Forums

Help › Forums

Re: Meter speed question

rated by 0 users
Tue, Feb 6 2024 3:11 PM (25 replies)
  • SamSpayed
    4,902 Posts
    Thu, Feb 1 2024 11:45 AM

    Yiannis1970:

    From my test, at least to me, they are clear 3 things:

    There's no consistency in the game.

    I agree with you there 😁  But I attribute that inconsistency to the 'variance' that is built into WGT's internal formulas, whereas (I believe) you attribute it to VEM.  Variance, as we know, is not the same as VEM (although variance could certainly be influenced by VEM if, indeed, VEM is being used by WGT).

    Yiannis1970:
    There's no mathematical pattern between the meter speed of various balls.

    There has to be.  We could probably take the same driver (as the constant), hit a variety of balls with different meter speeds (eg. 2.0 / 2.5 / 3.0 / 3.5 / 4.0 / 4.5 / 5.0 / etc.) with it, and plot the different "time to ding" values for each on a graph to come up with a good estimate of the mathematical formula.

    Yiannis1970:
    And finally, that equipment affects more the meter speed than the balls. Surely is not an average between them. If i should have guessed, i would say around 60%-65% for the club and 40%-35% for the ball.

    This was actually what I was most interested in learning:  the weighting of the equipment meter speed vs. ball meter speed.  

    Thanks for doing your analysis 🍺

  • Yiannis1970
    3,270 Posts
    Fri, Feb 2 2024 4:11 AM

    SamSpayed:

    Yiannis1970:

    From my test, at least to me, they are clear 3 things:

    There's no consistency in the game.

    I agree with you there 😁  But I attribute that inconsistency to the 'variance' that is built into WGT's internal formulas, whereas (I believe) you attribute it to VEM.  Variance, as we know, is not the same as VEM (although variance could certainly be influenced by VEM if, indeed, VEM is being used by WGT).

    Yiannis1970:
    There's no mathematical pattern between the meter speed of various balls.

    There has to be.  We could probably take the same driver (as the constant), hit a variety of balls with different meter speeds (eg. 2.0 / 2.5 / 3.0 / 3.5 / 4.0 / 4.5 / 5.0 / etc.) with it, and plot the different "time to ding" values for each on a graph to come up with a good estimate of the mathematical formula.

    Yiannis1970:
    And finally, that equipment affects more the meter speed than the balls. Surely is not an average between them. If i should have guessed, i would say around 60%-65% for the club and 40%-35% for the ball.

    This was actually what I was most interested in learning:  the weighting of the equipment meter speed vs. ball meter speed.  

    Thanks for doing your analysis 🍺

     

    1. No, no, no...i wouldn't attribute this discrepancy to VEM. This is a stable discrepancy between various clubs eventhough WGT states that have the same caratteristics (for example 4.5 meter speed). It's just a bad display of the attributes of each club and/or balls (if you have watched my video you know what i am talking about) from WGT, but nothing to do with VEM.

     

    2. Reading this, i just realized that you haven't watched my video!!! I did exactly what you suggest and i came up with the difference in percentages. The discrepancies are random and not linear in order to get a mathematical pattern. Let's say for each 0.5 we have 10% of difference. Does not work at all like this. Watch the video if you like.

     

    3. You are welcome.

     

  • MioKontic
    4,591 Posts
    Fri, Feb 2 2024 5:32 AM

    Very interesting video and findings.  It lead me to a couple more questions:

    1)  Is the meter speed consistently the same for a ball?

    2)  Is the meter speed the same every game you play?

    There was a theory a few years ago that the meter speed for a ball wasn't totally consistent for each swing.  I think it was Andyson who did some testing and came up with the theory that there were 3 different speeds for any ball, each with just a very slight difference.  The belief was that this was to try and combat auto-dingers.  I remember Andyson also saying that he would always let the first swing run through, then hit the ball on the 2nd swing because firstly the speed was more consistent, and secondly it was less prone to meter spikes. I don't know how true this is, but I do remember once trying exactly this while playing an 18-hole round on Royal St Georges, might have been in the Virtual Open qualifier in 2011 or 2012, and had my best ever 18-hole score at the time.  Never did it after that.

    With regards to the second question, i always feel my meter is smoother and slower in the mornings.  I've always wondered if my mind is just playing tricks on me or is it true.

    So, having seen Yiannis's video, I decided to do some testing myself.  I played 10 swings with a level 81 TM ball and then 10 swings with a level 47 TM ball.  I did this last night - late evening of 1st Feb.  In a similar way to Yiannis, I slowed down the video in order to do the timing.  Unfortunately I kept making mistakes during the timing of the 10 swings, sometimes forgetting to start the timer or clicking a fraction too late as the meter starts the downswing, occasionally clicking the RESET button by mistake instead of the STOP button, and then almost every time I would think I've got my 10 timings and there was another swing! (There was definitely only 10, I counted them afterwards at normal playback speed)  So, I abandoned it for the evening (had been doing it unsuccessfully for about an hour!) and decided I would finish it today.  This morning I did another video with 10 swings on each of the two balls so that I can compare timings for different parts of the day.  Unfortunately once again, when I was doing the timings I kept messing up, but I will get it done, just bear with me.

    One thing I did learn from last night is that the timings for the level 81 TM ball were mostly between 10.7-10.8, and for the level 47 TM ball between 10.0-10.2.  This was with the playback running at 25% of its original speed so that I could try click more accurately.  Now obviously 1/10th and 2/10ths of a second aren't much, and could be accounted for by my hand/eye coordination when clicking the START button at beginning of the downswing.  However, as you well know, the meter accelerates as it reaches the ding, so any difference in the time would definitely result in missing the ding, which would definitely affect any auto-dingers.  And it wouldn't be difficult to program - you just put in an adjustment factor, random within a range, probably similar to what they do for precision.

    Later today I'll try get timings to comapre morning and evening to see if there was any difference and I'll post my findings.

     

  • Yiannis1970
    3,270 Posts
    Sun, Feb 4 2024 3:37 PM

    Why don't you try to playback the video at maximum slow motion as i did? It's easier to get accurate results.

     

    Thank you for the input and for testing.

     

    PS

     

    As soon i have an answer to your questions (need testing), i will report back.

  • MioKontic
    4,591 Posts
    Mon, Feb 5 2024 10:22 AM

    Yiannis1970:
    Why don't you try to playback the video at maximum slow motion as i did?

    I used Windows Media Player and 25% was the slowest.  It was also very difficult to stop the timer exactly when the meter reached the ding line because the playback was so jittery due to the slow motion.

    However, I just had a go at using Microsoft Clipchamp.  I was able to slow the playback down to 10% of the original speed and I managed to get some results.  I discounted the quickest and slowest times as they could well have been down to my clicking, so the middle 8 times were accepted.

    Evening timings
    L81 TM - between 27.32 - 27.45 seconds. (27.17 & 27.49 discounted)
    L47 TM - between 25.59 - 25.81 seconds. (25.26 & 25.82 discounted)

    Morning timings
    L81 TM - between 27.21 - 27.50 seconds. (27.20 & 27.52 discounted)
    L47 TM - between 25.52 - 25.73 seconds. (25.44 & 25.84 discounted)

    Well, it seems there is no difference whatever the time of day it is, so I can only assume my eyes are playing tricks on me.  It doesn't totally disprove that there isn't a very slight difference in the time it takes the meter to reach the ding (to try combat auto-dingers), even a tenth of a second, but it's not something I can test accurately enough to say either way.

    It occured to me that maybe it's not the time it takes to reach the ding line, but the accaleration of the downswing meter that may be different between swings.  And because of the way Clipchamp handles slow playback, I think I can take timings at different points on the meter to see if there is a difference.  So I will do this and feed back the results.

  • Yiannis1970
    3,270 Posts
    Tue, Feb 6 2024 3:11 PM

    MioKontic:

     It doesn't totally disprove that there isn't a very slight difference in the time it takes the meter to reach the ding (to try combat auto-dingers), even a tenth of a second, but it's not something I can test accurately enough to say either way.

     

    True.

     

RSS