DeChambeau on the range at The Masters with dual launch monitors

That and the fact that few tour pros are using them. Likely due to the stickers based on Bryson’s example today.

Oh, and that one time a tour pro had a big snafu for having the stickers on his club during play in a tournament round.

https://www.google.com/amp/amp.pga....s-two-clubs-lead-eight-shot-penalty-ben-crane

i have no dog in this fight. i have enjoyed interacting with you.

but how are the stickers a failure?

are the stickers annoying? maybe for you, maybe for pros who don't want to have to add stickers to 13 clubs then take them off before a round. but not everyone is annoyed by the stickers.

i would think a failure would be poor readings, because that is what the system is designed for: reading and communicating data. a failure might be a proper label for some of the ernest sports units, or the swing caddie sc300, which seem to be found lacking when compared to more reliable units.
 
i have no dog in this fight. i have enjoyed interacting with you.

but how are the stickers a failure?

are the stickers annoying? maybe for you, maybe for pros who don't want to have to add stickers to 13 clubs then take them off before a round. but not everyone is annoyed by the stickers.

i would think a failure would be poor readings, because that is what the system is designed for: reading and communicating data. a failure might be a proper label for some of the ernest sports units, or the swing caddie sc300, which seem to be found lacking when compared to more reliable units.

The stickers aren't tournament legal. That's a big deal for tour pros, but then again they are much less than 1% of the golfing public.

Also, there are those that could be distracted by having stickers on the club face. So those are 2 drawbacks.

But for the majority of golfers, they're not going to care about the club data. They only want to have the basics: distance, ball speed, and maybe spin rate plus launch angle for a driver fitting.

This is a subset of the many factors in golf that are getting more divergent for tour pros as compared to everyday golfers.
 
i have no dog in this fight. i have enjoyed interacting with you.

but how are the stickers a failure?

are the stickers annoying? maybe for you, maybe for pros who don't want to have to add stickers to 13 clubs then take them off before a round. but not everyone is annoyed by the stickers.

i would think a failure would be poor readings, because that is what the system is designed for: reading and communicating data. a failure might be a proper label for some of the ernest sports units, or the swing caddie sc300, which seem to be found lacking when compared to more reliable units.

I understand what he's saying, and the conversation was never about what unit is better than another. And I agree with him that the GCQuad would probably see more tour use if it wasn't for the need for stickers to get club data. But comparing the SC units or Ernest units to a CGQuad or Trackman is like comparing a Yugo to a Bentley. They don't belong in the same conversation.
 
The stickers aren't tournament legal. That's a big deal for tour pros, but then again they are much less than 1% of the golfing public.

Also, there are those that could be distracted by having stickers on the club face. So those are 2 drawbacks.

But for the majority of golfers, they're not going to care about the club data. They only want to have the basics: distance, ball speed, and maybe spin rate plus launch angle for a driver fitting.

This is a subset of the many factors in golf that are getting more divergent for tour pros as compared to everyday golfers.
That club face data helps fitters and instructors immensely.
 
That club face data helps fitters and instructors immensely.
And usually they will have only one or a few clubs dotted up when need.

Really think about this.

Bryson is sponsored by flight scope and also uses a gc quad. Not sure how that is a failure for foresight when a guy who is sponsored by a competitor also uses their product.
 
And usually they will have only one or a few clubs dotted up when need.

Really think about this.

Bryson is sponsored by flight scope and also uses a gc quad. Not sure how that is a failure for foresight when a guy who is sponsored by a competitor also uses their product.

Because, to me anyway, it seems pretty obvious that if he didn't have to use the stickers he'd only have the GCQuad. Otherwise, why even have the Flightscope to track anything?

"Failure" appears to be a trigger word here. It could just as easily been worded along the lines of - it would be a success if Foresight could figure out how to track club data without the stickers.
 
Because, to me anyway, it seems pretty obvious that if he didn't have to use the stickers he'd only have the GCQuad. Otherwise, why even have the Flightscope to track anything?

"Failure" appears to be a trigger word here. It could just as easily been worded along the lines of - it would be a success if Foresight could figure out how to track club data without the stickers.

Actually, Bryson is a paid endorser of FlightScope.
He is obviously not getting everything he wants out of a doppler unit, so added a GCQuad.
 
Actually, Bryson is a paid endorser of FlightScope.
He is obviously not getting everything he wants out of a doppler unit, so added a GCQuad.
I laughed a little at this. I had no idea he was an endorser.

Sent from my SM-G955U1 using Tapatalk
 
Actually, Bryson is a paid endorser of FlightScope.
He is obviously not getting everything he wants out of a doppler unit, so added a GCQuad.

I'm aware of that. But do you think he'd continue that relationship if he thought he could get all he wanted/needed out of the GCQuad. I personally do not believe that as data driven as he is.
 
I'm aware of that. But do you think he'd continue that relationship if he thought he could get all he wanted/needed out of the GCQuad. I personally do not believe that as data driven as he is.

personally i like being paid. So long as I could still use the GCQuad and I just have to have the flightscope out at the same time I would definitely keep that relationship.
 
I'm aware of that. But do you think he'd continue that relationship if he thought he could get all he wanted/needed out of the GCQuad. I personally do not believe that as data driven as he is.

You told me to only deal in facts. So the facts are straight forward. He is in a multiyear contract as a paid endorser of Flightscope.
If and when that ends, it will be his choice to use what he thinks works best.
Right now, the only fact is that he is not getting what he needs out of a doppler unit so purchased a GCQuad.
 
personally i like being paid. So long as I could still use the GCQuad and I just have to have the flightscope out at the same time I would definitely keep that relationship.

Except your not him. He's made over 12.5 million on tour already, plus whatever his various sponsors are paying him. He's also eccentric and focuses on what works. So I don't know if that's a drive for him. Though we all know we are purely speculating as to his reasoning.
 
You told me to only deal in facts. So the facts are straight forward. He is in a multiyear contract as a paid endorser of Flightscope.
If and when that ends, it will be his choice to use what he thinks works best.
Right now, the only fact is that he is not getting what he needs out of a doppler unit so purchased a GCQuad.

Or, that he likes GCQuad, but doesn't get ALL that he needs out of it. To compensate, he uses a doppler unit to get club data without having to tinker with stickers.

And we have a commentator saying as much. Whether that's speculation on the commentator or not is unknown.
 
Or, that he likes GCQuad, but doesn't get ALL that he needs out of it. To compensate, he uses a doppler unit to get club data without having to tinker with stickers.

And we have a commentator saying as much. Whether that's speculation on the commentator or not is unknown.

Hahahha.
By contract he has to use the Flightscope. If it makes you happier to say otherwise, thats fine.
You said you wanted to deal in facts, the facts are stated above.
 
Except your not him. He's made over 12.5 million on tour already, plus whatever his various sponsors are paying him. He's also eccentric and focuses on what works. So I don't know if that's a drive for him. Though we all know we are purely speculating as to his reasoning.
Flightscope is literally paying him.

The only assured money in golf is sponsorship so get as many as you can.
 
Somehow my name came up in all of this - I'll add I did a ton of research into all high-end units and tested them well before any involvement with THP. I bought from Foresight on my own (again, before becoming a staff writer) because the data was the best I saw. Personally, I thought TM and GCQ were close but I preferred the business model of Foresight to that of the TM and my preference for indoor use pushed it to GCQ.

What was the question again? I think that has been lost in all of this.
 
Hahahha.
By contract he has to use the Flightscope. If it makes you happier to say otherwise, thats fine.
You said you wanted to deal in facts, the facts are stated above.

Where did you read the contract?
 
Where did you read the contract?

I know the years of it. Know how FlightScope sponsors players.
At this point you are just trying to argue. You wanted to deal in facts, they were laid out as to who is his sponsor is and who isn't.
I know its easier to go conspiracy theory and blame THP and accuse us of lacking integrity, but its just nonsense.
 
Flightscope is literally paying him.

The only assured money in golf is sponsorship so get as many as you can.

I'm down to use a Flightscope everywhere I go for a very small fee lmao!
 
I know its easier to go conspiracy theory and blame THP and accuse us of lacking integrity, but its just nonsense.

I thought this was off limits? You said as much already...

I didn't accuse you or THP of lacking integrity. I said you had a professional relationship with Foresight and I understand if you feel obligated to support them.

And I'm not a conspiracy theory kinda guy.
 
The stickers aren't tournament legal. That's a big deal for tour pros, but then again they are much less than 1% of the golfing public.

Also, there are those that could be distracted by having stickers on the club face. So those are 2 drawbacks.

But for the majority of golfers, they're not going to care about the club data. They only want to have the basics: distance, ball speed, and maybe spin rate plus launch angle for a driver fitting.

This is a subset of the many factors in golf that are getting more divergent for tour pros as compared to everyday golfers.

i agree. but that's one application of many, and it certainly doesn't render the product a failure (not your word).
 
i agree. but that's one application of many, and it certainly doesn't render the product a failure (not your word).

Not my words either. I never said the product was failure. I said the sticker/dot system was a failure.
 
I thought this was off limits? You said as much already...

I didn't accuse you or THP of lacking integrity. I said you had a professional relationship with Foresight and I understand if you feel obligated to support them.

And I'm not a conspiracy theory kinda guy.

Actually what you said is below

"I understand that you have a professional relationship with them and feel obligated to share whatever they tell you though."

Which is completely false. Not only do I not have any different relationship with them than I do with the other 5 or so companies, I had a choice to pick any one of them I want since it is my own dollars and chose the GCQuad. You can choose to believe there is some conspiracy, but as each of our staff writers that WE (other than Molten who already purchased his) supplied launch monitors for, none of that is even close to reality.

In fact we are sponsored by a launch monitor company. Voice Caddie. If you see my review of the SC300, you will see that we don't play that game.
So enough already. You wanted facts, they were laid out.
Want to debate the units fine. Lots of good in all of them. Want to say that THP is on the take for its choices, and has to say what is told. ********. Take it elsewhere.
 
Actually what you said is below

"I understand that you have a professional relationship with them and feel obligated to share whatever they tell you though."

Which is completely false. Not only do I not have any different relationship with them than I do with the other 5 or so companies, I had a choice to pick any one of them I want since it is my own dollars and chose the GCQuad. You can choose to believe there is some conspiracy, but as each of our staff writers that WE (other than Molten who already purchased his) supplied launch monitors for, none of that is even close to reality.

In fact we are sponsored by a launch monitor company. Voice Caddie. If you see my review of the SC300, you will see that we don't play that game.
So enough already. You wanted facts, they were laid out.
Want to debate the units fine. Lots of good in all of them. Want to say that THP is on the take for its choices, and has to say what is told. ********. Take it elsewhere.

Fair enough. I was of the understanding that Foresight supplied some, if not all, of your original GC2 units, or that you got a significant discount on them.
 
Except your not him. He's made over 12.5 million on tour already, plus whatever his various sponsors are paying him. He's also eccentric and focuses on what works. So I don't know if that's a drive for him. Though we all know we are purely speculating as to his reasoning.

off topic, but this has always fascinated me about tour players. if oem #1 is willing to pay $1 million a year for a full bag of clubs, and oem #2 is only willing to pay $500k for that same deal, the player often chases the money. yet one decent tournament will make up for that extra $, so why not play the equipment that gives you the ability to score the best and earn more on the course? it's never made sense to me when a player gets accused of chasing the money, when the weekly purses are so big.
 
Back
Top