Arcos vs Shotscope

[hammergolf]

Always been a laser guy, but want to get a gps system to help log data and give yardages for blind shot situations. What do you guys recommend?

[phil75070]

I won't knock Arccos as a lot of guys like it and use it. I do know they had an advantage over Shot Scope in regard to data originally, as Shot scope did not originally provide Shots Gained data. That has changed. I personally prefer Shot Scope because the sensors on the clubs are smaller, they don't require batteries like the Arccos sensors, and Shot Scope has no annual subscription fee. I've used the Shot Scope watch, the V3, for over 400 rounds and rarely does a shot get missed. 

 

Both systems will have their proponents and detractors.

[70sinsight]

2 hours ago, phil75070 said:

I won't knock Arccos as a lot of guys like it and use it. I do know they had an advantage over Shot Scope in regard to data originally, as Shot scope did not originally provide Shots Gained data. That has changed. I personally prefer Shot Scope because the sensors on the clubs are smaller, they don't require batteries like the Arccos sensors, and Shot Scope has no annual subscription fee. I've used the Shot Scope watch, the V3, for over 400 rounds and rarely does a shot get missed. 

 

Both systems will have their proponents and detractors.

Do you have any info on how their strokes gained and other data compares? I have a free set of Arccos sensors, but am kind of put off by the subscription fee, especially since I can't golf 5-6 months out of the year due to the climate. I have a Garmin S20 which gives me F/M/B which is about all I need along with my laser, but am looking to deep dive a little bit more into my stats to see where I can improve. The smaller sensors for Shot Scope and no subscription fee seem enticing. 

[phil75070]

6 hours ago, 70sinsight said:

Do you have any info on how their strokes gained and other data compares? I have a free set of Arccos sensors, but am kind of put off by the subscription fee, especially since I can't golf 5-6 months out of the year due to the climate. I have a Garmin S20 which gives me F/M/B which is about all I need along with my laser, but am looking to deep dive a little bit more into my stats to see where I can improve. The smaller sensors for Shot Scope and no subscription fee seem enticing. 

Having never used Arccos and having no access to their data, I have no idea how their SG data is displayed. With Shot Scope, you can compare your SG data to Tour players and various handicaps in each of the major categories of the game (tee shots, approaches, short game and putting). You can also review any round and see the SG data for each shot on each hole if you want to see that data as well. For example, the following is for the 2nd hole during my last round with SG compared to a "0" handicap:

 

[70sinsight]

38 minutes ago, phil75070 said:

Having never used Arccos and having no access to their data, I have no idea how their SG data is displayed. With Shot Scope, you can compare your SG data to Tour players and various handicaps in each of the major categories of the game (tee shots, approaches, short game and putting). You can also review any round and see the SG data for each shot on each hole if you want to see that data as well. For example, the following is for the 2nd hole during my last round with SG compared to a "0" handicap:

 

That's great, thanks. Does Shot Scope break down things like proximity based on distance, club, etc.? 

[phil75070]

12 hours ago, 70sinsight said:

That's great, thanks. Does Shot Scope break down things like proximity based on distance, club, etc.? 

[70sinsight]

Awesome. Made my decision for me. Appreciate it. 

[Dan13]

How does the tracking software allow for partial/ specialty shots? Obviously don’t want a knock down 7 iron distance to be lumped into my standard 7 iron distance - as an example. 
 

Aldo since it is tracking total distances is there any setting to account for firmness (amount of roll out)? At least generically - soft, medium, hard? 

[phil75070]

33 minutes ago, Dan13 said:

How does the tracking software allow for partial/ specialty shots? Obviously don’t want a knock down 7 iron distance to be lumped into my standard 7 iron distance - as an example. 
 

Aldo since it is tracking total distances is there any setting to account for firmness (amount of roll out)? At least generically - soft, medium, hard? 

There are two averages kept. One includes all shots, the other, referred to as a P-AVG, drops outliers, both long and short. You can also, during post round editing, mark any shot as "Positional" which excludes the shot from figuring into either average. "Recovery" shots, chip-outs from behind trees, etc., would also be marked "Positional".

 

There is no way to account for roll-out conditions, only the total distance between two GPS locations is calculated. Playing multiple rounds in varying conditions tends to average things out.

 

Also, there has been a lot of debate as to what to do about layup shots, such as 2nd shots on par 5s where you are not going for the green. The "official" position is those shots should be marked a "Positional" as any shot longer than 50 yards is considered an "approach" shot, and if not marked "positional", those layups negatively impact one's approach success stats. Some want those shots included in the club distances which, I think, inflates the distances that clubs are hit, so I agree with Shot Scopes' position on what to do with those shots. Also, approach stats are more meaningful to me.

 

[GGalunga]

On 4/5/2023 at 1:39 PM, hammergolf said:

Always been a laser guy, but want to get a gps system to help log data and give yardages for blind shot situations. What do you guys recommend?

I still use a laser but prefer ShotScope

 

smaller sensors

no annual subscription

good support

devices work well - I have the watch but prefer the H4 (https://shotscope.com/us/products/golf-gps-handhelds/h4/)  

[hammergolf]

Trying to decide between Arcos and Shotscope. I like the fact that with Arcos is less hassle on the course, but have heard some negatives about the need to adjust the data after each round. Can anyone confirm or give an opinion between these two options?

[Dewdman42]

I returned my Arccos after a couple rounds.  not for me.  I could feel the weight difference and didn't like that.  I don't like the price either.  It did track my shots very nicely without issue but I also found myself kind of consumed and distracted by marking the pin location and double checking it after after hole to make sure it tracked it.   maybe that would become more routine after more rounds, but even other people asked me what I was doing.  In the end it was cool to see all my shots on a map and I like the concept of strokes gained, but it didn't really tell me anything I don't already know.  For me the cons outweigh the pros, so that's that.  Just one man's experience, I know some people really like it.

[70sinsight]

I love my Shotscope X5. Great tracking, easy to use, shots gained and history dashboard is very detailed, and the trackers are unnoticeably light. Not to mention you don't pay the subscription. The only thing I usually have to adjust is the pin position or length of tap in putts from time to time, but it's quick. 

[taskerc]

In my experience with both Arccos and Shotscope - you can do as little or as much effort as you want - more effort results in more accurate data and less effort generally produces less accurate data. The question is - what level of data accuracy do you (or anyone of us) need/want? I’ve always been about the data and trying to get as much accuracy as possible - I’m unclear how much it helps me in reality, but my philosophy has been getting too much data/accuracy is better than too little. From a comment above, one of the things about shot data that is (in hindsight) obvious is that the stats are often interdependent.  For example, if  I’m  lazy getting accurate putting data, that can make my putting look better or worse than it is. But, it also affects how short game and approach shot data gets represented. Case in point - if I hit an approach shot to 15 feet but don’t capture the accurate data on the green, both Arccos and Shotscope will guesstimate based on shot interpretations. But putting shots are one of the least reliably captured shots in my experience. So my putting  can look great and my approach/ short game results can get compromised by this inaccuracy. Since my goal is to target my main paths for improvement, approach shot data accuracy is the most important thing for me. And from this it usually means, at a minimum, that I need to get good data for first putting location and pin location in order to get the most useful approach / short game data.

Not sure if this makes sense, but it’s my experience.

 

On the other hand, if all that matters is club/ shot distances, then the normal shot capture outcomes are generally good enough with little to no editing required.

 

summary - everyone can get benefits depending on what you are trying to achieve and what you seek for improvements, goals etc.

Edited August 13, 2023 by taskerc
Typo city

[Mike_Honcho]

arccos just missed too many shots for me.  it's extremely rare that shotscope misses.

[hammergolf]

5 hours ago, Dewdman42 said:

I returned my Arccos after a couple rounds.  not for me.  I could feel the weight difference and didn't like that.  I don't like the price either.  It did track my shots very nicely without issue but I also found myself kind of consumed and distracted by marking the pin location and double checking it after after hole to make sure it tracked it.   maybe that would become more routine after more rounds, but even other people asked me what I was doing.  In the end it was cool to see all my shots on a map and I like the concept of strokes gained, but it didn't really tell me anything I don't already know.  For me the cons outweigh the pros, so that's that.  Just one man's experience, I know some people really like it.

That’s my concern. I just want to play and focus on golf without pushing buttons or having to move flag locations, or entering number of putts, etc. 

[70sinsight]

The only thing I manually track is putting. Seems to be better when I stand over the ball and the pin and hit the button. Takes 1 sec when you're reading your putt. 

[phil75070]

17 hours ago, Mike_Honcho said:

it's extremely rare that shotscope misses.

The only shots my X5 has been missing lately has been due to user error. I use Manual putting and I get too quick to mark my tap-ins and the hole location, often tapping the watch too low on the face, marking the hole location without adding the tap-in putt. Easy enough to add back in during editing, though. 

[CodyShootsHigh]

I committed to Arccos for a year to see where my game is hurting the most. The app on the apple watch makes everything much much easier. I hardly have any missed shots or any added shots. I only have about 6 rounds with it so far, but it has been great.

[CROTUSman]

 

On 4/6/2023 at 7:54 AM, phil75070 said:

I won't knock Arccos as a lot of guys like it and use it. I do know they had an advantage over Shot Scope in regard to data originally, as Shot scope did not originally provide Shots Gained data. That has changed. I personally prefer Shot Scope because the sensors on the clubs are smaller, they don't require batteries like the Arccos sensors, and Shot Scope has no annual subscription fee. I've used the Shot Scope watch, the V3, for over 400 rounds and rarely does a shot get missed. 

 

Both systems will have their proponents and detractors.

 

I’ve had the SS V3 for roughly 2.5 years now but have waffled between it and the V1 app on the Apple Watch during that time.  I always shake my head when reading comments like the one above from Phil.  Not because I don’t believe them, but because this has not been my experience at all.  I’ve read and re-read the instructions a hundred times, scoured the Internet forums like this one for best practices and have never once had a round where the V3 didn’t miss a shot.  On average I would say that I have at least five to eight dropped shots per round.  

 

Every now and then I get really frustrated with my V3 and consider switching to Arccos.  However, as Phil has pointed out I am turned off by the size of the sensors and of course the subscription fee.  Still, I might grin and bare both if the system just worked like it was supposed to, but I have read just as many people complain about dropped shots with Arccos as with SS, so who the heck really knows.  Kind of waiting for one of these companies or someone not yet known to really solve the issue on how to consistently and seamlessly provide this data to the average golfer.

 

Recently my V3 stopped picking up the tags all together and I was thinking about the X5 and then came across this and slowly backed out of the room.

 

 

Then I figured I should just buy new tags and came across this thread which seemed to suggest that my issue is likely with the band.

 

 

Now I’m beginning to wonder if my band had been faulty all along.  Just ordered one so time will tell.  Long story short, I think both have their pros and cons, and you will be able to find just as many people who swear by both as you will people who have had issues.  Given that, I will continue to take my chances with SS because of the subscription and size of the Arccos sensors.  If something better comes along I will likely jump ship in a second though.  Good luck.

 

[phil75070]

11 hours ago, CROTUSman said:

On average I would say that I have at least five to eight dropped shots per round.  

Missed shots tend to fall into one of these catgories:

 

- the ball doesn't go at least 5 yards between shots.

-shots taken with the same club within 45 seconds will only have one recorded

- in auto putting mode, when standing over the hole using Pin Collect, a shot using the putter from off the green is not counted, and only putts from on the green are. You include ALL shots with the putter, The system sorts out "putts" from "chips" where the putter was used.

- choking down such that the tag is outside the limit for being sensed, usually around the green.

- if it is always the same club, a bad tag, typically due to wear from rubbing on the bottom of the bag. Felt or clear rubber furniture pads can prevent that.

- if all shots are being missed, a bad watchband. A "loose" watchband can cause problems. MAke sure all the screws are tight.

 

-

[larrybud]

13 hours ago, CROTUSman said:

 

 

I’ve had the SS V3 for roughly 2.5 years now but have waffled between it and the V1 app on the Apple Watch during that time.  I always shake my head when reading comments like the one above from Phil.  Not because I don’t believe them, but because this has not been my experience at all.  I’ve read and re-read the instructions a hundred times, scoured the Internet forums like this one for best practices and have never once had a round where the V3 didn’t miss a shot.  On average I would say that I have at least five to eight dropped shots per round.  

 

Every now and then I get really frustrated with my V3 and consider switching to Arccos.  However, as Phil has pointed out I am turned off by the size of the sensors and of course the subscription fee.  Still, I might grin and bare both if the system just worked like it was supposed to, but I have read just as many people complain about dropped shots with Arccos as with SS, so who the heck really knows.  Kind of waiting for one of these companies or someone not yet known to really solve the issue on how to consistently and seamlessly provide this data to the average golfer.

 

Recently my V3 stopped picking up the tags all together and I was thinking about the X5 and then came across this and slowly backed out of the room.

 

 

Then I figured I should just buy new tags and came across this thread which seemed to suggest that my issue is likely with the band.

 

 

Now I’m beginning to wonder if my band had been faulty all along.  Just ordered one so time will tell.  Long story short, I think both have their pros and cons, and you will be able to find just as many people who swear by both as you will people who have had issues.  Given that, I will continue to take my chances with SS because of the subscription and size of the Arccos sensors.  If something better comes along I will likely jump ship in a second though.  Good luck.

 

 

I have instructions in my thread which shows you how to check your band.

 

[phillyspecial]

I was an early Arccos adopter, but I ditched it in 2017 and went back to it this season.  I am very much on the fence if I will carry on with it next season.  I love stats and data, but Im not sure Im really getting any major insights that I didnt already know.  

 

- I want to try the built in grip sensors, but the screw in ones still really irritate me.  You just know its there, you know its kinda loose, Im always messing with screwing it back in more.  

 

- I use it with Apple watch Ultra and it has been really nice to consolidate my life into 1 watch (vs using a Garmin just for golf).  The Set Pin Location aspect is very cool, but you always have to remember to do it and it looks weird to your playing partners over time.  

 

- It rarely misses a shot for me, but it misses loads of putts.  I always have to bang my putter on the ground after a putt to make sure it registers.  This is highly annoying.  

 

-The AI caddie thing is cool in theory - but it suggests so many <Drivers and Im not a long hitter (268 smart distance).  I know I cant hit a 5w/7w with a ton of confidence, and I also know from Decade and multiple other studies about Drivers where Im very skeptical of their math.  

 

-  The AI calculated distance thing (taking into acct wind, temp, elevation etc)  tho is VERY cool, and I can tell you after testing this against Scottish caddies in 30mph winds on a recent trip that it is very accurate.  I like that combined w the club suggestion.  

 

- I started using it again because I really wanted accurate strokes gained data - but the thing about SG at least for me is it doesnt take a weatherman to to tell me I lose strokes Driving and Approach vs SG and Putting.  Like it told me exactly what I would have guessed, and that also goes for my club smart distances.  Definitely fun to review the good rds and confirm distances on great shots etc, but is it adding a ton of value?  No.  

 

 

The last time I quit , it was very nice feeling to tear off the sensors and stop caring about if it caught the shot or putt - I find myself craving that even tho I still love the data.  I dont know.  

 

 

 

[Glock917]

On 8/13/2023 at 10:46 AM, hammergolf said:

Trying to decide between Arcos and Shotscope. I like the fact that with Arcos is less hassle on the course, but have heard some negatives about the need to adjust the data after each round. Can anyone confirm or give an opinion between these two options?

 

Neither one is going to be completely hassle free. If anyone says otherwise they are full of it. Both and any shot tracking system you have to do some post round editing. Some may be easier than others based on devices used. 

 

I have had both and now just shotscope. Like many say it has its advantage in simplicity of its slim non powered tags with no annual subscription.

 

Both misses shots I say equally maybe shotscope a bit more efficient in tagged tags. But when I paired arccos with a apple watch it was pretty good as well but obviously you have to have one and the app is a notorious battery hog.

 

The biggest plus of arccos for me is the enriched data is give you through the app. Not sure if thats the reason for the subscription but I do prefer. As a data guy I like how much more it gives you. It gives you trend lines, bar/line graphs, SG per club, and displays the data more intuitively. 

 

So it really is down to personal preference and the subscription is a big deal as it was for me and ultimately why I am using shotscope now.

 

 

[CROTUSman]

8 hours ago, phil75070 said:

Missed shots tend to fall into one of these catgories:

 

- the ball doesn't go at least 5 yards between shots.

-shots taken with the same club within 45 seconds will only have one recorded

- in auto putting mode, when standing over the hole using Pin Collect, a shot using the putter from off the green is not counted, and only putts from on the green are. You include ALL shots with the putter, The system sorts out "putts" from "chips" where the putter was used.

- choking down such that the tag is outside the limit for being sensed, usually around the green.

- if it is always the same club, a bad tag, typically due to wear from rubbing on the bottom of the bag. Felt or clear rubber furniture pads can prevent that.

- if all shots are being missed, a bad watchband. A "loose" watchband can cause problems. MAke sure all the screws are tight.

 

 

Thanks, Phil.  To be fair to SS, I do find that it does a better job for me when I play a "clean" round (i.e. limited duffs/poor chips around the green, etc.). Unfortunately as a 14.5 that's hit or miss for me.

 

7 hours ago, larrybud said:

 

I have instructions in my thread which shows you how to check your band.

 

 

Yeah, thanks a ton, Larry.  I actually remembered that I had some totally unused SS tags in the garage and did a tag test this morning and got zilch, so pretty sure the issue is the band.  You saved me $34.

 

2 hours ago, phillyspecial said:

I was an early Arccos adopter, but I ditched it in 2017 and went back to it this season.  I am very much on the fence if I will carry on with it next season.  I love stats and data, but Im not sure Im really getting any major insights that I didnt already know.  

...

The last time I quit , it was very nice feeling to tear off the sensors and stop caring about if it caught the shot or putt - I find myself craving that even tho I still love the data.  I dont know.  

 

 

 

 

Great point, Philly re: how much either of these devices actually help people improve.  I know both claim that they do, and I won't dispute that given the data that they provide.  That said, I was recently playing a round with some guys at my club and one of them made a comment about how I like data after I was manually tagging the pin.  I was explaining the concept to the guy I was riding with and he thought it was cool, but then asked me if I had improved.  

 

I was thinking about it a bit more and came to the conclusion that while these products are the closest the amateur golfer is going to get to shot link data, at the end of the day I still only have a limited amount of time to use the data to improve. Last year, my driver and putting were really costing me a lot of strokes.  I've spent a lot of time improving/practicing both of those areas this year and I've seen some really good strides in those areas.  But, guess what?  I've got a job, wife, and two kids so I stopped working as much on my irons and now SS tells me I'm dropping a ton of shots with on my approach shots.  Hell, this even happens to guys on Tour.  Rickie comes to mind.  Great putter, then starts tinkering with his swing and spending more time on the range and less on the green and then he can't putt anymore.  And these guys have all the time in the world to practice.

 

Obviously, none of this is SS or Arccos fault, just an observation that neither of these devices are going to be a panacea for your golf game.  The data is fun to look at after a good round or a great hole, and a high level look at where your game is, but unless you have a ton of time to devote to practice I wouldn't expect huge leaps in improvement.  Just my experience though.  Sure there are those out there who have figured out how to make it work for them.

 

Great point re: the freedom when you stop wearing it.  Something very nice about just going out and playing and not having to worry if the watch captured your last good drive or how far it went.  End of day its a first world problem/gadget.  People have been playing golf for hundreds of years without these things so just something to keep in mind.   

[phillyspecial]

3 minutes ago, CROTUSman said:

 

Thanks, Phil.  To be fair to SS, I do find that it does a better job for me when I play a "clean" round (i.e. limited duffs/poor chips around the green, etc.). Unfortunately as a 14.5 that's hit or miss for me.

 

 

Yeah, thanks a ton, Larry.  I actually remembered that I had some totally unused SS tags in the garage and did a tag test this morning and got zilch, so pretty sure the issue is the band.  You saved me $34.

 

 

Great point, Philly re: how much either of these devices actually help people improve.  I know both claim that they do, and I won't dispute that given the data that they provide.  That said, I was recently playing a round with some guys at my club and one of them made a comment about how I like data after I was manually tagging the pin.  I was explaining the concept to the guy I was riding with and he thought it was cool, but then asked me if I had improved.  

 

I was thinking about it a bit more and came to the conclusion that while these products are the closest the amateur golfer is going to get to shot link data, at the end of the day I still only have a limited amount of time to use the data to improve. Last year, my driver and putting were really costing me a lot of strokes.  I've spent a lot of time improving/practicing both of those areas this year and I've seen some really good strides in those areas.  But, guess what?  I've got a job, wife, and two kids so I stopped working as much on my irons and now SS tells me I'm dropping a ton of shots with on my approach shots.  Hell, this even happens to guys on Tour.  Rickie comes to mind.  Great putter, then starts tinkering with his swing and spending more time on the range and less on the green and then he can't putt anymore.  And these guys have all the time in the world to practice.

 

Obviously, none of this is SS or Arccos fault, just an observation that neither of these devices are going to be a panacea for your golf game.  The data is fun to look at after a good round or a great hole, and a high level look at where your game is, but unless you have a ton of time to devote to practice I wouldn't expect huge leaps in improvement.  Just my experience though.  Sure there are those out there who have figured out how to make it work for them.

 

Great point re: the freedom when you stop wearing it.  Something very nice about just going out and playing and not having to worry if the watch captured your last good drive or how far it went.  End of day its a first world problem/gadget.  People have been playing golf for hundreds of years without these things so just something to keep in mind.   

 

It depends where youre at in your golf journey and how well you really know your game.  I hit balls on a launch monitor all winter so I know my distances.  I know what my current miss is.  It doesnt take an app to tell me after a great rd that I drove and approached it better than my avg or vice versa.  I know exactly what I need to be working on.   But for a lot of folks I imagine they really do think they hit it further than they do, dont understand how bad their short game really is, etc.  

 

 

 

[CactusGolf]

Been using Garmin data since the original S2 and have really enjoyed the data that their system provides.  Total distances are very accurate, but was missing a lot of short game data as I know that is where I'm losing a lot of my strokes.

 

Forgot that when I bought my Hi-Toe wedges that I could get a free set of Arccos sensors so I put in the order along with the Link (didn't want to carry my phone) and thought that the system was much improved over other tagging systems that I've used in the past (used Game Golf for several years when it was active and had 164 rounds from December 2014 to August 2020 when their system shut down).  Looks like Game Golf really improved their online system when I just logged in.

 

What I like about the Arccos is that I can set the pin location and it tracks my putting statistics a lot better.  Still trying to figure out how to best interpret and action the results, but promising so far.  Only issue that I've seen is wearing clothing that covers the link.

 

 

[J_Tizzle]

The Arccos is easier to use (with an Apple Watch), much more intuitive.  However, the sensors are massive and I truly dislike the size of the sensors.  I think the data between the two is similar (however, I will say the putting stats like distance of my putts and pin locations are wildly more accurate with the Arccos vs the SS).  I like the automatic sensing of the Arccos vs the manual tapping of the SS, however Arccos has a subscription fee vs SS being only $150 investment.

 

I got my Arccos late this season, however, I plan to try it out for a year and see if it continues to be helpful to my game, otherwise I'll probably just go back to no stat tracking and play my game and hope for the best.  

[70sinsight]

I played a round today in a scramble. Super windy. Manual putts logged. X5 didn't miss a shot. 

[hammergolf]

3 hours ago, Glock917 said:

 

Neither one is going to be completely hassle free. If anyone says otherwise they are full of it. Both and any shot tracking system you have to do some post round editing. Some may be easier than others based on devices used. 

 

I have had both and now just shotscope. Like many say it has its advantage in simplicity of its slim non powered tags with no annual subscription.

 

Both misses shots I say equally maybe shotscope a bit more efficient in tagged tags. But when I paired arccos with a apple watch it was pretty good as well but obviously you have to have one and the app is a notorious battery hog.

 

The biggest plus of arccos for me is the enriched data is give you through the app. Not sure if thats the reason for the subscription but I do prefer. As a data guy I like how much more it gives you. It gives you trend lines, bar/line graphs, SG per club, and displays the data more intuitively. 

 

So it really is down to personal preference and the subscription is a big deal as it was for me and ultimately why I am using shotscope now.

 

 

The putting stats for me aren’t that big a deal for me. If I have Shotscope but don’t enter putts, will it automatically pick back up on the next holes tee shot?