How accurate is TM with driver spin indoors w/out RCH balls?

[Wardonation]

Stupid question I know but I dont know the answer. I have been doing some ball testing at a PGA SS using their TM. I am starting to wonder how accurate the spin #'s are with a non radar ball? The problem for me is some of the balls I want to check do not have the radar ball. Thank you...

[taylorx300]

TM indoor with travel of less than 18’ will need a RCT type ball to give the best spin numbers. If you ever see the spin number displayed sideways, it is a guess.

[Stuart_G]

On 2/23/2025 at 11:21 AM, Wardonation said:

Stupid question I know but I dont know the answer. I have been doing some ball testing at a PGA SS using their TM. I am starting to wonder how accurate the spin #'s are with a non radar ball? The problem for me is some of the balls I want to check do not have the radar ball. Thank you...

 

 TM (and Flightscope) have been around and very successful for a LOT longer than the RCT balls have been around. 🙂

 

If you use the metallic dots AND there is enough room between the ball and net to get two full revolutions of the ball - it's going to be very accurate with the total spin.   The RCT balls are nice but they are not necessary to get good results.  

 

If you know your rough ball speed and spin with driver, it's not all that hard to calculate how much distance you need between the ball and net/screen.  It's not going to be an issue with any other club than driver.

 

The bigger problem at places like PGA SS or other retail outlets is that they don't bother with using the metallic dots on the ball.   I've not seen any actual hard data on accuracy numbers without the metallic dots.  It can vary a lot between different ball types.   In some case, the seams on some balls can actually help get decent numbers.

 

 

Edited February 25 by Stuart_G

[Wardonation]

How many dots should I put on a ball, I am assuming can purchase the dots. THank you guys for your help...

[iacas]

6 hours ago, Stuart_G said:

 

 TM (and Flightscope) have been around and very successful for a LOT longer than the RCT balls have been around. 🙂

 

If you use the metallic dots AND there is enough room between the ball and net to get two full revolutions of the ball - it's going to be very accurate with the total spin.   The RCT balls are nice but they are not necessary to get good results.  

 

If you know your rough ball speed and spin with driver, it's not all that hard to calculate how much distance you need between the ball and net/screen.  It's not going to be an issue with any other club than driver.

 

The bigger problem at places like PGA SS or other retail outlets is that they don't bother with using the metallic dots on the ball.   I've not seen any actual hard data on accuracy numbers without the metallic dots.  It can vary a lot between different ball types.   In some case, the seams on some balls can actually help get decent numbers.

 

I don't find the above to be entirely true. I see fittings with 12 feet of ball flight and a Trackman 4 will give italic numbers for spin fairly often.

[Stuart_G]

5 minutes ago, iacas said:

 

I don't find the above to be entirely true. I see fittings with 12 feet of ball flight and a Trackman 4 will give italic numbers for spin fairly often.

 

I'll be honest, my experience is actually with Flightscope - Xi, X3, + mevo+.    Not directly with TM but according to TM university, the principles are the same.

 

12 ft of ball flight isn't always enough to get 2 full revs of the ball, especially with higher swing speed players.

 

e.g.  for a 150 mph ball speed (100 mph club speed) and 2000 rpm - that's only ~1.8 revs before impact with the screen.

 

And the positioning of the dot when the ball is placed on the tee can make a big difference as well.  And of course, there's always the question of the a good general setup and environment.   Lots of stores where fittings tend to happen use florescent lights which can cause a high level of interference with the radar units.

 

That's also assuming they are valid dots and not some cheap aftermarket product.

 

 

[iacas]

3 minutes ago, Stuart_G said:

I'll be honest, my experience is actually with Flightscope - Xi, X3, + mevo+.    Not directly with TM but according to TM university, the principles are the same.

 

I was a FlightScope ambassador for a long time, too. What I said applies to FS and Trackman.

 

3 minutes ago, Stuart_G said:

12 ft of ball flight isn't always enough to get 2 full revs of the ball, especially with higher swing speed players.

 

It gets italic numbers for seniors hitting their 7I 140 yards. I thought I'd typed it, but I'm talking about seniors, juniors, and some regular fit guys doing full bag fittings. For the irons, they'll use a 7I.

 

I think you're vastly over-stating how good radar units are at getting great spin data indoors.

[Guest RobS]

43 minutes ago, Wardonation said:

How many dots should I put on a ball, I am assuming can purchase the dots. THank you guys for your help...

I use one dot when testing non-RCT balls. I place the ball with the dot facing the target and I get good readings.  To be safe, you need to know that the TM is set up properly.  In particular, normalized, elevation and ball type (9 categories).  If the ball type is off, i.e. set up for a hard distance ball and you're hitting a TP5, the software conversion will produce inaccurate numbers.

[Stuart_G]

14 hours ago, iacas said:

It gets italic numbers for seniors hitting their 7I 140 yards. I thought I'd typed it, but I'm talking about seniors, juniors, and some regular fit guys doing full bag fittings. For the irons, they'll use a 7I.

 

I think you're vastly over-stating how good radar units are at getting great spin data indoors.

 

It's a tool.  And like any other tool to get good results it must be used properly by the people who know how to use it and understand the limitations.   If there are problems, it's not the technology.

 

Now I do agree that the radar units are more prone to user error and environmental errors than some of the optical units.  They certainly are not idiot proof.   But it's not nearly as wide spread as you seem to think.  People having problems are way more vocal than the ones for which it's working fine and frequently get parroted by those "trying to be helpful" with no actual experience.   That's always going to artificially amplify the severity of any issue.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[iacas]

2 hours ago, Stuart_G said:

It's a tool.  And like any other tool to get good results it must be used properly by the people who know how to use it and understand the limitations.   If there are problems, it's not the technology.

Tools have limitations.

 

Radar units work best when they have more room to capture data. Indoors you often get bad or “less than perfect” spin data without any operator error. RCT balls  help.

[Stuart_G]

13 minutes ago, iacas said:

Tools have limitations.

 

Radar units work best when they have more room to capture data. Indoors you often get bad or “less than perfect” spin data without any operator error. RCT balls  help.

 

Sure they do.  But that's not the case the vast majority of the time people are having problems indoors getting spin. 

 

This shows there really isn't an issue with accuracy for radar units reading spin indoors when setup and used properly.  And the study was not even using the latest version of TM.

 

Leach et al (2017) trackman foresight published.pdf

 

 

Edited February 26 by Stuart_G

[iacas]

43 minutes ago, Stuart_G said:

Sure they do.  But that's not the case the vast majority of the time people are having problems indoors getting spin.

 

The fitter with whom we work knows how to use his Trackman and set it up. Does he — or anyone that isn't conducting a scientific study — spend four hours calibrating it and refining the space? Of course not.

 

The simple truth is that in the wild, in actual daily use by people who know how to set it up and use it, Trackman often gives italic spin numbers even when the ball rotates twice. Very few people use the metallic dots, which can help, but RCT balls help even more.

 

RCT balls continue to be recommended for use when using radar units indoors.

[Stuart_G]

27 minutes ago, iacas said:

 

The fitter with whom we work knows how to use his Trackman and set it up. Does he — or anyone that isn't conducting a scientific study — spend four hours calibrating it and refining the space? Of course not.

 

 

That's because they can't "calibrate" it.  They don't want the user messing with calibrations - that would make things even worse.   They just have to make sure it's setup properly and check for environmental variables that could cause interference.  And more importantly, if they are having problems, contact TM customer support to help them trouble shoot the problem.  Considering how much they pay for it, they better be taking advantage of it.

[iacas]

11 minutes ago, Stuart_G said:

That's because they can't "calibrate" it.  They don't want the user messing with calibrations - that would make things even worse.   They just have to make sure it's setup properly and check for environmental variables that could cause interference.  And more importantly, if they are having problems, contact TM customer support to help them trouble shoot the problem.  Considering how much they pay for it, they better be taking advantage of it.

No, it’s not that.

[LeftDash14]

If you see italicized spin its not good data. You can glean ball speed and chs numbers but i generally wouldn't rely on them for fitting if the spin isn't accurate. Ive seen misread spin throw out wild hooks or blocks, then a similar strike where it doesn't miss the spin its much better. Also make sure the trackman is targeted properly. Without that you have very little chance of making a proper decision.