Jump to content

Welcome. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest which does not give you access to all the great features at GolfWRX such as viewing all the images, interacting with members, access to all forums and eligiblility to win free giveaways. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free. Create a FREE GolfWRX account here.

- - - - -

Arccos 360 New User Review


76 replies to this topic

#61 Kmac

Kmac

    Advanced

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 308 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 125246
  • Joined: 03/25/2011
GolfWRX Likes : 90

Posted 12 July 2017 - 08:32 AM

 bluedot, on 12 July 2017 - 08:18 AM, said:

 Kmac™, on 12 July 2017 - 07:58 AM, said:

Pretty sure strokes gained IS present in the stats online for Arccos.

I've got 73 rounds logged in with Arccos 360, and I haven't seen anything that provides "strokes gained" information on either my phone app or the website.  If you have seen something with strokes gained on Arccos, I stand corrected.  Arccos DOES base the estimated handicaps for each of the five areas on strokes gained data, but they present it as an estimated handicap.

I am only guessing here, but as I mentioned above, I assume that the reason the data is presented that way is that "strokes gained" requires a field of players to gain or lose AGAINST, at least as I understand it.  When Broadie shows that Luke Donald gained 0.95 strokes per round putting in 2011, he's comparing Donald to 204 other PGA Tour pros with at least 30 rounds on Tour that year.  I think it's safe to say that Donald would have gained MORE than 0.95 against the field in the Member-Guest at Bushwood, so the field does matter.

The other reason, of course, to present the data on Arccos in the form of estimated handicaps is familiarity.  When Arccos tells me that my estimated handicap for approach shots is 8.8, I understand what that means, at least in general terms.  If somehow they could present it as "strokes gained" vs. other single digit index golfers and it was 0.95, my question would be, "OK, is that good or bad?"; much more explanation would be called for.

Hope that helps.

Well you seem to understand a lot more about it than I do, haha. But I think you are correct in your statement. I only have a couple rounds with Arccos and just thought I had seen something while flipping between the two damn dashboards that they need to combine.


Remove This Advertisement Viewing As Guest

    GolfWRX Forums

    Advertisement


1

#62 North Butte

North Butte

    Hall of Fame

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,178 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 424472
  • Joined: 05/09/2016
GolfWRX Likes : 5537

Posted 12 July 2017 - 08:39 AM

From the Arccos web site:

Quote

Tour Analytics is rooted in the strokes gained methodology now in use on the PGA tour.  In a nutshell, it analyzes every shot you take and determines whether you got more or less out of that shot than you should have.  

If they are computing "strokes gained" without accounting for obstructed/recovery shots then there is a major flaw in any conclusions you draw about driving vs approach shots.

Two scenarios:

220 yard drive, 30 yards left of the fairway, open shot to the green of 150 yards.

220 yard drive, 30 yards left of the fairway, blocked out by tree requiring chip out sideways.

The tee shot in the second scenario is nearly a full stroke worse than the first scenario. Game Golf treats those two tee shots as equal in value. I suspect Arccos does as well, do you know for sure whether it does?
Everything has its drawbacks, as the man said when his mother-in-law died, and they came down upon him for the funeral expenses.

2

#63 bluedot

bluedot

    Major Winner

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,950 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 85265
  • Joined: 06/10/2009
  • Handicap:6.1
GolfWRX Likes : 1232

Posted 12 July 2017 - 09:20 AM

 North Butte, on 12 July 2017 - 08:39 AM, said:

From the Arccos web site:

Quote

Tour Analytics is rooted in the strokes gained methodology now in use on the PGA tour.  In a nutshell, it analyzes every shot you take and determines whether you got more or less out of that shot than you should have.  

If they are computing "strokes gained" without accounting for obstructed/recovery shots then there is a major flaw in any conclusions you draw about driving vs approach shots.

Two scenarios:

220 yard drive, 30 yards left of the fairway, open shot to the green of 150 yards.

220 yard drive, 30 yards left of the fairway, blocked out by tree requiring chip out sideways.

The tee shot in the second scenario is nearly a full stroke worse than the first scenario. Game Golf treats those two tee shots as equal in value. I suspect Arccos does as well, do you know for sure whether it does?

But they are NOT computing "strokes gained"; that's the point!  They are using the strokes gained work done by Broadie (and others, I assume) to compare what I am doing with a driver to other golfers, and then estimating how well I am driving the ball.  That they present it as an estimated handicap is not hard to understand; in fact, there is no other way to do that I can think of.

As to your two scenarios with a 220 yard drive, I can only guess how the Arccos algorithms handle that.  I'd be a little bit (pleasantly) surprised if the Arccos algorithms count account for the tree that is blocking me in the second scenario, just as I would be a little bit (pleasantly) surprised if Arccos could account for a drive hitting a tree and bouncing forward and back into the fairway, or hitting a cart path and bouncing forward an additional 20 yards, or any of the other myraid of things that happen on a golf course.  None of that bothers me, because I'm looking at literally HUNDREDS of shots; no one shot is going to be statistically significant, and if I consistently miss fairways by 30 yards, guess what?  Arccos will tell me that I suck, except using numbers.  I've had individual rounds where Arccos told me that I drove the ball like a 30+ handicap, but I knew what they meant by that.

The reason is that I'm looking for a large picture.  I now have, according to the app, 656 shots with the driver recorded and analyzed by Arccos; that's a LOT of data.  Without question, some of the shots were "unusual" in the sense that they ended up better or worse than similarly struck shots.  But speaking ONLY for myself (not Arccos!) I'm assuming that over the course of HUNDREDS of shots, the data washes out, and the analysis that Arccos gives me is at least reasonably accurate and useful.  Not perfect; reasonably accurate and useful.  Being blocked, or not blocked, by a tree when I've missed the fairway by 30 yards brings in an element of luck that I don't think it's reasonable for Arccos to be able to deal with, and in the big picture of hundreds of driver shots, it isn't statistically significant anyway.

(BTW, I have 1518 putts recorded; that plus the driver are more shots than ALL other clubs in the bag combined!  In case any of us doubted that driving and putting are HUGE...)

At the end of it all, I don't really care too much about how Arccos handles those two scenarios.  Here's what I DO care about from the driver stats:
1. If I hit the ball solidly, I can figure on about 219 yds, with a max under "normal" conditions of 230.  (BTW, this verifies what Trackman told me in my last driver fitting.)
2. I'm hitting 68.1% of fairways with the driver.
3. 14.9% of my drives miss left, and 16.9% of my drives miss right.  (This is the one that REALLY bothers me; two way misses are death if you want to play good tournament golf, which I do, and this MUST be addressed!)

Besides that, in the case of the open shot of 150 in the first scenario, the issue becomes my approach capabilities.  In the second scenario, my approach capabilities are going to be based on BOTH shots, not just the chip out or the third shot, and Arccos will give me approach stats as well as stats on each club that reflect that.  If I use a 7 iron to punch out, that shot will not figure into my 7 iron stats because it's an outlier; if I then use a 9 iron from the fairway for my third shot, that shot WILL show up in my 9 iron distance and accuracy stats, assuming that I make reasonable contact.  BOTH shots are in the approach data, though, just like a missed green and a subsequent chip are in the approach data.  It took me two shots to hit the green from 150 yds in both cases, and THAT is what is significant, at least to me.

For Game Golf (with which I have no familiarity) or Arccos to account for the tree, we'd have to have an employee of the company following us around and posting data to Shotlink for analysis.  It's possible that might cost more than the one-time expenditure of $250, so I'll settle for the useful (if imperfect?) data that I'm getting.

3

#64 North Butte

North Butte

    Hall of Fame

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,178 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 424472
  • Joined: 05/09/2016
GolfWRX Likes : 5537

Posted 12 July 2017 - 09:33 AM

Well we're repeating ourselves at this point. You are most interested in how far you hit each club and which direction you miss. As I've said several times in this and other threads, both Game Golf and Arccos do that beautifully.

It is almost certain that every time you have to chip out after a bad drive, Arccos (like Game Golf) is totally missing the fact that you had to chip out. Because they DO use the strokes gained methodology (before converting it to a user friendly pseudo-handicap metric) that means each occasion of a chip-out or recovery shot after a drive apportions roughly one stroke of "bad" to the chip-out itself when that stroke should have been counted as "bad" on the drive.

You're right, you will never be able to tell how all that shakes out in your driving "handicap". If you only have recovery shots after 0 or 1 tee shot most rounds it'll work out to about one stroke/round of incorrect strokes gained allocation. And we have no way of knowing how much that one stroke/round of incorrect strokes gained will influence their proprietary formula for converting strokes gained to "handicap".

If you're like me and typically have 2, 3 or occasionally more of those shots per round it will assign you a driving "handicap" that is too low and most likely assign you an approach shot handicap that's too high. But I really don't get the sense you care much whether there's a systematic error in those numbers. You just want to watch them change over time and you most just want to know if you can figure out a way to drive it five yards farther and hit one more fairway per round, am I right?

Every product has its target consumer and I think you are squarely in the middle of Arccos's segment. For my part, if I'm going to bother to use something like this (and pay money for it) I can not tolerate systematic, built-in difference between what it claims to be reporting (a set of game-segments handicaps derived from shot-by-shot Stroke Gained data) and what it's actually doing (miscounting 2 or 3 of my bad drives per round as though they were bad approach shots).

P.S. But I've got to say, riddle me this...

Do you really consider yourself to have driven the ball exactly as well in these two rounds?

1) Average 220 off the tee, drive it in the fairway nine times and rough nine times, hit seven GIR and shoot 82.

2) Average 220 off the tee, drive it in the fairway nine ties, in the rough four times and five times have to chip out of the trees, hit four GIR and shoot 86

Because I'm am virutally certain that Arccos would assign you the exact same "Driving Handicap" for Round 1 where you were in play all day and for Round 2 where you chipped out of the woods five times. That's all I'm saying, if that's good enough for you then there's no problem. It isn't remotely good enough for me.

Edited by North Butte, 12 July 2017 - 09:37 AM.

Everything has its drawbacks, as the man said when his mother-in-law died, and they came down upon him for the funeral expenses.

4

#65 bluedot

bluedot

    Major Winner

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,950 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 85265
  • Joined: 06/10/2009
  • Handicap:6.1
GolfWRX Likes : 1232

Posted 12 July 2017 - 10:08 AM

 North Butte, on 12 July 2017 - 09:33 AM, said:

Well we're repeating ourselves at this point. You are most interested in how far you hit each club and which direction you miss. As I've said several times in this and other threads, both Game Golf and Arccos do that beautifully.

It is almost certain that every time you have to chip out after a bad drive, Arccos (like Game Golf) is totally missing the fact that you had to chip out. Because they DO use the strokes gained methodology (before converting it to a user friendly pseudo-handicap metric) that means each occasion of a chip-out or recovery shot after a drive apportions roughly one stroke of "bad" to the chip-out itself when that stroke should have been counted as "bad" on the drive.

You're right, you will never be able to tell how all that shakes out in your driving "handicap". If you only have recovery shots after 0 or 1 tee shot most rounds it'll work out to about one stroke/round of incorrect strokes gained allocation. And we have no way of knowing how much that one stroke/round of incorrect strokes gained will influence their proprietary formula for converting strokes gained to "handicap".

If you're like me and typically have 2, 3 or occasionally more of those shots per round it will assign you a driving "handicap" that is too low and most likely assign you an approach shot handicap that's too high. But I really don't get the sense you care much whether there's a systematic error in those numbers. You just want to watch them change over time and you most just want to know if you can figure out a way to drive it five yards farther and hit one more fairway per round, am I right?

Every product has its target consumer and I think you are squarely in the middle of Arccos's segment. For my part, if I'm going to bother to use something like this (and pay money for it) I can not tolerate systematic, built-in difference between what it claims to be reporting (a set of game-segments handicaps derived from shot-by-shot Stroke Gained data) and what it's actually doing (miscounting 2 or 3 of my bad drives per round as though they were bad approach shots).

P.S. But I've got to say, riddle me this...

Do you really consider yourself to have driven the ball exactly as well in these two rounds?

1) Average 220 off the tee, drive it in the fairway nine times and rough nine times, hit seven GIR and shoot 82.

2) Average 220 off the tee, drive it in the fairway nine ties, in the rough four times and five times have to chip out of the trees, hit four GIR and shoot 86

Because I'm am virutally certain that Arccos would assign you the exact same "Driving Handicap" for Round 1 where you were in play all day and for Round 2 where you chipped out of the woods five times. That's all I'm saying, if that's good enough for you then there's no problem. It isn't remotely good enough for me.

For clarification:

1. I'm NOT trying to hit it five yards farther, and I'm NOT using Arccos to tell me anything about how to do either that OR how to hit one more fairway per round.  I am VERY interested in yardage gaps in my set, which I've said about 10 times now, and in WHERE I am missing, which I've also said a bunch.

2. I don't care about the micro of comparing two rounds with nine this or that; I KNOW the difference in how I drove the ball in those two rounds without ANY help from Arccos or anything else.  Hell, at 65, I have days where I can't hit it out of my shadow because of a bad hip anyway!  And there are days where the course is muddy, and days where the wind is blowing, and days when everything is PERFECT.  I don't care about ANY of that stuff, so there's no need to ask me any more riddles about two drives, or even two rounds.  IT JUST DOES NOT MATTER in the statistical picture, just like the topped 4 hybrid doesn't matter in the overall statistical picture that told me that I hit that club as far as I do my 7 wood.  Think big picture...

3. I DO care about what I'm doing over the course of 70+ rounds and 600+ shots with a driver.  In THAT picture, two drives, or even two rounds are just not statistically significant.  I know that you know that.  That YOU care about the difference between two shots, or even two rounds, is just not something that I can control, or that the programs can handle, I suspect.  You're going to have to pay more for that; a LOT more!

4. If I'm in the middle of the Arccos target group, you know something that I don't, but it's great that Arccos and I found each other, I suppose.

I surrender.  No more hypothetical 220 yard drives, or trees, or rounds, or any of that, ok?  You've worn me out explaining the same thing over and over.


5

#66 hack2489

hack2489

    Member

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 108 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 459550
  • Joined: 03/18/2017
  • Location:Northern NSW (Australia)
  • Handicap:16
GolfWRX Likes : 42

Posted 03 February 2018 - 10:23 PM

Hey folks, what's the current verdict, feedback, user experience like with the ANDROID app?

Seems it wasn't as good in the past. Is it still an issue?

6

#67 larciel

larciel

    I play for eagle

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,161 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 228091
  • Joined: 02/10/2013
GolfWRX Likes : 331

Posted 06 February 2018 - 11:05 PM

Android app is working much better than before. They just emailed me for beta testing for Android app supposedly increasing battery life and putting strokes register

7

#68 Frankensteins Monster

Frankensteins Monster

    Hall of Fame

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,128 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 214901
  • Joined: 12/07/2012
GolfWRX Likes : 4478

Posted 07 February 2018 - 07:59 AM

 larciel, on 06 February 2018 - 11:05 PM, said:

Android app is working much better than before. They just emailed me for beta testing for Android app supposedly increasing battery life and putting strokes register

That's good to hear. I've read that was a weak point for them. It's cool you're a beta tester! How did you get into it? I wonder if I can beta test for iOS?

8

#69 bthomps33

bthomps33

    Member

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 118 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 435682
  • Joined: 08/07/2016
GolfWRX Likes : 64

Posted 08 February 2018 - 10:09 PM

Question. At the end of each hole, can you just stand on top of the hole and adjust the pin location to your location shown on the app? Seems like it would be a pretty easy way to adjust pin location as long as you're getting decent GPS accuracy?

Also, does the phone have to be in your pocket to register a shot? I use a push cart and usually mount it on there.

Edited by bthomps33, 08 February 2018 - 10:10 PM.


9

#70 larciel

larciel

    I play for eagle

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,161 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 228091
  • Joined: 02/10/2013
GolfWRX Likes : 331

Posted 10 February 2018 - 08:29 PM

 bthomps33, on 08 February 2018 - 10:09 PM, said:

Question. At the end of each hole, can you just stand on top of the hole and adjust the pin location to your location shown on the app? Seems like it would be a pretty easy way to adjust pin location as long as you're getting decent GPS accuracy?

Also, does the phone have to be in your pocket to register a shot? I use a push cart and usually mount it on there.

Yes you can do that.

Phone has to be in you FRONT pocket. They are coming out with a new device that you can use and keep your phone off you.

Although I agree with mgs that phone in my pocket doesn't bother me now.


Remove This Advertisement Viewing As Guest

    GolfWRX Forums

    Advertisement


10

#71 MSchad

MSchad

    Advanced

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 298 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 93174
  • Joined: 08/28/2009
  • Location:Rapid City, SD
GolfWRX Likes : 68

Posted 12 February 2018 - 01:24 PM

 larciel, on 10 February 2018 - 08:29 PM, said:

They are coming out with a new device that you can use and keep your phone off you.


You are the first I've heard about this. You have a link to the referenced information you are using?

Thanks

Edited by MSchad, 12 February 2018 - 01:25 PM.

Taylormade M2
Nike Sumo 3w, 5w
Nike CPR 26*
Mizuno JPX-EZ Forged, 5-PW
Cleveland 588 RTX 50,54,58
Scotty Futura X7M DB
Precision Pro NX7 Pro
Arccos Game Tracker

11

#72 BigCat78

BigCat78

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 19 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 128000
  • Joined: 05/03/2011
  • Location:San Diego
  • Handicap:7
GolfWRX Likes : 3

Posted 12 February 2018 - 03:26 PM

I heard something about a poker sized chip that you could put in your pocket instead of your phone.  I heard it around the PGA Show but not sure if there is any truth to it or not.

12

#73 Duke of Hazards

Duke of Hazards

    Member

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 108 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 57683
  • Joined: 06/10/2008
GolfWRX Likes : 29

Posted 14 February 2018 - 12:58 AM

As an FYI, I saw this reply to a 1-26-2018 review of Arccos 360 on the Google Play Store:

Arccos Golf LLC January 29, 2018

Thank you for your feedback. Recently, we have focused our efforts on improving stability and battery life. In addition, in 2018 we plan to greatly improve the Android app and include the features available on iOS. Caddie will be available in time for golf season as well as many other improvements. Please contact us with any questions.
'

13

#74 bthomps33

bthomps33

    Member

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 118 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 435682
  • Joined: 08/07/2016
GolfWRX Likes : 64

Posted 14 February 2018 - 11:36 AM

 MSchad, on 12 February 2018 - 01:24 PM, said:

 larciel, on 10 February 2018 - 08:29 PM, said:

They are coming out with a new device that you can use and keep your phone off you.


You are the first I've heard about this. You have a link to the referenced information you are using?

Thanks

I just asked via the chat on the website... I copy and pasted our conversation.

Jeff: Hello, would you like to talk about our products?

Brian:  Hi, are you developing something smaller that will go in the front pocket for shot detection? I want to use your product, but I can't stand having a phone on me while playing.


Jeff: Hi Brian, thank you for reaching out. Yes, we are launching this type of product in May / June of this year. The small hardware device is the size of a tic tac container and would go in your pocket instead of the phone.

At the same time, a customer with an Apple Watch 3 would be able to use just the watch and not have to keep the phone in their pocket
The devices communicate to the phone via bluetooth. As soon as you are withing bluetooth range of your phone (Generally 20 ft or so), the data from the small hardware device would synch to the phone 360 App

14

#75 BigCat78

BigCat78

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 19 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 128000
  • Joined: 05/03/2011
  • Location:San Diego
  • Handicap:7
GolfWRX Likes : 3

Posted 15 February 2018 - 07:42 AM

Thanks bthomps33 for the investigative reporting �.  I’m interested to see this when it comes out, I just got the Arccos 360 yesterday.  I’m curious to see if it will be an add on or a whole new system, and even more importantly how much.


15

#76 FrankfurtDave

FrankfurtDave

    Member

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 120 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 147845
  • Joined: 11/21/2011
GolfWRX Likes : 43

Posted 16 February 2018 - 01:44 AM

Going back to the the example of being behind a tree and affect on driving statistics and strokes gained.

What you can do when you are blocked out is edit the round afterwards to add a 1 shot penalty on the drive  and remove the punch out recovery shot?

You would get the same shot count but the drive statistics would get the penalty and not the approach statistics.

I just tried this on one of my rounds and could see that where before I had 8,7 (driving) and 12,3 (approach) with the punch out that changed to 9,2 (driving) and 12,0 (approach) with the penalty. This certainly provides a better reflection of the bad drive.

I know that this is a manual step, but as we are Wrx's it does not happen that often.

Just an idea that I remember to do sometimes.

16

#77 North Butte

North Butte

    Hall of Fame

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,178 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 424472
  • Joined: 05/09/2016
GolfWRX Likes : 5537

Posted 16 February 2018 - 11:24 AM

That's certainly better than taking it at face value.

Before I just quit using Game Golf (and started tracking Strokes Gained directly) for my last few rounds I was simply adding a note to each round with some number of "+1" or "+0.5" notations to reflect how many times I pitched out backward or sideways (a +1) or was able to advance the ball but not toward the green (+0.5) after a poor drive.

So if I examined my last five rounds of pseudo-Strokes Gained in Game Golf and it said 8.7 driving and 12.3 approach I could look back through those notes and see that (over the five rounds) I needed to reallocate a total of let's say 6.5 strokes from driving to approach or an average of 1.3 stroke per round adjustments to the Strokes Gained.
Everything has its drawbacks, as the man said when his mother-in-law died, and they came down upon him for the funeral expenses.

17



1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users

GolfWRX Sponsors