Jump to content


Photo

Backspin


  • Please log in to reply
119 replies to this topic

#21 Dazmaniac

Dazmaniac

    Rock. Loud and Heavy

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 6,941 posts
  • LocationEngland, UK

Posted 24 February 2016 - 06:34 PM

tlvx, on 24 Feb 2016 - 5:00 PM, said:

Speculation isn't part of the testing paradigm. Do the stuff in the practice facility, to a flat surface, and you will find that the OP's observations are spot on.

 

All this excuse making does is hurt actual progress in realism.

 

I've had the 60W back up on the range maybe a few feet.

 

The OP is saying he had a shot land in the fairway (so presuming out on a course) and i backed up 10-15 feet. He gave no other details on the scenario. That is all I'm asking for.

 

I can go and hit balls a plenty on the range and find what I already have, but it might not be mirroring what the OP is experiencing.

 

Plus, I have seen shots from fairway bunkers on the PGA and European Tour's that when they land on a fairway, they spin back.


  • tlvx likes this

#22 tlvx

tlvx

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,441 posts

Posted 24 February 2016 - 06:41 PM

Dazmaniac, on 24 Feb 2016 - 6:34 PM, said:

I've had the 60W back up on the range maybe a few feet.

 

The OP is saying he had a shot land in the fairway (so presuming out on a course) and i backed up 10-15 feet. He gave no other details on the scenario. That is all I'm asking for.

 

I can go and hit balls a plenty on the range and find what I already have, but it might not be mirroring what the OP is experiencing.

 

Plus, I have seen shots from fairway bunkers on the PGA and European Tour's that when they land on a fairway, they spin back.

 

Can any video of this be produced as reference to its regularity to occur?

 

Hit any wedge, in this game, in the practice facility, to the flat fairway, at full power, and good snap. (full power in this game is 122%)

 

Observe the results. If you think it's realistic, or have seen it before... okay.

 

I'd argue that while it's possible to do this on greens, fairways usually aren't anywhere near as pliable to drawback, unless we're talking about designed slopes, like false fronts and what not.

 

Possible? Yes. Plausible, particularly at the lowest trajectory possible? -- Not so sure.



#23 smokey

smokey

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 24 posts

Posted 24 February 2016 - 06:43 PM

I see no problem with spin. I have recently had a (project a) golf ball back up about 30 feet on a green that had a small amount of back to front slope. I did not do anything special in my swing just swung down on the ball and struck it well. My point is with todays equipment this is possible. I like the spin the way it is.

#24 slouis

slouis

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 749 posts
  • LocationCalgary

Posted 24 February 2016 - 06:44 PM

I just want to say that I think the ball physics in PG are the most realistic of any computer golf game I have played.  I only asked about  backspin because it happened on a shot that hit the fairway and it surprised me. To be honest I don't recall if it hit a flat portion or a slope but then because it is not an issue with me I did not note the details. It was not meant as a criticism of the game or the ball physics, just a question.   The fact that the course management I use playing PG is the same that I use when playing real golf is a testament of how realistic the game and ball physics are.

I am now using RTS-M and one of the above replies said that it is easier to over hit with this control method and he is probably right as I was using MS prior to the latest update.


  • robbiet71 and tlvx like this

RTSM - Pro


#25 AwYea

AwYea

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 274 posts
  • LocationWest Virginia

Posted 24 February 2016 - 06:59 PM

Dazmaniac, on 24 Feb 2016 - 6:34 PM, said:

I've had the 60W back up on the range maybe a few feet.

 

The OP is saying he had a shot land in the fairway (so presuming out on a course) and i backed up 10-15 feet. He gave no other details on the scenario. That is all I'm asking for.

 

I can go and hit balls a plenty on the range and find what I already have, but it might not be mirroring what the OP is experiencing.

 

Plus, I have seen shots from fairway bunkers on the PGA and European Tour's that when they land on a fairway, they spin back.

 

Trust me can spin it back quite a bit. You can even get all the way up to a 8 iron and spin it back 3 to 5 ft. You got to hit it a 122% without being well out on the heel or toe.


PG + OGT & MP = Golfing Bliss! 

Steam-ahhyeaa


#26 tlvx

tlvx

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,441 posts

Posted 24 February 2016 - 07:01 PM

slouis, on 24 Feb 2016 - 6:44 PM, said:

I just want to say that I think the ball physics in PG are the most realistic of any computer golf game I have played.  I only asked about  backspin because it happened on a shot that hit the fairway and it surprised me. To be honest I don't recall if it hit a flat portion or a slope but then because it is not an issue with me I did not note the details. It was not meant as a criticism of the game or the ball physics, just a question.   The fact that the course management I use playing PG is the same that I use when playing real golf is a testament of how realistic the game and ball physics are.

I am now using RTS-M and one of the above replies said that it is easier to over hit with this control method and he is probably right as I was using MS prior to the latest update.

 

I agree with a lot of this, except the highlighted part.

 

I'm not so quick to just anoint an unfinished product, that clearly has some inconsistent physics, to be the most realistic... simply because I want the project to succeed.

 

We cannot just ignore, or sweep these instances under the rug... like, oh, I'll just trust that eventually they fix or improve it.

 

If none of us have seen something before on a golf course, or on Tour - with any regularity - than, it's nothing wrong with trying to ensure that the math behind it adds up correctly, lest some slight adjustments can be made that represent real golf better.

 

There's nothing wrong with getting better, even if you are the best.

 

If I see a ball morph under the lip of a bunker and emerge up through the underground to the green... I can't say that's the best I've seen in a golf game. Fortunately, I haven't been in the bunkers enough since the latest update to see if it's been fixed or not.

 

If I hit a putt that disappears through the turf, and into the cup, without ever touching the lip of the cup, I can't say that's the best I've seen in a golf game.

 

If I see a player that has a broken back, I can't say that's the best golfer I've seen in a golf game... particularly when the previous player's back wasn't broken.

 

I just look for improvements.

 

Yeah, I'd like this to be the best golf game. But, that want alone doesn't make it so.



#27 tlvx

tlvx

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,441 posts

Posted 24 February 2016 - 07:04 PM

AwYea, on 24 Feb 2016 - 6:59 PM, said:

Trust me can spin it back quite a bit. You can even get all the way up to a 8 iron and spin it back 3 to 5 ft. You got to hit it a 122% without being well out on the heel or toe.

 

I honestly think that the spin has improved slightly, since the previous build.

 

I think it's definitely possible to spin back an 8-Iron. Just not 30 feet of zip, like it was at one point.

 

My issue with over-spin in this game, is that it's far too linearly tied to swing speed, rather than launch trajectory.

 

In real life, hitting the ball harder doesn't guarantee significant backspin increase, particularly when lowering the trajectory, using a solid core ball, using certain equipment at certain launch angles... etcetera, etcetera.

 

But, this game would have us believe that we've completely changed all of our equipment to the highest possible loft, and golf-ball type nigh to a wiffle-ball - mid-swing - simply by breaching the overswing line.

 

The way this game works, the lower a wedge traj. is shaded, the harder it bites back, because the overspin this game pulls up, doesn't have time to dissipate.

 

The problem with that, is that it hadn't taken the launch trajectory enough into account, in the first place. So, we get backwards results. - More spin with a lower trajectory. When in point of fact, real golf produces the exact opposite result.

 

It honestly doesn't seem like the hardest fix in the world. I think the physics were closer to right, back in June of 2015. Starting in July, 2015, the builds started taking a curious turn, regarding golf physics. -- I've been keeping track of the changes with each successive build, because the clubs distances aren't anywhere near linear, and knowing the specifics of their quirks is the only way to get around the course unscathed.

 

So, it seems like if the launch trajectory was given a bit more consideration, as it is in real golf; and, overswing wasn't so linearly tied to exorbitant spin increases... the results should be more like what Tour players are able to produce at those same swing speeds.

 

The distance limits are always going to have to be arbitrary, because it's not like the game can allow a 150 mph swing speed, lest we want 400 yard drives to be the norm. But, the point is that each variable - swing speed, ball speed, launch trajectory, ball composition - should all have a more correct meaning, as it relates to actual golf physics.

 

I know... easier said than done. But, we have to try to make it realistic, right?

 

I'm just saying that this game's golf physics shouldn't completely breakdown within the narrow scope of the available overswing meter. It's not like it's meant to represent 150 mph swing speed or anything like that. So, it should be a bit more representative of what Tour Pros typically achieve when muscling up on a shot... which should be more related to distance gains than over-spin gains.

 

http://www.pgatour.c...stat.02401.html

 

http://www.pgatour.c...stat.02343.html

 

You can pretty much identify the guys with the best swings and best equipment setup, because they are the ones that maximize their swing speed to distance ratio.

 

But, there aren't any guys with slow swing speeds bombing it out there on Tour.

 

The Tour players with the top swing speeds are all the top bombers, almost exclusively.



#28 AwYea

AwYea

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 274 posts
  • LocationWest Virginia

Posted 24 February 2016 - 07:56 PM

Well tlvx we also have to consider the balls and equipment that haven't came out yet and what type of effects they will have on spin.

 

I'm not sure i follow what you're saying or agree that in-game lower wedges as you said(i'm assuming lower wedge means a 60W compared to a 64W and the 60W spinning more and backing up. I did try hitting the same club at 122% at low, normal and high and didn't see any real difference. I didn't take time to compare spin back distance with different lofted wedges.

 

Like i said, the Pro i mentioned earlier who qualifield for the US Senior Open hit the lowest wedge shot you've seen in your life and probably didn't have a club head speed of 105 mph, if that, and could spin it back as good as anyone including P Mickelson. I mean you could put him on the hardest British open greens and assuming there was no downwind he could spin it back a good 15 ft to 20 ft easily. He would even be spinning back his 9 and 8 iron.

 

My point is there is a difference in backspin and getting the ball to bite and getting a ball to suck back. You can hit a ball with a lot more backspin and height and it will only hit and bite. The longer the ball is in the air the more backspin it is going to lose when coming down that will take the spin and suck back away. I've heard people say that hitting it lower produces more spin in the game which i haven't seen in my honest opinion. If it was like that i would have to agree based on what i've seen IRL.


PG + OGT & MP = Golfing Bliss! 

Steam-ahhyeaa


#29 tlvx

tlvx

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,441 posts

Posted 24 February 2016 - 08:07 PM

AwYea, on 24 Feb 2016 - 7:56 PM, said:

Well tlvx we also have to consider the balls and equipment that haven't came out yet and what type of effects they will have on spin.

 

I'm not sure i follow what you're saying or agree that in-game lower wedges as you said(i'm assuming lower wedge means a 60W compared to a 64W and the 60W spinning more and backing up. I did try hitting the same club at 122% at low, normal and high and didn't see any real difference. I didn't take time to compare spin back distance with different lofted wedges.

 

Like i said, the Pro i mentioned earlier who qualifield for the US Senior Open hit the lowest wedge shot you've seen in your life and probably didn't have a club head speed of 105 mph, if that, and could spin it back as good as anyone including P Mickelson. I mean you could put him on the hardest British open greens and assuming there was no downwind he could spin it back a good 15 ft to 20 ft easily. He would even be spinning back his 9 and 8 iron.

 

My point is there is a difference in backspin and getting the ball to bite and getting a ball to suck back. You can hit a ball with a lot more backspin and height and it will only hit and bite. The longer the ball is in the air the more backspin it is going to lose when coming down that will take the spin and suck back away. I've heard people say that hitting it lower produces more spin in the game which i haven't seen in my honest opinion. If it was like that i would have to agree based on what i've seen IRL.

 

Lower trajectory, same wedge = more spin drawback in this game.

 

Conversely, Highest trajectory, same wedge = softer landing and less drawback than a lower traj. with the exact same wedge.

 

It's a flawed principle, because the launch trajectory should have more impact than spin dissipation.



#30 AwYea

AwYea

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 274 posts
  • LocationWest Virginia

Posted 24 February 2016 - 08:11 PM

tlvx, on 24 Feb 2016 - 8:07 PM, said:

Lower trajectory, same wedge = more spin drawback in this game.

 

Haven't seen it. What i did see it appeared hitting the ball in the middle produced slightly more spin than either high or low. Don't want to argue, and you've probably spent more time testing this, but i will honestly have to see a video proving it...just saying.


PG + OGT & MP = Golfing Bliss! 

Steam-ahhyeaa


#31 tlvx

tlvx

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,441 posts

Posted 24 February 2016 - 08:16 PM

AwYea, on 24 Feb 2016 - 8:11 PM, said:

Haven't seen it. What i did see it appeared hitting the ball in the middle produced slightly more spin than either high or low. Don't want to argue, and you've probably spent more time testing this, but i will honestly have to see a video proving it...just saying.

 

Just go to the range and test it out. It's been well documented here in these forums. Old news.

 

Move the loft up to the top, or down to the bottom of the meter; then hit some shots at maximum power with any wedge, and observe which has more backspin drawback, to a flat practice green. (with the same wedge, apples vs. apples)

 

I agree that the spin will have less chance do dissipate - the less time it's in the air. But, that doesn't change the fact that the launch trajectory should be the more significant factor as to what produces the level of spin RPM's to begin with.

 

Therefore, a lower launched ball should not have the same spin RPM's as a higher launched ball, when struck with the same club-head speed. -- And, in real life, does not. Which is why - in real life - each successive golf club produces more spin RPM's as the trajectory increases.

 

http://blog.trackman...age-tour-stats/

 

So, when the result in the game goes against common sense golf principles, it points out that there exist imbalances in the way different factors are, and should be affecting each shot.



#32 AwYea

AwYea

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 274 posts
  • LocationWest Virginia

Posted 24 February 2016 - 08:37 PM

I have ran out of things to say lol. This discussion started out about spinning the ball back, not just RPM spin rates. Like i said earlier there is a clear distinction between getting a ball to bite and spinning the ball back which i've already went into detail about.

 

I'm so confused know i don't even know if know what i'm talking about at the moment. :)


PG + OGT & MP = Golfing Bliss! 

Steam-ahhyeaa


#33 tlvx

tlvx

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,441 posts

Posted 24 February 2016 - 08:39 PM

AwYea, on 24 Feb 2016 - 8:37 PM, said:

I have ran out of things to say lol. This discussion started out about spinning the ball back, not just RPM spin rates. Like i said earlier there is a clear distinction between getting a ball to bite and spinning the ball back which i've already went into detail about.

 

I'm so confused know i don't even know if know what i'm talking about at the moment. :)

 

The RPM rate is directly tied to the backspin drawback produced. What do you mean. We're talking about the exact same thing.

 

I'm well aware of a ball checking up, versus drawing back... which is based on the percentage of power in this game.

 

-- Maybe I'm just not following the point you were leaning at about that.



#34 mebby

mebby

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3,517 posts
  • LocationCharlotte, NC

Posted 24 February 2016 - 08:40 PM

tlvx, on 24 Feb 2016 - 6:09 PM, said:

If you don't care if the physics are right with well struck shots, than why are you weighing in on the discussion, that you don't care whether the physics are right or not?

Obviously, you don't need to hunt for something if you know how to hit well struck shots. Everyone playing the game has the same physics.

Stop making excuses for the inaccuracies, and then trying to blame the messenger for having some kind of agenda for merely reporting these results.

Absolutely I have an agenda. And it's to improve the game. Not to sit here and be ridiculed for reporting bugs.

Trying to qualify bug reports to be within your personal play zone of "95% to 110%," while everyone else must have to be exactly like you... is just selfish and shortsighted.

No one cares that someone doesn't care that something isn't working, just because they personally don't even use it.

That doesn't give them the right to ridicule those that do utilize those features of the game, and in the course of using them, discover bugs.


Sensitive much? I was in no way ridiculing you. Just stating my opinion. I'm pretty sure that's allowed here.

Steam Name: Turnerm05

Swing Type: RTSC | Tour Pro | XB1 Wireless

 

Intel i7 4790K 4.0GHz

GTX 1080 Founders Edition

16GB DDR3

1 TB Samsung 850 EVO


#35 Dazmaniac

Dazmaniac

    Rock. Loud and Heavy

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 6,941 posts
  • LocationEngland, UK

Posted 24 February 2016 - 08:44 PM

AwYea, on 24 Feb 2016 - 8:37 PM, said:

I have ran out of things to say lol. This discussion started out about spinning the ball back, not just RPM spin rates. Like i said earlier there is a clear distinction between getting a ball to bite and spinning the ball back which i've already went into detail about.

 

I'm so confused know i don't even know if know what i'm talking about at the moment. :)

 

Exactly, and I still have no idea what club the OP was using to get this 10-15 ft of backspin on the fairway. Where he did it, what the conditions were, was there slope involved, was there any wind, was it firm, was it soft. If the OP would at least back up his findings with a bit  more info, we might get somewhere.

 

We are effectively still testing, but if he is offering a bug report, it is missing a lot of content.



#36 tlvx

tlvx

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,441 posts

Posted 24 February 2016 - 08:45 PM

mebby, on 24 Feb 2016 - 8:40 PM, said:

Sensitive much? I was in no way ridiculing you. Just stating my opinion. I'm pretty sure that's allowed here.

 

There's a difference between having an opinion on the game, and having an opinion on an individual user's *agenda*

 

No, it doesn't matter that you play between "95% and 110%" if the bug report is about something that happens at 111%.

 

Obviously, that's a ridiculous way - thus ridicule - to assert that someone else has an agenda, as if they should be limited to your personal preferences for the scope of gameplay that should be considered eligible for bug reports.

 

As far as you're concerned, since you don't breach a certain portion of the overswing meter, it's out of sight and out of mind, and no one else deserves to be able to play at 111%, unless they are willing to be okay with breaking the game in the process.



#37 frank70

frank70

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,538 posts
  • LocationGermany

Posted 24 February 2016 - 08:48 PM

tlvx, on 24 Feb 2016 - 8:39 PM, said:

The RPM rate is directly tied to the backspin drawback produced. What do you mean. We're talking about the exact same thing.

 

I'm well aware of a ball checking up, versus drawing back... which is based on the percentage of power in this game.

 

-- Maybe I'm just not following the point you were leaning at about that.

Just for understanding: Are you talking mainly about spin effects when you go 122% power/overswing - or do you talk about spin effect in the 100 % range?



#38 tlvx

tlvx

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,441 posts

Posted 24 February 2016 - 08:53 PM

frank70, on 24 Feb 2016 - 8:48 PM, said:

Just for understanding: Are you talking mainly about spin effects when you go 122% power/overswing - or do you talk about spin effect in the 100 % range?

 

Over-swing, up to the max. Basically the way this game is playing now. 100 percent is the maximum power that can be generated with all clubs except Driver. (which is a separate but related issue to these inconsistent physics)

 

With all clubs except Driver, basically anything above 100 percent is being almost completely converted to over-spin, and ramps up to insane (read:unrealistic) RPM increases, within the narrow scope of 101% to 122%.

 

But, instead of just that... the over-swing area is essentially also creating a quasi higher launch angle, regardless of whether or not one has been selected... and, even if the lowest launch angle has been selected.

 

So, the over-swing area is basically causing the otherwise solid golf physics to all but completely break down in this game.

 

So, they can either say 100 mph is the fastest swing speed the game will allow, and remove the broken over-swing meter... or fix the resultant over-swing physics to be more in line with the results that actually occur at greater swing speeds, regarding over-swing. -- It's easy enough to find these statistical results - because there are several Tour players that produce similar swing speeds.

 

Naturally, there will always be hard limits, in a video golf environment. But, the results should make sense at these limits, unless the factors within are greater than what has already been recorded into golf history.



#39 Dazmaniac

Dazmaniac

    Rock. Loud and Heavy

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 6,941 posts
  • LocationEngland, UK

Posted 24 February 2016 - 09:37 PM

I guess this is what Slouis is referring to.

 

This is a 60W hit at 120% with my Amateur 3C player on the range. 2 MPH wind, normal firmness.

 

 

Hit at 100%, in same conditions, the ball lands, checks slightly and releases out a few feet.

 

Did same test with 120% hits for 56W, 52W, PW, and 9i and all had varying amounts of backspin on the fairway. Not until I got to the 8i did the shot just check and stop on third bounce.

 

I would just like to add though, that these little niggles aside, the game is playing so good at the minute. Moving back to my 3C TP game has been great and with that little bit of wiggle room around the snap not penalizing distance as much as older builds, grooving the swing to hit draws and fades is an absolute joy.



#40 AwYea

AwYea

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 274 posts
  • LocationWest Virginia

Posted 24 February 2016 - 09:55 PM

I swore i was going to let this go but it has to be said because tlvx is misleading people. tlvx you can spout trackman numbers till your blue in the face but a trackman or any other device out there only records the launch RPM spin rate.

 

In order for it to truly track bite or suck back it would have to track the RPM spin rate for the total flight of the ball and record the landing RPM spin rate and factor time in air.

 

Please drop this. You don't know what you're talking about.


PG + OGT & MP = Golfing Bliss! 

Steam-ahhyeaa





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users