still have to work on that offset
Here is your Offset. Measured in "squares"
C20 = Yards to the pin.
Once you get the offset, go to reverse view and move the arrow right that many squares.
Example. A 15yd flop will yield an offset of 1.77 squares. go to the REVERSE view, grab the pointer and move it right 1.77 squares
Interesting Splash Lewis, it is something I have pondered upon lots, that shot was hit with 26 yards of power I do believe out of 35% sand, but the actual distance to pin was only 13 yard - exactly half.
My offset at the present time works on the actual shot power, I have often wondered just that - does it work off the actual distance to pin or the shot input distance the ball is hit - so in this example it presents the offset as it would be for 26 yards, which is around 10 feet - which was about 2x what the offset turned out to be (it should have been around 5 feet).
Looking at those figures I have now added an extra scaling which says multiply the offset by:
actual distance to pin/ shot hit yardage
which in this case would have been x 13/26, or 1/2, 0.5.
That would have got me right on the pin so I am trialing this at the moment, I will note what you have said there because you appear to be taking the actual distance to pin and that would have worked out pretty well too though my predictor would have given a null result, it would see 13 as out of range, presented a negative gibberish number that would in-turn have yielded a zero which means out of range, it just means the predictor is suggesting the 20 yard flop, but obviously that's no good here because it is in range so I have to find a way that it will accept supposed out of range distances when hitting out of roughs that require in-range powers and this fix of mine would appear to be the solution. But as long as we find a fix that works for our own individual models that's the main thing, there is no right and no wrong with these things - just what works.
Just as an aside - has anyone noticed the amount of cr@pspeak on the forums these days, just loads and loads of rubbish-speak and nobody is doing anything new or innovative - you have to flip back to around pre-2015 for all the good stuff.
These days it's just absolute waffle with nothing fresh to offer - apart from people like Splash Lewis and Myself who are always working on new stuff, so don't even dare mock what either of us are doing or discussing - we are a rarity among this stale bit chy community that has run out of ideas.
Oh look - something new and innovative on the forums...
FCCPPP - 2nd gen with preliminary Chip-in and Pitch-in predictors
lols, look at this!!
As I hard-stitch the 115yard Mackdaddy wedge in I find myself having to execute this particular line of command!!
The logic is complex because there are 2 paths that can be taken - depending on whether the 115 yard wedge is switched in - they are 100yard wedge to 120yard pitching wedge and 115yard wedge to version 2 of the 120yard pitching wedge which has different limits from the first version of that club!! Because of this the 135 yard iron has to be ready to accept overflow from either of them!!!
Not only this particular complexity, the punch also adds to this mental spaghetti by cutting in at 84 yards, 96 yards and 103 yards as the 100yd cleveraland, 115ysd macdaddy and 120 yard RSi pitching wedge kick in and out of their operational ranges.
I have also added cream to the quality of this pie by imposing a limit in the final user screen which tells the G.U.I to return a zero if the result is between 80 and 103 yards for a full shot, this is added to prompt the user to use the FCPP and implement a punch instead. in this way the user will never have to remember the range over which the pitching wedge and macdaddy wedge operate and thus take the full shot in error. This limit has to be imposed at the very last stage such are the intricacies of rough, ball and club compensations - they can push an out of range value back in to range all the way up to the final presentation, thus the need for this limit toi be set at the very end of the chain - these are the complexities you face when working on such a powerful hyper-machine like La Ferrari 2019 and I have truly excelled myself in this 4th stage of development.
The logic has been stunningly intricate, complex and liable to error that would be like searching through a needle in a haystack!! But I have managed to complete the full chain for a headwind with no backspin - the whole circle of mayhem has been achieved for 1 set or circumstances and means I have made it, achieved it, because it's just a matter of copying over what I did now, there is no more intuition required....just a matter of time to sift through this massive jobbie - i am hiugely excited that I appear to be on the verge of succeeding in the incredibly intricate task of Hard Stitching the 115yard Macdaddy wedge and I will document all of this in due course - you are going to be gobsmacked with the logic and hold my intellect in the highest regard when you see what I have managed to achieve!!
All coming up soon in the final chapter of the La-Ferrari 2019 project log!!!!