Awesome Jaggie. Glad to see this thing is working for you. I am definately pondering one of these.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Good thread and I am reading it with interest, I am a player who has the opposite problem, that is getting enough spin with the driver, but I like to stay informed on anything golf related so I can share it with my friends who may be interested in this product.
Yeah, if you are a player that is down the middle on most drives and who would benefit from more spin off their driver, than this is not for you. But, if you are like me, a little erratic off the tee and could use less spin, than this is a fantastic product!
I'm not seeing that at all. In fact, I'm missing more fairways than normal at the moment.
This is really my first time taking a really hard look at the shot maker. Hawk- I am excited to see your launch monitor numbers in respect to side and back spin. While I put some stock in the "field" results like FIR, there are a ton of variables that simply convolute the whole process.
Thanks for taking the time and being so thorough!
hmmm could you have the wrong flex?
I think LM results are necessary, but on course results are just as important. Especially at the price tag the Shotmaker carries. I know there are many variables, but seeing results over time should give a good idea of it's worth.
How long are you compiling results for?
I guess my concern is that something else (difference in swing, etc) could be accounting for changes. Is there a comparison driver (similar make/model) that is being used as a baseline
How long are you compiling results for?
I guess my concern is that something else (difference in swing, etc) could be accounting for changes. Is there a comparison driver (similar make/model) that is being used as a baseline
His own driver. He has used with the shot maker and without. What you're saying could be accounted for any type of on course or range testing.
The only reason I asked is if I graph my FIR over the course of this season I can see a 20% difference between time frames, without a swing change. It's just the ebb and flow of golf. I think the value of a LM is that you can see the results of two set ups on the same day with the same swing.
I didn't mean to question Hawk's testing, just saying that I am excited to see LM numbers and a direct comparison.
The only reason I asked is if I graph my FIR over the course of this season I can see a 20% difference between time frames, without a swing change. It's just the ebb and flow of golf. I think the value of a LM is that you can see the results of two set ups on the same day with the same swing.
I didn't mean to question Hawk's testing, just saying that I am excited to see LM numbers and a direct comparison.
I dont mean to question you, but I really doubt your swing doesnt change throughout the course of the round. It happens with everyone. Even to single digit and scratch golfers.
It comes down to this product should be beneficial to golfers ever without a 100% consistant swing. From the testing it doesnt look like it works for everyone.
Honest question. When looking at drivers lets say you pick up two and head to the course.
One of them you play 18 and the other one you play the next 18.
One of them you miss all but 1 fairway.
THe other one you hit all but 1 fairway.
Do you then say "its the ebb and flow of golf"? Or do you believe that you liked the second driver more?
Hey Gus, I have gone on the LM on two separate occasions with the Shotmaker and both times it has shown a decrease in spin and a tighter dispersion. I will post the link to the thread with the data on it.
http://www.thehackersparadise.com/forum/showthread.php?22214-New-Harrison-Shotmaker
I dont mean to question you, but I really doubt your swing doesnt change throughout the course of the round. It happens with everyone. Even to single digit and scratch golfers.
It comes down to this product should be beneficial to golfers ever without a 100% consistant swing. From the testing it doesnt look like it works for everyone.
How long are you compiling results for?
I guess my concern is that something else (difference in swing, etc) could be accounting for changes. Is there a comparison driver (similar make/model) that is being used as a baseline
Of course it does- it changes swing to swing! That isn't my point.
For clarification:
1. I am not criticizing Hawks testing or methods. I have forum tested before, and I understand the limitations to what/how you can test
2. I am not doubting the numbers that he is getting. You can color me a complete skeptic regarding this product- I am very surprised with its claims
You certainly like the second driver more... but the extreme nature of the example makes that obvious. A better example of what I am taking about is the same two drivers:
Driver 1: FIR 55% over 3 weeks
Driver 2: FIR 65% over 3 weeks
Without changing my driver I can see 10% change over a 6 week period- so how do I know it is the different drivers and not me?
My bad I thought you were...