| |
Main
Date: 17 Sep 2006 01:08:50
From: Dave Lee
Subject: GPS Type "Rangefinder" Review (iGolf)
|
This is a cut/paste of a review that I posted on FGI a few weeks ago. I
wouldn't change much at this point other than to say that I'm still not sure
if there are things that can be done to improve accuracy (my best estimate
is no better than 5 yards - OK, but just barely from my perspective).
Continuous 'satellite data availability' still seems like it matters from
what I can observe anecdotally and in my current usage mode (device carried
around in my pocket) I don't achieve that.
I have basic understanding of how GPS works, but am not sure how they do it
without either a very accurate/synchronized clock or an absolute
land-reference for calibration. So if anyone out there wants to share
operational details, that would be appreciated.
The usual disclaimers (I have no personal/financial interests in iGolf or
FGI). Here is the previously FGI-posted review.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------
I chose a GPS device over the laser types priily due to ease of use
considerations. If everyone on our courses used laser devices and folks
standing around trying to acquire a target from 190 yards was the norm, I
might have purchased a laser type. To me their major advantage is highly
accurate yardages to the pin from inside 100 yards. But these aren't the
norm around here, are bulky in comparison to the iGolf device, and (in my
limited experience) are sometimes difficult to use. Based on what I've seen
I don't think I'd change my mind.
I chose iGolf GPS Caddie over SkyCaddie because I didn't like the basically
mandatory annual fee that the SkyCaddie requires, and the SkyCaddie only
supports 3 user defined points which I find inadequate.
At a high level this is a well designed/manufactured and easy to use device.
Despite things that I've read, I'm finding battery life to be quite
acceptable. My experience so far is that (using new 2500 maHr rechargeable
AA batteries) the device will go 3 rounds on a single set of batteries.
Battery life is a non-issue, (so far).
Functionally the device works with two buttons. One is an 'Escape' button
that generally performs a 'backup' or 'cancel' function. The other is a
combination four-direction cursor key and 'push to enter' key. You typically
cursor around on the screen to select what you want to do and push to
select. During normal play you are generally not many 'keystrokes' from
where-ever you are to what you want to do next, although there is (in my
mind) a MAJOR exception to this for one specific case.
Accuracy is of course a priy consideration. My experience is limited thus
far, but I'm finding the accuracy to be 'OK, but just barely'. I still
wonder if I'll learn a few things that might improve this (more about this
later), but at this point I would call it no better than 5 yards (with very
occasional exceptions).
From what I have learned from a limited amount of web research, the
government imposed randomization of commercially used GPS signals (reducing
accuracy significantly) is no longer in effect. There is also the WAAS
system which is 25 land-stations spread across the US plus 3 geosynchronous
satellites. The WAAS stations continuously read the GPS satellite signals
and generate compensation information that is sent to the geosynchronous
WAAS satellites and rebroadcast for use by GPS devices (WAAS is supported by
the iGolf device). From my limited experimentation WAAS should be enabled
(at least in my area of south-central NC).
To get a better feel for accuracy I walked around our neighborhood in areas
with good sky visibility and set 3 different points into my device on the
course that I call "PRACTICE". The practice course currently contains points
in my shag ball area and (when I can sneak onto our range sometime down the
road) some points on our range as well. While I don't know exact distances
from these three neighborhood points to anything, I am going to treat the
repeatability of the distance measurements as kind of a proxy for absolute
accuracy (it can't be any better than that).
I took the following distance measurements to Points #1/2/3 from a spot in
my driveway over a 12 hour period (2-3 hours between each measurement).
P1 - 120, 121, 118, 118, 122, 116
P2 - 293, 293, 290, 286, 287, 291
P3 - 177, 177, 175, 171, 179, 173
I also did another interesting experiment where I took these same
measurements, walked 15 yards out/back to the same spot, waited 5 seconds
and recorded, repeat. Here is the data
P1 - 122, 122, 117, 115, 120
P2 - 294, 294, 287, 287, 291
P3 - 179, 179, 172, 177, 177
It seems to me the variation over a very short period of time is similar to
the variation that you see over much longer period of times (when the
satellite configurations have changed dramatically).
I will also say that on rare occasions I have seen yardages show up that are
obviously 10+ yards off - they are almost always temporary (10-20 seconds
max), but that does leave a question in your mind. I have been very
surprised at how convenient it is to have yardages 'in your pocket' even
when there are ked sprinkler nearby. However at this point I tend to
always have an eye on posted yardages as I haven't yet developed 100%
confidence in the device. I'm guessing that this will change (see next
paragraph).
As I've said I do not feel that this is (from my perspective) the final say
on accuracy. I get the feeling that the longer the device gets continuous
information, the better it works. My current usage mode on the course is to
carry it around in my pocket. It often loses satellite signals when in my
pocket and I'm in a golf cart. It doesn't take long to find them again once
it is out of my pocket (a few seconds), but I wonder if accuracy is lost in
this case. I say this because I have been out in my shag area (device never
in my pocket) where I have two prominent "target trees" ked and they
"never move" by more than 2 yards (that I've noticed). So there may be ways
to improve the accuracy that I'm describing. The test data was created by
"turn it on, wait for the satellite syncing process, take the measurement,
turn it off and repeat two'ish hours later". That may not be optimum.
With 'WAAS Off' I see 15 yard errors with some frequency. With Stabilization
Off things will often drift up/down/up/down by 12 yards or so a couple
times/minute (not always). So for now I am always running with WAAS on and
Stabilization on.
Now for the only serious drawback that I've encountered (and it will, by
definition, be temporary).
The six courses that I play all had Front/Center/Back information available
online that I used. For the most part this information has seemed to be
accurate within the parameters that I've described (quite frankly the
typical accuracy on the course 'feels' more accurate than my test data for
the most part).
There are a number of holes that I play that have a fair number of
lay-up/carry points that I'm interested in. For example two of the par 5's
on one course that I play have 15 to 20 bunkers on both holes. I entered all
the points that I'm interested in into the courses on the iGolf device while
at home using my own 'coding' (a user defined point can have up to five
alphanumerics). I mapped all the points to the easy chair in our sunroom (it
is 2973 yards to carry the water on hole #14 - better use a 3W :-). My plan
was to remap the points on the course as I played and encountered them. Here
is "the problem".
The device has two priy operating modes - "Play Golf" or "Map Course". In
order to map a point while in "Play Golf" mode you have to back out of "Play
Golf" mode, go into map mode, select the course (cursoring through any
number of other courses), select the hole (cursoring through each hole
starting with hole #1), cursor to the predefined point, etc. etc. Then you
reverse all this to go back to play golf mode. Depending this could easily
be 30 to 40 'keystroke' actions - each being very simple but it just isn't
something that fits into the typical rhythm of a game of golf in many cases.
So doing this while playing is awkward at best, unless you simply play
without using Play Mode. In this case it is very simple as the mapping
process (once you are standing on the point to be mapped) is about 5 seconds
max.
As I said this will work itself out over time - but will take a good bit
longer than I had expected. It would REALLY be nice if there were some kind
of hot key that would send you to 'Map Mode' on the course/hole that you are
on in 'Play Mode' (and hot key back, of course).
My initial impressions.
dave
|
|
| |
Date: 17 Sep 2006 07:52:47
From: Piturno
Subject: Re: GPS Type "Rangefinder" Review (iGolf)
|
I have an igolf GPS like you and it is always within 3 yards. I often play
with my brother who has a SkyCaddie and both are accurate within 2-3 yards.
The key is to keep it out in the open, not in your pocket. And also you do
have to stand still 5-10 seconds so the signal will 'stabilize'.
"Dave Lee" <DaveLeeNC@ix.netcom.RemovE.com > wrote in message
news:Ce1Pg.12594$bM.6242@newsread4.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> This is a cut/paste of a review that I posted on FGI a few weeks ago. I
> wouldn't change much at this point other than to say that I'm still not
> sure
> if there are things that can be done to improve accuracy (my best estimate
> is no better than 5 yards - OK, but just barely from my perspective).
> Continuous 'satellite data availability' still seems like it matters from
> what I can observe anecdotally and in my current usage mode (device
> carried
> around in my pocket) I don't achieve that.
>
> I have basic understanding of how GPS works, but am not sure how they do
> it
> without either a very accurate/synchronized clock or an absolute
> land-reference for calibration. So if anyone out there wants to share
> operational details, that would be appreciated.
>
> The usual disclaimers (I have no personal/financial interests in iGolf or
> FGI). Here is the previously FGI-posted review.
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> -------
>
> I chose a GPS device over the laser types priily due to ease of use
> considerations. If everyone on our courses used laser devices and folks
> standing around trying to acquire a target from 190 yards was the norm, I
> might have purchased a laser type. To me their major advantage is highly
> accurate yardages to the pin from inside 100 yards. But these aren't the
> norm around here, are bulky in comparison to the iGolf device, and (in my
> limited experience) are sometimes difficult to use. Based on what I've
> seen
> I don't think I'd change my mind.
>
> I chose iGolf GPS Caddie over SkyCaddie because I didn't like the
> basically
> mandatory annual fee that the SkyCaddie requires, and the SkyCaddie only
> supports 3 user defined points which I find inadequate.
>
> At a high level this is a well designed/manufactured and easy to use
> device.
> Despite things that I've read, I'm finding battery life to be quite
> acceptable. My experience so far is that (using new 2500 maHr rechargeable
> AA batteries) the device will go 3 rounds on a single set of batteries.
> Battery life is a non-issue, (so far).
>
> Functionally the device works with two buttons. One is an 'Escape' button
> that generally performs a 'backup' or 'cancel' function. The other is a
> combination four-direction cursor key and 'push to enter' key. You
> typically
> cursor around on the screen to select what you want to do and push to
> select. During normal play you are generally not many 'keystrokes' from
> where-ever you are to what you want to do next, although there is (in my
> mind) a MAJOR exception to this for one specific case.
>
> Accuracy is of course a priy consideration. My experience is limited
> thus
> far, but I'm finding the accuracy to be 'OK, but just barely'. I still
> wonder if I'll learn a few things that might improve this (more about this
> later), but at this point I would call it no better than 5 yards (with
> very
> occasional exceptions).
>
> From what I have learned from a limited amount of web research, the
> government imposed randomization of commercially used GPS signals
> (reducing
> accuracy significantly) is no longer in effect. There is also the WAAS
> system which is 25 land-stations spread across the US plus 3
> geosynchronous
> satellites. The WAAS stations continuously read the GPS satellite signals
> and generate compensation information that is sent to the geosynchronous
> WAAS satellites and rebroadcast for use by GPS devices (WAAS is supported
> by
> the iGolf device). From my limited experimentation WAAS should be enabled
> (at least in my area of south-central NC).
>
> To get a better feel for accuracy I walked around our neighborhood in
> areas
> with good sky visibility and set 3 different points into my device on the
> course that I call "PRACTICE". The practice course currently contains
> points
> in my shag ball area and (when I can sneak onto our range sometime down
> the
> road) some points on our range as well. While I don't know exact distances
> from these three neighborhood points to anything, I am going to treat the
> repeatability of the distance measurements as kind of a proxy for absolute
> accuracy (it can't be any better than that).
>
> I took the following distance measurements to Points #1/2/3 from a spot in
> my driveway over a 12 hour period (2-3 hours between each measurement).
>
> P1 - 120, 121, 118, 118, 122, 116
> P2 - 293, 293, 290, 286, 287, 291
> P3 - 177, 177, 175, 171, 179, 173
>
> I also did another interesting experiment where I took these same
> measurements, walked 15 yards out/back to the same spot, waited 5 seconds
> and recorded, repeat. Here is the data
>
> P1 - 122, 122, 117, 115, 120
> P2 - 294, 294, 287, 287, 291
> P3 - 179, 179, 172, 177, 177
>
> It seems to me the variation over a very short period of time is similar
> to
> the variation that you see over much longer period of times (when the
> satellite configurations have changed dramatically).
>
> I will also say that on rare occasions I have seen yardages show up that
> are
> obviously 10+ yards off - they are almost always temporary (10-20 seconds
> max), but that does leave a question in your mind. I have been very
> surprised at how convenient it is to have yardages 'in your pocket' even
> when there are ked sprinkler nearby. However at this point I tend to
> always have an eye on posted yardages as I haven't yet developed 100%
> confidence in the device. I'm guessing that this will change (see next
> paragraph).
>
> As I've said I do not feel that this is (from my perspective) the final
> say
> on accuracy. I get the feeling that the longer the device gets continuous
> information, the better it works. My current usage mode on the course is
> to
> carry it around in my pocket. It often loses satellite signals when in my
> pocket and I'm in a golf cart. It doesn't take long to find them again
> once
> it is out of my pocket (a few seconds), but I wonder if accuracy is lost
> in
> this case. I say this because I have been out in my shag area (device
> never
> in my pocket) where I have two prominent "target trees" ked and they
> "never move" by more than 2 yards (that I've noticed). So there may be
> ways
> to improve the accuracy that I'm describing. The test data was created by
> "turn it on, wait for the satellite syncing process, take the measurement,
> turn it off and repeat two'ish hours later". That may not be optimum.
>
> With 'WAAS Off' I see 15 yard errors with some frequency. With
> Stabilization
> Off things will often drift up/down/up/down by 12 yards or so a couple
> times/minute (not always). So for now I am always running with WAAS on and
> Stabilization on.
>
> Now for the only serious drawback that I've encountered (and it will, by
> definition, be temporary).
>
> The six courses that I play all had Front/Center/Back information
> available
> online that I used. For the most part this information has seemed to be
> accurate within the parameters that I've described (quite frankly the
> typical accuracy on the course 'feels' more accurate than my test data for
> the most part).
>
> There are a number of holes that I play that have a fair number of
> lay-up/carry points that I'm interested in. For example two of the par 5's
> on one course that I play have 15 to 20 bunkers on both holes. I entered
> all
> the points that I'm interested in into the courses on the iGolf device
> while
> at home using my own 'coding' (a user defined point can have up to five
> alphanumerics). I mapped all the points to the easy chair in our sunroom
> (it
> is 2973 yards to carry the water on hole #14 - better use a 3W :-). My
> plan
> was to remap the points on the course as I played and encountered them.
> Here
> is "the problem".
>
> The device has two priy operating modes - "Play Golf" or "Map Course".
> In
> order to map a point while in "Play Golf" mode you have to back out of
> "Play
> Golf" mode, go into map mode, select the course (cursoring through any
> number of other courses), select the hole (cursoring through each hole
> starting with hole #1), cursor to the predefined point, etc. etc. Then you
> reverse all this to go back to play golf mode. Depending this could easily
> be 30 to 40 'keystroke' actions - each being very simple but it just isn't
> something that fits into the typical rhythm of a game of golf in many
> cases.
> So doing this while playing is awkward at best, unless you simply play
> without using Play Mode. In this case it is very simple as the mapping
> process (once you are standing on the point to be mapped) is about 5
> seconds
> max.
>
> As I said this will work itself out over time - but will take a good bit
> longer than I had expected. It would REALLY be nice if there were some
> kind
> of hot key that would send you to 'Map Mode' on the course/hole that you
> are
> on in 'Play Mode' (and hot key back, of course).
>
> My initial impressions.
>
> dave
>
>
|
| | |
Date: 17 Sep 2006 12:22:43
From: sfb
Subject: Re: GPS Type "Rangefinder" Review (iGolf)
|
Who maps iGolf courses? Unless the mapping is done accurately, GPS devices
suck. SkyCaddy courses may be professionally mapped with fancy gadget that
has multiple antennas and a lap top computer.
"Piturno" <stringent@aol.com > wrote in message
news:0aCdncDC8L-07pDYnZ2dnUVZ_rKdnZ2d@adelphia.com...
>I have an igolf GPS like you and it is always within 3 yards. I often play
>with my brother who has a SkyCaddie and both are accurate within 2-3 yards.
>The key is to keep it out in the open, not in your pocket. And also you do
>have to stand still 5-10 seconds so the signal will 'stabilize'.
>
> "Dave Lee" <DaveLeeNC@ix.netcom.RemovE.com> wrote in message
> news:Ce1Pg.12594$bM.6242@newsread4.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>> This is a cut/paste of a review that I posted on FGI a few weeks ago. I
>> wouldn't change much at this point other than to say that I'm still not
>> sure
>> if there are things that can be done to improve accuracy (my best
>> estimate
>> is no better than 5 yards - OK, but just barely from my perspective).
>> Continuous 'satellite data availability' still seems like it matters from
>> what I can observe anecdotally and in my current usage mode (device
>> carried
>> around in my pocket) I don't achieve that.
>>
>> I have basic understanding of how GPS works, but am not sure how they do
>> it
>> without either a very accurate/synchronized clock or an absolute
>> land-reference for calibration. So if anyone out there wants to share
>> operational details, that would be appreciated.
>>
>> The usual disclaimers (I have no personal/financial interests in iGolf or
>> FGI). Here is the previously FGI-posted review.
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> -------
>>
>> I chose a GPS device over the laser types priily due to ease of use
>> considerations. If everyone on our courses used laser devices and folks
>> standing around trying to acquire a target from 190 yards was the norm, I
>> might have purchased a laser type. To me their major advantage is highly
>> accurate yardages to the pin from inside 100 yards. But these aren't the
>> norm around here, are bulky in comparison to the iGolf device, and (in my
>> limited experience) are sometimes difficult to use. Based on what I've
>> seen
>> I don't think I'd change my mind.
>>
>> I chose iGolf GPS Caddie over SkyCaddie because I didn't like the
>> basically
>> mandatory annual fee that the SkyCaddie requires, and the SkyCaddie only
>> supports 3 user defined points which I find inadequate.
>>
>> At a high level this is a well designed/manufactured and easy to use
>> device.
>> Despite things that I've read, I'm finding battery life to be quite
>> acceptable. My experience so far is that (using new 2500 maHr
>> rechargeable
>> AA batteries) the device will go 3 rounds on a single set of batteries.
>> Battery life is a non-issue, (so far).
>>
>> Functionally the device works with two buttons. One is an 'Escape' button
>> that generally performs a 'backup' or 'cancel' function. The other is a
>> combination four-direction cursor key and 'push to enter' key. You
>> typically
>> cursor around on the screen to select what you want to do and push to
>> select. During normal play you are generally not many 'keystrokes' from
>> where-ever you are to what you want to do next, although there is (in my
>> mind) a MAJOR exception to this for one specific case.
>>
>> Accuracy is of course a priy consideration. My experience is limited
>> thus
>> far, but I'm finding the accuracy to be 'OK, but just barely'. I still
>> wonder if I'll learn a few things that might improve this (more about
>> this
>> later), but at this point I would call it no better than 5 yards (with
>> very
>> occasional exceptions).
>>
>> From what I have learned from a limited amount of web research, the
>> government imposed randomization of commercially used GPS signals
>> (reducing
>> accuracy significantly) is no longer in effect. There is also the WAAS
>> system which is 25 land-stations spread across the US plus 3
>> geosynchronous
>> satellites. The WAAS stations continuously read the GPS satellite signals
>> and generate compensation information that is sent to the geosynchronous
>> WAAS satellites and rebroadcast for use by GPS devices (WAAS is supported
>> by
>> the iGolf device). From my limited experimentation WAAS should be enabled
>> (at least in my area of south-central NC).
>>
>> To get a better feel for accuracy I walked around our neighborhood in
>> areas
>> with good sky visibility and set 3 different points into my device on the
>> course that I call "PRACTICE". The practice course currently contains
>> points
>> in my shag ball area and (when I can sneak onto our range sometime down
>> the
>> road) some points on our range as well. While I don't know exact
>> distances
>> from these three neighborhood points to anything, I am going to treat the
>> repeatability of the distance measurements as kind of a proxy for
>> absolute
>> accuracy (it can't be any better than that).
>>
>> I took the following distance measurements to Points #1/2/3 from a spot
>> in
>> my driveway over a 12 hour period (2-3 hours between each measurement).
>>
>> P1 - 120, 121, 118, 118, 122, 116
>> P2 - 293, 293, 290, 286, 287, 291
>> P3 - 177, 177, 175, 171, 179, 173
>>
>> I also did another interesting experiment where I took these same
>> measurements, walked 15 yards out/back to the same spot, waited 5 seconds
>> and recorded, repeat. Here is the data
>>
>> P1 - 122, 122, 117, 115, 120
>> P2 - 294, 294, 287, 287, 291
>> P3 - 179, 179, 172, 177, 177
>>
>> It seems to me the variation over a very short period of time is similar
>> to
>> the variation that you see over much longer period of times (when the
>> satellite configurations have changed dramatically).
>>
>> I will also say that on rare occasions I have seen yardages show up that
>> are
>> obviously 10+ yards off - they are almost always temporary (10-20 seconds
>> max), but that does leave a question in your mind. I have been very
>> surprised at how convenient it is to have yardages 'in your pocket' even
>> when there are ked sprinkler nearby. However at this point I tend to
>> always have an eye on posted yardages as I haven't yet developed 100%
>> confidence in the device. I'm guessing that this will change (see next
>> paragraph).
>>
>> As I've said I do not feel that this is (from my perspective) the final
>> say
>> on accuracy. I get the feeling that the longer the device gets continuous
>> information, the better it works. My current usage mode on the course is
>> to
>> carry it around in my pocket. It often loses satellite signals when in my
>> pocket and I'm in a golf cart. It doesn't take long to find them again
>> once
>> it is out of my pocket (a few seconds), but I wonder if accuracy is lost
>> in
>> this case. I say this because I have been out in my shag area (device
>> never
>> in my pocket) where I have two prominent "target trees" ked and they
>> "never move" by more than 2 yards (that I've noticed). So there may be
>> ways
>> to improve the accuracy that I'm describing. The test data was created by
>> "turn it on, wait for the satellite syncing process, take the
>> measurement,
>> turn it off and repeat two'ish hours later". That may not be optimum.
>>
>> With 'WAAS Off' I see 15 yard errors with some frequency. With
>> Stabilization
>> Off things will often drift up/down/up/down by 12 yards or so a couple
>> times/minute (not always). So for now I am always running with WAAS on
>> and
>> Stabilization on.
>>
>> Now for the only serious drawback that I've encountered (and it will, by
>> definition, be temporary).
>>
>> The six courses that I play all had Front/Center/Back information
>> available
>> online that I used. For the most part this information has seemed to be
>> accurate within the parameters that I've described (quite frankly the
>> typical accuracy on the course 'feels' more accurate than my test data
>> for
>> the most part).
>>
>> There are a number of holes that I play that have a fair number of
>> lay-up/carry points that I'm interested in. For example two of the par
>> 5's
>> on one course that I play have 15 to 20 bunkers on both holes. I entered
>> all
>> the points that I'm interested in into the courses on the iGolf device
>> while
>> at home using my own 'coding' (a user defined point can have up to five
>> alphanumerics). I mapped all the points to the easy chair in our sunroom
>> (it
>> is 2973 yards to carry the water on hole #14 - better use a 3W :-). My
>> plan
>> was to remap the points on the course as I played and encountered them.
>> Here
>> is "the problem".
>>
>> The device has two priy operating modes - "Play Golf" or "Map Course".
>> In
>> order to map a point while in "Play Golf" mode you have to back out of
>> "Play
>> Golf" mode, go into map mode, select the course (cursoring through any
>> number of other courses), select the hole (cursoring through each hole
>> starting with hole #1), cursor to the predefined point, etc. etc. Then
>> you
>> reverse all this to go back to play golf mode. Depending this could
>> easily
>> be 30 to 40 'keystroke' actions - each being very simple but it just
>> isn't
>> something that fits into the typical rhythm of a game of golf in many
>> cases.
>> So doing this while playing is awkward at best, unless you simply play
>> without using Play Mode. In this case it is very simple as the mapping
>> process (once you are standing on the point to be mapped) is about 5
>> seconds
>> max.
>>
>> As I said this will work itself out over time - but will take a good bit
>> longer than I had expected. It would REALLY be nice if there were some
>> kind
>> of hot key that would send you to 'Map Mode' on the course/hole that you
>> are
>> on in 'Play Mode' (and hot key back, of course).
>>
>> My initial impressions.
>>
>> dave
>>
>>
>
>
|
| | | |
Date: 17 Sep 2006 17:15:15
From: Dave Lee
Subject: Re: GPS Type "Rangefinder" Review (iGolf)
|
"sfb" <sfb@spam.net > wrote in message
news:rv2dnW95urvO65DYnZ2dnUVZ_sSdnZ2d@comcast.com...
> Who maps iGolf courses? Unless the mapping is done accurately, GPS
devices
> suck. SkyCaddy courses may be professionally mapped with fancy gadget
that
> has multiple antennas and a lap top computer.
>
snip
From what I understand the iGolf folks map from satellite images. I don't
know how to assess the accuracy of this process, but my experience so far
would indicate that the mapping is at least as accurate as the technology.
The iGolf device is really set up for 'user mapping', despite the
inconvenience of 'mapping as you play'.
dave
|
| | | | |
Date: 17 Sep 2006 16:28:38
From: sfb
Subject: Re: GPS Type "Rangefinder" Review (iGolf)
|
If iGolf maps from satellite images, the mapping is only as good as the
resolution of the images which can be poor in rural areas and the skill of
the eyeballs doing the mapping. Those of us living in areas where the
satellite images are old and pre-date new golf course construction are shit
out of luck.
"Dave Lee" <DaveLeeNC@ix.netcom.RemovE.com > wrote in message
news:DofPg.2669$UG4.2569@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>
> "sfb" <sfb@spam.net> wrote in message
> news:rv2dnW95urvO65DYnZ2dnUVZ_sSdnZ2d@comcast.com...
>> Who maps iGolf courses? Unless the mapping is done accurately, GPS
> devices
>> suck. SkyCaddy courses may be professionally mapped with fancy gadget
> that
>> has multiple antennas and a lap top computer.
>>
> snip
>
> From what I understand the iGolf folks map from satellite images. I don't
> know how to assess the accuracy of this process, but my experience so far
> would indicate that the mapping is at least as accurate as the technology.
>
> The iGolf device is really set up for 'user mapping', despite the
> inconvenience of 'mapping as you play'.
>
> dave
>
>
|
| | | | | |
Date: 17 Sep 2006 22:55:07
From: Dave Lee
Subject: Re: GPS Type "Rangefinder" Review (iGolf)
|
"sfb" <sfb@spam.net > wrote in message
news:3tmdnaB8vahrMpDYnZ2dnUVZ_vOdnZ2d@comcast.com...
> If iGolf maps from satellite images, the mapping is only as good as the
> resolution of the images which can be poor in rural areas and the skill of
> the eyeballs doing the mapping. Those of us living in areas where the
> satellite images are old and pre-date new golf course construction are
shit
> out of luck.
I believe that this is either an extremely rare issue, or possible
non-existent. Maybe there are all kinds of areas out there without accurate
satellite image data available, but I doubt it - I also admit that this is a
guess. The iGolf website refers to "using various methods" to map courses.
To me the accuracy of the iGolf supplied data is only of minor importance.
If it is wrong it is pretty simple to remap the error (per my review, just
not as easy as I think it should be). From my perspective being SOL is
highly speculative to just plain incorrect. I was willing to buy the device
when the iGolf website said that only two of the six courses that I play
regularly were mapped (the other four have since been mapped).
However maybe you always play a different course every round in areas that
aren't accurately mapped that have mostly brand new golf courses. Who knows.
dave
>
> "Dave Lee" <DaveLeeNC@ix.netcom.RemovE.com> wrote in message
> news:DofPg.2669$UG4.2569@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> >
> > "sfb" <sfb@spam.net> wrote in message
> > news:rv2dnW95urvO65DYnZ2dnUVZ_sSdnZ2d@comcast.com...
> >> Who maps iGolf courses? Unless the mapping is done accurately, GPS
> > devices
> >> suck. SkyCaddy courses may be professionally mapped with fancy gadget
> > that
> >> has multiple antennas and a lap top computer.
> >>
> > snip
> >
> > From what I understand the iGolf folks map from satellite images. I
don't
> > know how to assess the accuracy of this process, but my experience so
far
> > would indicate that the mapping is at least as accurate as the
technology.
> >
> > The iGolf device is really set up for 'user mapping', despite the
> > inconvenience of 'mapping as you play'.
> >
> > dave
> >
> >
>
>
|
| |
Date: 17 Sep 2006 07:18:41
From: dsc
Subject: Re: GPS Type "Rangefinder" Review (iGolf)
|
I recently had the chance to test my laser against a couple sky caddie
type gps devices. The laser is reported to be acccurate to a yard or
two and the caddies were always within a yard or so of the laser.
However, there was one hole at Pawley's Plantation where we had a
strange event. The hole is a short par 3 listed @69 yards on the card
but ked at 88 yards on a rail road tie. The green is surounded by
water except for the walk up that comes in from the right side. It was
also not a real deep green. I lasered it @88, I beleive the sky caddie
agreed. he flag was back that day. I hit a hard 60* which I rarely hit
more than about 75 yards unless I skull it. It flew high and pretty and
landed on the back of the green not more than 5 feet from being over
and maybe 15 feet from the pin. Everyone else in my group air-mailed
the green with what they swore was their 80 yard clubs. The wind was
nothing to speak of and the elevation was basically level. While I
maintain that it had to be with a yard or so of 88 yards to that
flag... it sure appeared to play about 10 yards shorter and I can't
explain why. I do not remember what the caddie gave for the front and
rear of the green. If I lasered the frotn off the green... I don't
remember than numbber either. I expected my 60* to clear the water and
make the green and leave me an uphill putt (possibly of some length).
Suprise... suprise. :)
BTW - I do like the caddies very much. They are more convenient to play
with that the laser and are small enough to carry on your belt. That's
the part I like best. I beleive you can get the info you need quicker
with them than you can with the laser (not that the laser takes all
that long).
|
| |
Date: 17 Sep 2006 06:25:14
From: S McFarlane
Subject: Re: GPS Type "Rangefinder" Review (iGolf)
|
"Dave Lee" <DaveLeeNC@ix.netcom.RemovE.com > wrote in message
news:Ce1Pg.12594$bM.6242@newsread4.news.pas.earthlink.net...
What all of these devices need is the ability to enter long/lat data
offline. Google earth allows you to get sufficient resolution on all the
points you'd like on a golf course, assuming it has been around for awhile.
But Google Earth is no help if you can't enter waypoints with map
coordinates (which appears to be the case with all golf-optimized GPS
systems).
Accuracy is also the major issue with these systems for golf use. A 10 yard
error is very significant in golf terms. That's a club, and what do I need
an expensive device if it can't tell me accurately what club I should have
in my hand (wind, slope, mishits, etc. not considered). I can eyeball a
shot if all I need to do is get within a club's distance, and that's free.
A funny thing about GPS systems in golf applications: many people are
completely oblivious to these accuracy issues. They believe the GPS info is
completely reliable, and do not even consider that it might not be right. A
few weeks ago we were on the tee box of a par 3, and the carts had GPS
capabilities. I was walking, and so I had to rely on the old-fashioned
ways. I had also played the course recently, so I pretty much knew the
yardage from my previous shot at it. It was right at 150 yards, but the GPS
systems had it at 165. When I said I thought the GPS was off (if for no
other reason that the pin was dead center and a sprinkler head about 3 yards
in front of the tee had it at 146 yds), one of the guys playing with us said
"The GPS don't lie." I don't think he had any clue about error issues with
GPS systems.
The really strange thing is, the rest of the group played the hole as if it
were 165 yards, and I played it at 150 yards. Nobody was more than 30 feet
off distance-wise. I wonder if the subconscious mind was at work on whoever
was wrong about the distance. It's the better part of 2 clubs difference,
but everybody seemed to have the right club!
Scott
|
| | |
Date: 17 Sep 2006 14:18:46
From: Howard Brazee
Subject: Re: GPS Type "Rangefinder" Review (iGolf)
|
On Sun, 17 Sep 2006 06:25:14 GMT, "S McFarlane"
<skottymac@verizon.net > wrote:
>A funny thing about GPS systems in golf applications: many people are
>completely oblivious to these accuracy issues.
They assume that a GPS has measured where the pin is. But at my
course, they just enter 1, 2, or 3 to indicate today's pin position.
Although I saw two carts sitting next to each other, with almost 20
yards difference in the number on the back. I don't know the reason
for the difference - maybe pin position was missed, maybe there was a
different variable.
|
| | |
Date: 17 Sep 2006 03:58:28
From: sfb
Subject: Re: GPS Type "Rangefinder" Review (iGolf)
|
There is GPS and then there is GPS with WAAS - Wide Area Argumentation
System. My Sky Caddie which uses WAAS is usually within two or three yards
of course yardage kers which I attribute to a combination of WAAS being
within 3 yards 95% of the time and different folks finding the middle of the
green at different times. The biggest difference I seen recently was all of
five yards.
"S McFarlane" <skottymac@verizon.net > wrote in message
news:eT5Pg.753$W13.411@trnddc05...
>
> "Dave Lee" <DaveLeeNC@ix.netcom.RemovE.com> wrote in message
> news:Ce1Pg.12594$bM.6242@newsread4.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>
> What all of these devices need is the ability to enter long/lat data
> offline. Google earth allows you to get sufficient resolution on all the
> points you'd like on a golf course, assuming it has been around for
> awhile. But Google Earth is no help if you can't enter waypoints with map
> coordinates (which appears to be the case with all golf-optimized GPS
> systems).
>
> Accuracy is also the major issue with these systems for golf use. A 10
> yard error is very significant in golf terms. That's a club, and what do
> I need an expensive device if it can't tell me accurately what club I
> should have in my hand (wind, slope, mishits, etc. not considered). I can
> eyeball a shot if all I need to do is get within a club's distance, and
> that's free.
>
> A funny thing about GPS systems in golf applications: many people are
> completely oblivious to these accuracy issues. They believe the GPS info
> is completely reliable, and do not even consider that it might not be
> right. A few weeks ago we were on the tee box of a par 3, and the carts
> had GPS capabilities. I was walking, and so I had to rely on the
> old-fashioned ways. I had also played the course recently, so I pretty
> much knew the yardage from my previous shot at it. It was right at 150
> yards, but the GPS systems had it at 165. When I said I thought the GPS
> was off (if for no other reason that the pin was dead center and a
> sprinkler head about 3 yards in front of the tee had it at 146 yds), one
> of the guys playing with us said "The GPS don't lie." I don't think he
> had any clue about error issues with GPS systems.
>
> The really strange thing is, the rest of the group played the hole as if
> it were 165 yards, and I played it at 150 yards. Nobody was more than 30
> feet off distance-wise. I wonder if the subconscious mind was at work on
> whoever was wrong about the distance. It's the better part of 2 clubs
> difference, but everybody seemed to have the right club!
>
> Scott
>
>
|
|
