app. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, hammersia said:

It will be in the R10 thread, but I did do a similar head to head with Awesome golf after the original David Maxfield video, both bench marked against TopTracer, because I was a bit surprised him claiming it was way more accurate (this was before the spin update in September). 

The figures Awesome generated were definitely different to Garmin, but statistically the accuracy levels were the same - e.g. if the R10 was reading 2% short of reality, Awesome might be reading 2% longer (just a made up example), etc. etc.

 

I can see that the user experience with Awesome, being able to have a big laptop screen, clicking through numbers and averages, is far better suited to a studio setup than the mobile Garmin app. 

I just like simplicity. My setup location is outside of wifi and having to hotspot my phone to a Laptop and all that is aggravating. So I just use my Android tablet. But I can run both garmin or AG. I'm just trying to decide if it's really worth that chunk of change for AG. I do think garmin is pretty dang close to AG especially now since I'm using the RCT balls with it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, kiwihacker said:

I have Awesome Golf and since buying it I never use the Garmin Golf App. I just find the Awesome Golf app far superior in all aspects, graphics, features, training modes, target practice, drills etc

 

In terms of accuracy I've heard that the Garmin Golf App has improved a lot, especially with the RCT balls and is now also pretty accurate but I just find the user experience and interface far superior with AG.  

 

There is a guy in Australia named David Maxfield who has done a lot of YouTube videos on this very topic. He is a massive proponent of Awesome Golf. See the links below. He has evolved from hitting into a net to an indoor screen but he is a big fan of AG. The 3rd link is a recent one he did proving that the Garmin app is now similarly accurate but he just loves using AG for his range practice. I've found his videos excellent so hope they help you too. 

 

 

 

 

See that's another thing I've been debating to whether I would just be better off getting the Club sensors and just strictly using on course numbers. To me that would be the dead on numbers compared to a Launch monitor 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, Longdriver295 said:

See that's another thing I've been debating to whether I would just be better off getting the Club sensors and just strictly using on course numbers. To me that would be the dead on numbers compared to a Launch monitor 

Club sensors as in Arccos or Shot Scope etc.?

 

Lengthy threads on these, lots of people like them, for me I tried for a while but I just concluded that if you're regularly playing the same course you quickly get a lot of bias in the numbers, i.e. if there's a downhill par 3 that normally play downwind with an 8 iron you're going to get jacked 8 iron numbers.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, hammersia said:

Club sensors as in Arccos or Shot Scope etc.?

 

Lengthy threads on these, lots of people like them, for me I tried for a while but I just concluded that if you're regularly playing the same course you quickly get a lot of bias in the numbers, i.e. if there's a downhill par 3 that normally play downwind with an 8 iron you're going to get jacked 8 iron numbers.

Yes and I tried the arccos free Trial and within 2 weeks I told them to cancel it, I hated it!! I really like a LM though because I can go hit 20 decent shots with one club and know my avg Carry/total distance fir that club. Went out this morning though with driver, only thing I think was accurate about it was spin. Everything else seemed off to me. I hit driver 240-250 total on course and everyone I hit on the R10 was 210-215. Also the Launch angle was around 10° I'm pretty sure I hit my drives much higher than that! My spins was 2400-3000. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Longdriver295 said:

Yes and I tried the arccos free Trial and within 2 weeks I told them to cancel it, I hated it!! I really like a LM though because I can go hit 20 decent shots with one club and know my avg Carry/total distance fir that club. Went out this morning though with driver, only thing I think was accurate about it was spin. Everything else seemed off to me. I hit driver 240-250 total on course and everyone I hit on the R10 was 210-215. Also the Launch angle was around 10° I'm pretty sure I hit my drives much higher than that! My spins was 2400-3000. 

Considering your swing speed with 8i is lower than my wedges, I'd think the low launch angle (whether perceived or real) is the root cause of 210y carry with driver. Generally, the lower the ball speed, the higher the launch angle needed to optimize carry. Tour driver average is just under 11° so you'll definitely need more than that.

 

Edit: check the Flightscope optimizer and input your data but play with the launch angle and see what you can get, keeping all other parameters the same. 

 

https://trajectory.flightscope.com/

Edited by Bubbtubbs
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Longdriver295 said:

Yes and I tried the arccos free Trial and within 2 weeks I told them to cancel it, I hated it!! I really like a LM though because I can go hit 20 decent shots with one club and know my avg Carry/total distance fir that club. Went out this morning though with driver, only thing I think was accurate about it was spin. Everything else seemed off to me. I hit driver 240-250 total on course and everyone I hit on the R10 was 210-215. Also the Launch angle was around 10° I'm pretty sure I hit my drives much higher than that! My spins was 2400-3000. 

It's a classic measurement tradeoff. In a lot of (non-golf) scientific studies, you can get lots of high quality data in a laboratory or other controlled setting or you can get a smaller amount of possibly tricky to measure data in real-world settings. That's akin to you being able to hit 20 shots on a launch monitor versus hitting a few shots on-course and lasering the distance.

 

Somehow you need to get both and triangulate between them to gain the best insight. You could hit 20 or 200 shots in an artificial seting with the LM and you still won't know exactly how much of what you measure in an artifact of the context. But if you carefully gather whatever on-course information you can (for instance by lasering a target before and after each shot) and keeping records of the distances as well as any unusual conditions, then you can notice when the LM results seem "off" compared to what you've seen in the real world. 

 

A lot of the marketing of launch monitors tends to gloss over the fact that, unlike Dustin Johnson spending hundreds of hours dialing in his wedge game with Trackman, amateur golfers don't have an unlimited supply of brand new TP5X off and an unlimited supply of pristine turf to hit them from while monitoring the entire downrange flight. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, North Butte said:

It's a classic measurement tradeoff. In a lot of (non-golf) scientific studies, you can get lots of high quality data in a laboratory or other controlled setting or you can get a smaller amount of possibly tricky to measure data in real-world settings. That's akin to you being able to hit 20 shots on a launch monitor versus hitting a few shots on-course and lasering the distance.

 

Somehow you need to get both and triangulate between them to gain the best insight. You could hit 20 or 200 shots in an artificial seting with the LM and you still won't know exactly how much of what you measure in an artifact of the context. But if you carefully gather whatever on-course information you can (for instance by lasering a target before and after each shot) and keeping records of the distances as well as any unusual conditions, then you can notice when the LM results seem "off" compared to what you've seen in the real world. 

 

A lot of the marketing of launch monitors tends to gloss over the fact that, unlike Dustin Johnson spending hundreds of hours dialing in his wedge game with Trackman, amateur golfers don't have an unlimited supply of brand new TP5X off and an unlimited supply of pristine turf to hit them from while monitoring the entire downrange flight. 

And this makes good sense and why I'm about to the point of Selling my LM and just use my backyard net to work on my ball striking only. I've got blue Tees rangefinder with slope but I feel there's a better rangefinder out there than the blue tees, it's hard to get locked on a target with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, Longdriver295 said:

And this makes good sense and why I'm about to the point of Selling my LM and just use my backyard net to work on my ball striking only. I've got blue Tees rangefinder with slope but I feel there's a better rangefinder out there than the blue tees, it's hard to get locked on a target with it.

I guess it depends on whether what you get from selling the R10 is worth not having it at all. Even if you really pay attention just to ball speed and starting direction, when working on your ball striking that's still good feedback. But it's not a trivial amount of money, I know.

 

In my opinion, unless you have access to really elite-level resources the most trustworthy data is always what you see and measure (laser) on the golf course. For me the biggest limitation is I can't afford to pay too much attention to distances and such before it starts distracting me from playing. But I play enough golf I can "play" a lot and still have some separate rounds where I'm practicing and accumulating information. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, North Butte said:

I guess it depends on whether what you get from selling the R10 is worth not having it at all. Even if you really pay attention just to ball speed and starting direction, when working on your ball striking that's still good feedback. But it's not a trivial amount of money, I know.

 

In my opinion, unless you have access to really elite-level resources the most trustworthy data is always what you see and measure (laser) on the golf course. For me the biggest limitation is I can't afford to pay too much attention to distances and such before it starts distracting me from playing. But I play enough golf I can "play" a lot and still have some separate rounds where I'm practicing and accumulating information. 

I play alot myself. And I have a 9 hole course near me that this time a year may have 10 cars in the parking lot so not real busy. I may see no one for 3 holes ahead or behind me. So I have days I could just go over just for practice or play whatever I choose to do. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Longdriver295 said:

And this makes good sense and why I'm about to the point of Selling my LM and just use my backyard net to work on my ball striking only. I've got blue Tees rangefinder with slope but I feel there's a better rangefinder out there than the blue tees, it's hard to get locked on a target with it.

Still depends what you're trying to do - 

 

Personally I think the R10 is good enough to be help you with ball striking, and adds something to working in a net. The exception might be if you're trying to incorporate new moves / feelings where you know there's going to be a temporary decline in results because your motor patterns aren't there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Our picks

    • 2022 RSM Classic - Discussion and Links
      Please put and questions or comments here
       
       
       
      General Albums
       
      2022 RSM Classic - Monday #1
      2022 RSM Classic - Monday #2
      2022 RSM Classic - Monday #3
       
       
       
       
       
      WITB Albums
       
      Matt Wallace - WITB - 2022 RSM Classic
      Erik Barnes - WITB - 2022 RSM Classic
      Spencer Ralston - WITB - 2022 RSM Classic
      Palmer Jackson - WITB - 2022 RSM Classic
      Scott Harrington - WITB - 2022 RSM Classic
      Kyle Westmoreland - WITB - 2022 RSM Classic
       
       
       
       
      Pullout Albums
       
      Nick Hardy's custom Swag putter - 2022 RSM Classic
       
       
       
        • Like
      • 19 replies
    • 2022 Cadence Bank Houston Open - Discussion and Links
      Please put any questions or comments here
       
       
      General Albums
       
      2022 Cadence Bank Houston Open - Monday #1
      2022 Cadence Bank Houston Open - Monday #2
       
       
       
      WITB Albums
       
      Johannes Veerman - WITB - 2022 Cadence Bank Houston Open
      Richy Werenski - WITB - 2022 Cadence Bank Houston Open
      Danny Lee - WITB - 2022 Cadence Bank Houston Open
      Ben Kern - So. Texas PGA Section Champ - WITB - 2022 Cadence Bank Houston Open
      Justin Rose (mini WTB) custom JR irons - 2022 Cadence Bank Houston Open
       
       
      Pullout Albums
       
      Carson Young's custom Cameron - 2022 Cadence Bank Houston Open
      New Mitsubishi Tensei K series shaft - 2022 Cadence Bank Houston Open
      Cameron putter - 2022 Cadence Bank Houston Open
      Garrick Higgo’s custom Cameron - 2022 Cadence Bank Houston Open
      Tyler Duncan's custom Cameron putter - 2022 Cadence Bank Houston Open
      New Super Stroke Zenergy grips - 2022 Cadence Bank Houston Open
       
       
       
       
        • Like
      • 8 replies
    • The 2022 CJ Cup at Congaree Golf Club – Discussion Thread
      General Galleries
       
      The 2022 CJ Cup – Tuesday Pt. 1 The 2022 CJ Cup – Wednesday Pt. 1  
      WITB
       
      Tommy Fleetwood WITB Shane Lowry WITB – 2022 CJ Cup  
       
       
      Pullout Threads
       
      Scottie Scheffler's custom Scotty Cameron mallet putter Kevin Kisner's new Callaway Apex TCB irons (w/ Nippon prototype shafts) Congaree hole-by-hole walking tour (hole Nos. 1-11, and 18) New Bettinardi Hexperimental Proto mallet putters – 2022 CJ Cup Tommy Fleetwood's custom Scotty Cameron Buttonback Masterful putter – 2022 CJ Cup New Srixon ZX5 MKII irons, and ZX MKII utility – 2022 CJ Cup Cameron Young's new Titleist TSR2+ 3-wood, TSR2 5-wood, SuperStroke putter grip – 2022 CJ Cup LA Golf P-Series 135 "Tom Kim" backup putter shafts – 2022 CJ Cup New Srixon ZX MKII fairway wood – 2022 CJ Cup  
       
       
       
      • 4 replies
    • Ping G430 LST and Max drivers, G430 Max fairway wood & G430 hybrid  – 2022 Shriners Children's Open
      Ping G430 LST and Max drivers, Ping G430 Max fairway wood – 2022 Shriners Children's Open
        • Thanks
        • Like
      • 643 replies
    • New Srixon ZX7 MKII irons – 2022 Shriners Children's Open
      New Srixon ZX7 MKII irons – 2022 Shriners Children's Open
        • Thanks
        • Like
      • 203 replies

×
×
  • Create New...