Back to PuttingZone
 


  << Previous Topic | Next Topic >>Main  

TOMI vs SAM Putt Lab

January 16 2007 at 8:30 AM
DM1234  (no login)
from IP address 66.138.223.122

 
The TOMI seems to be just like the SAM Putt Lab only it cost $895 vs ~$4600. Wasn't Marius Filmater associated with the SAM Putt Lab earlier? Also, there was supposed to have been a $1200 version of the SAM Putt Lab coming out. Now, there's a TOMI at around that same price range. I also note that Hank Haney, who earlier used the SAM Putt Lab, is now endorsing the TOMI. Geoff, could you explain the differences and the business evolution of these ultrasonic-based putting analyzers?
thanks

 
 Respond to this message   
AuthorReply

(no login)
75.177.5.154

Marius Filmalter, TOMI and SAM PuttLab

January 17 2007, 10:22 AM 

Dear DM1234,

According to GolfSpan:

Marius Filmalter

Co-invented and developed SAM, TOMI and Golfteaze

Regarded as a leading authority on putting with over 20 years experience

Advising numerous touring professionals from the PGA, LPGA, European and Asian tours

Has measured, analyzed and compared more than 43,000 different putting strokes

Has devoted attention and efforts researching Motor Strategy Disturbances (YIPS), Defining Characteristics of a Normal Putting Stroke and Parameters influencing the Putting Stroke

Hank Haney Golf
Dedicated to making the game better.
Not just for players, but for everyone.

FOR MORE INFORMATION
TEL: 972-315-5300
FAX: 972-315-7446
2791 S. STEMMONS FWY, LEWISVILLE, TX 75067

Contact Info from GolfSpan.com.

The history is that Dr Ernst Poeppel in Munich wanted to involve fellow neuroscience researcher Dr Christian Marquardt in developing a movement monitor for putting, and the two of them (not being golf teachers) turned to local pro Marius Filmalter for consulting about the tasks in putting and what to monitor in designing the system.

Marquardt is the science behind the PuttLab and is a genuine movement disorders neuroscientist, researcher, and clinician. Filmalter is a golf pro who is not trained in neuroscience or movement disorders.

Nonetheless, Filmalter now holds himself out as a "yips" specialist and aligns his name with Dr Poeppel. The two have done some "yips" studies together. (Motor Strategy Disturbances in Golf
The effect of 'yips' on the movement of the putter head, Marius Filmalter, Pierre Noizet, Brian Baum, Fabian Pollo, Ernst Poeppel, B. Murthi. [Sponsored By The Edge Sports Technologies, Inc.]
)

This is how Filmalter describes his work on the PureMotionSports.com website:

"The inspiration for Tomi comes from Marius Filmalter. At the Hank Haney Golf Ranch in McKinney, Texas, Marius is the #1 instructor Hank turns to when a golfer is really struggling on the green. Few, if any, teaching pros have devoted more time to the scientific study of putting than Marius. (See the Putting Insights section.)

His work and published papers are THE go-to source among the pros for insights into what Marius calls the Two M's: The Mechanics of the putting stroke and the Mind that can sometimes get in the way. His understanding of how the mental and the physical aspects of putting are intertwined make Marius one of the most sought-after instructors among pros who are struggling with their short game particularly those who have developed a bad case of the yips. According to Marius...

"For whatever reason, a golfer can slip into bad habits on the green. A critical, but often subtle, glitch in his stroke can creep in and all of a sudden it's as if he forgot how to putt the ball. And not knowing exactly what's causing his mis-hits, he tries to correct the problem through trial and error his grip, his stance, a different putter.

"The problem is that haphazard experimentation can short-circuit other parts of his putting routine, compounding the problem and instigating a downward spiral. It's here that the mental gears can spin off track, the golfer's confidence unwinds, and a bad case of the yips can set in.

"I've learned that the best way to help the golfer get back on track is to de-program his bad habits, which, by the time I see him, are usually a combination of bad mechanics and a bad attitude. So, the process begins with the basic mechanics. I want the golfer to both understand and experience the cause-effect components of a well-stroked ball that falls in the cup.

"This is why Tomi is such a terrific aid to my students. When they see in real time (and with great precision) what they are doing right and the adjustments they can make to fix what's wrong, the fog burns away. They are back on track both physically and mentally."

Website.

Hank Haney doesn't really know much about the science, but he has Filmalter on staff so he defers to him. To Haney, the big plus of the TOMI is costs and ease of use.

So who is Dr Ernst Poeppel? He is a neuroscience researcher in Munich who has these fields of study:

Research Fields:

Neuropsychology of Perception in the visual modality; Description of residual vision ("blindsight"); colour induction as a retinal phenomenon; perceptual completion as a cortical phenomenon.

Restitution of functions after brain injuries and Neuropsychological Rehabilitation.

Development of a taxonomy of mental functions, in particular thinking.

Time and timing in neural systems and behavior; Elaboration of a hierarchical model of temporal perception and an experimental description of the "subjective present".

Development of a theoretical model and technical tools to monitor the depth of anaesthesia.

Circadian rhythms; Description of a special form of internal desynchronization of bodily functions.

Statistics: Development of new algorithms for the analysis of biological rhythms.

Professor Dr. Poeppel heads the neuroscience systems research group at the IMP. (Institue of Medical Psychology, Neuroscience Systems research, Dr Ernst Poeppel. His publications concentrate on visual and timing processes at a very technical level, not especially related to normal human movements except indirectly.

The German PGA says this about Dr Marquardt:

"Dr Christian Marquardt is a neuroscientist, specialising in the fields of medicine, sports and motor behaviour research. His work, dedicated to the development of new concepts for movement analysis, motor learning and treatment of movement disorders, is widely appreciated. Christian Marquardt earned a doctorate at the faculty of medical psychology at the Munich University on kinematic micromotion study.

Since 2001 Christian Marquardt has been involved in the golf sport. He developed a unique measuring system, the SAM PuttLab, which makes it possible for the first time to measure and analyse with great precision all aspects of putting. His lectures and seminars at the SAM Academy reflect his scientific approach and know-how so appreciated in the golfing community. A number of national and international golf federations and PGAs are now working with him.

In 2003 Christian Marquardt founded the Science&Motion GmbH to market both the SAM PuttLab and the SAM Academy. Top players and putters on the European Tour have used his system with great success, making him one of the leading putting experts. He has also made himself a name in golf with his revolutionary approach to the treatment of the much-feared yips."

German PGA.

THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN PUTTLAB AND TOMI:

The main difference is in the software. The PuttLab algorithms are quite a bit more sophisticated for data analysis and display options. I've previously talked about the differences here.

So, there are two companies with closely related products coming from the same trio of developers. I don't really know about Filmalter's expertise as a putting instructor truly and deeply familiar with history, lore, and science about the tasks in reading, aiming, stroking and controlling distance for putts. He says he's an expert. So of the three in this trio, only one is really a golfer. But do they really know putting and can teach with these gizmos? That's a different animal entirely. That's about all I can say in this context.

Cheers!

Geoff Mangum
Putting Coach and Theorist
PuttingZone.com
Golf's most advanced and comprehensive putting instriuction.



    
This message has been edited by aceputt from IP address 71.43.93.93 on Mar 5, 2009 7:48 AM
This message has been edited by aceputt from IP address 75.177.5.154 on Jan 17, 2007 10:27 AM
This message has been edited by aceputt from IP address 75.177.5.154 on Jan 17, 2007 10:24 AM
This message has been edited by aceputt from IP address 75.177.5.154 on Jan 17, 2007 10:23 AM


 
 Respond to this message   
dean1234
(no login)
66.138.223.122

Who actually developed SAM/TOMI technology?

July 24 2007, 11:33 AM 

Geoff,
I recently read on putterzone.com that Marius Filmalter "developed" the TOMI system. (I doubt that he personally designed the hardware and wrote the software himself). There is a core ultrasonic technology in the SAM PuttLab that the TOMI also coincidently uses. Any ideas on how Marius Filmalter was able to use the same core technology while also getting a "SAM-like" similar GUI developed for TOMI?

thanks,
Dean

 
 Respond to this message   


(Login aceputt)
Forum Owner
75.177.5.154

European Patent for the PuttLab Sensor

July 24 2007, 5:18 PM 

The European patent (EP 1 727 602 A1) for the PuttLab sensor has an application date of March 26, 2004, and names only Christian Marquardt as the inventor. The reference documents are WO2005094949 (A1), US2005215335 (A1), and EP1727602 (A0).

The US patent application (number 20050215335) for the sensor was filed September 30, 2004, and names only Christian Marquardt as the inventor. No patent has actually been issued to date.

There is a an earlier German patent (DE 103 40 635 A1 2005.03.31) dated September 3, 2003, for setting a ball on a tee automatically for which both Christian Marquardt and Marius Filmalter are named as inventors. (See European Patent Office document WO2005023380.)

My information is that before Marius developed the TOMI system, he was sued in German court and an Order issued barring him from representing himself as the developer of the PuttLab. This court order is in force in Germany and has not so far been pursued in the US courts, for reasons of resources and other issues. Marius is an instructor at DA Weibring's golf course and lists himself on the website as follows: "Marius Filmalter -- * Putting Guru for PGA, LPGA, Champions, Nationwide & European Tours * Co-Developer of S.A.M. Putting Software & System." Filmalter and Pierre Noize (a co-author with Filmalter on a paper on the yips with Marquardt's medical-research per Dr Ernst Poeppel) created a company called Research projects that used the SAM PuttLab to test Steve Boccieri's Heavy Putter and significantly helped launch this design (see Boccieri's patent.) On the TOMI website, Marius describes himself thus: "Marius has developed TOMI and other professional putting systems in the marketplace." Another DA Weibring associate is Bill Kirkendall. Kirkendall also backs Filmalter's Pure Motion, Inc.. Here is Kirkendall's Forbes profile:

"Director at
Finish Line Inc., The Class A
Indianapolis, Indiana
SERVICES / APPAREL STORES
Director since July 2001

53 years old

Mr. Bill Kirkendall has served as a director of the Company since July 2001. Mr. Kirkendall is a Partner in D.A. Weibring Golf Resources Group, a golf design management and consulting firm, he is also the chief executive officer and director of Pure Motion, Inc., a company that develops and markets technology-based training aids for recreational sports. Mr. Kirkendall is also a partner with Golf Resources Inc., a company that specializes in golf course design, management, and consulting, worldwide. From October 1999 to November 2002 Mr. Kirkendall was President and Chief Executive Officer of Orlimar Golf Company, a manufacturer and distributor of golf equipment. Mr. Kirkendall was President and CEO of Tretorn of N.A., Inc., a distributor and licensee of athletic footwear, from 1998 to 1999. Mr. Kirkendall was a driving force with Etonic Inc., a distributor, manufacturer, and licensee of athletic footwear and apparel from 1982 to 1998, holding the following positions: Sales Representative from 1982 to 1985, National Sales Manager from 1985 to 1986, Vice President from 1986 to 1988, Senior Vice President from 1988 to 1989, Executive Vice President from 1989 to 1991, and President from 1991 to 1998. From 1976 to 1982 Mr. Kirkendall was Vice President of Golden Brothers Inc., a long haul trucking company."

Filmalter does not hold a US patent. The US trademark "TOMI" (serial number 78762856, Filing Date November 29, 2005) is held by Pure Motion, Inc., a Texas corporation located at 15010 North 78th Way, Suite 202 Scottsdale ARIZONA 85260. A doctor is Scottsdale is another financial backer of the TOMI.

So, that being the situation, your exact question ("Any ideas on how Marius Filmalter was able to use the same core technology while also getting a "SAM-like" similar GUI developed for TOMI? ") prompts this response: I'm not clear that your assumption in your question that the "core technology" is "the same" is a valid assumption in any legal or even technological sense. But assuming that there is some technological infringing of some degree involved in this situation: The Science and Motion people in Germany did not get themselves properly protected legally in the US, and one does not really need a patent to make a technological device, so Marius just did it without a patent and the Germans haven't been able legally to stop him in the US due to resources etc. like they did in Germany, and Marius has not sought or obtained US patent protection, probably because it would be denied or provoke a fight he would lose. Just my educated guess.

Cheers!

Geoff Mangum
Putting Coach and Theorist
PuttingZone.com
Golf's most advanced and comprehensive putting instruction.

Visit the new PuttingZone Blog for podcasts of putting tips:
Site PuttingZone Blog
RSS XML Subscription

 
 Respond to this message   
dean1234
(no login)
96.226.2.52

TOMI technology

August 11 2007, 1:20 AM 

Geoff,
The SAM "Core Technology" (in my estimation) involves ultra-sonic signal pulse transmission and reception in 3 dimensions and translating the phase information into a 3D model of the putter head's motion with time. It would require knowledge of physics, analog circuit design, rf design, digital design, embedded microcomputer firmware, mechanical design, production design, and for the User Interface, Visual Studio C++/C#. For most products this complex, it would take a staff of 10 engineers to develop.

The TOMI appears to also use ultra-sonic sensor technology and has a very similar user interface. TOMI's development would require the same unique disciplines as the SAM system.
I was just curious how a golf professional could have "developed" such a complex system.

P.S. I am very impressed with your research skills.

Dean

 
 Respond to this message   
Allen H.
(no login)
76.1.147.206

TOMI on TV

October 27 2007, 5:10 AM 

In case anyone is interested, this past week on the Golf Channel's "Champions Tour Learning Center" program there was a segment featuring the TOMI. They interviewd Marius F. & Bill Kirkendall & got positive feedback from tour player Tom Mcnight.

A few weeks ago I spoke with Bill Kirkendall & he said (at that time) that the TOMI wasn't effective outdoors due to excess light entering the sensor. He did say the new & improved units would be available in the "4th quarter". They would look identical but would have a better light filter installed so the TOMI could be used outdoors.

Since they were featuring the unit out on the practice putting green at last weeks Champions Tour event I'm assuming the new TOMI's are now available.

IF, IF, IF the TOMI does work outdoors I was considering purchasing one for "only" $895.00. Heck the SAM is 9K !!

If anyone owns one already I'd be interested in hearing your feedback. Unless I'm supposed to be the "guinea pig" that buys one, LOL !!

Happy Putting to All !! ........ Allen

 
 Respond to this message   
Geoff Mangum
(no login)
12.193.243.62

SAM Puttlab vs TOMI evaluations

November 15 2007, 12:28 AM 

Allen,
You are thinking about buying this device for $900 from the guy who was sued in German court?
And it doesn't work outside due to "excessive light"?
Good luck!


    
This message has been edited by aceputt from IP address 71.43.93.93 on Mar 5, 2009 7:56 AM


 
 Respond to this message   

(no login)
87.224.52.145

Re: hmmm.

May 9 2008, 9:33 AM 

has anyone had chance to use both and do a comparsion?

 
 Respond to this message   
David Orr
(no login)
152.38.26.104

Re: hmmm.

May 9 2008, 3:19 PM 

I have used both side by side with Damon Lucas..."Close enough as long as they are calibrated the same way with strict control"...The problem is "calibrating with the same control"...You could have two SAM units calibrated by two different people and methods and get different parameters...Dr. Christian Marquart told me personally that this has been resolved...Unfortunatley I wasn't 100% convinced!!! Still I enjoy the "Gizmo"...and it is very useful in evaluating and giving feedback....However I agree with Geoff 100%...you still have to learn to have Touch for speed, Read Putts, Aim, and Trust your Instincts to putt consistenlty well!!!

 
 Respond to this message   

(no login)
90.199.161.205

Re: hmmm.

May 9 2008, 4:25 PM 

Thanks for the insight.

Can I ask which one you own?


 
 Respond to this message   
phil
(no login)
92.11.232.255

Re: hmmm.

May 10 2008, 1:34 PM 

i saw the tomi being tested in Orlando and the variability in results was worrying, i also have friend who uses it and he syays he gets mystery results in any data set.

I believe the SAM is essentially more accurate and that is where the price differene lies. The tomi i understand has difficuly in measuring certain parameters due to the mechanisms of how it collects the data.

 
 Respond to this message   

(no login)
90.199.161.126

Re: hmmm.

May 10 2008, 3:34 PM 

Phil, thanks for the info.

 
 Respond to this message   
Damon
(no login)
69.250.187.225

Re: hmmm.

May 10 2008, 9:23 PM 

Invariably, the people who talk about 'variability' in results for the TOMI are advocates for the Puttlab. So in essence the 'peer review' is coming from the closest competitor!

I think the Puttlab is a terrific tool and has more bells and whistles than the TOMI, but the TOMI is very accurate, covers eight of the most important parameters of what the putter does during the stroke, and is about an eighth of the price.

Having worked with both!

 
 Respond to this message   

(no login)
90.199.161.126

Re: hmmm.

May 11 2008, 5:06 AM 

Damon, thanks for the insight.

 
 Respond to this message   
David Orr
(no login)
75.210.116.94

Re: hmmm.

May 12 2008, 1:21 AM 

I use the SAM PuttLab Pro Edition which was donated by a private party for our putting research at Campbell University PGM...The golf team at Campbell has the TOMI...the folks from TOMI demonstrated their product at our facility...very nice product for the consumer...


I like both products...but SAM PuttLab for our research

 
 Respond to this message   
phil
(no login)
86.41.119.129

Re: hmmm.

May 12 2008, 4:45 PM 

Guys

I have no axe to grind or benefit from saying anything. I just saw what i saw at the show. If you check out the link http://www.gaspsystems.com/documents-29.html

There are some interesting file documenting what i saw.
Cheers
Phil

 
 Respond to this message   
Damon Lucas
(no login)
69.250.187.225

Re: hmmm.

May 12 2008, 5:59 PM 

Ok Phil,

I have seen all this data before, and the comparisons were compiled by Christian Marquart. He is a terrific guy and a very smart person, but do you really think that he is going to be unbiased?

Now you have come to this site, 'attempted' to take Geoff to task for his knowledge and presentation of ideas, now you are attempting to sell people on the Harold Swash school of thought without saying anything of any value whatsoever constructive, and you're also trying to sell your product and dress it up as independent thought.

Do you have any original ideas at all?

Anything to add to the discussion?

 
 Respond to this message   
Jer
(no login)
76.117.213.239

Re: hmmm.

May 12 2008, 7:15 PM 

Not to worry Damon--lomg time readers of this site take Phil as comic relief and an example of the teaching philospohy of--I saw so and so do it and it worked--that is what confuses the serious students of the game--the only good thing about 3 putt Phil is that he does get Geoff to cough up more of his incredble kowledge and demonstrate his ability to answer all comers with facts

 
 Respond to this message   
phil
(no login)
86.41.121.113

Re: hmmm.

May 13 2008, 1:56 PM 

Your both off the mark. I believe Christian has integrity and would have no need to fix anything to sell his product or trash others. I have nothig personal to gain by highlighting the data. In fact i dont care i was just tyrig to pass on some advice, as i see it objectiely. I hae also used the TOMI system and 'felt' the variability.

The specific comments i have made in the past have been about acceleration and velocity profiles. No other parameters. Most professionals I have seen on the tours dont have the acceleration and velocity profiles i would personally want to see. So for you to say i only believe what's correct is what 'good' players are doing is wrong. I also have views on other areas of putting, these werent discussed in the post. So again your comment is off the mark.

Also less of the 3 putt.....pointless personal comment. I can play and have played the game, no need to prove that.

I have passed suggestion that the profiles Geoff would teach and what he believes he demonstrates may not be ideal to develop consistency. I have beliefs and reasons for this. If they were ever going to be shared on his forum they wont be now, im sorry to say as your posts are just starting to show a hint of personal attack.


 
 Respond to this message   

(Login alrenz)
209.73.60.50

Re: hmmm.

May 13 2008, 4:29 PM 

Guy's

Is there anyway to post to post the Sam/Tomi results for specific players on this acceleration/deceleration question. Don't have experience with either system, but I would think that there are players who would exhibit characteristics of each. Theory is great, as is expanding our knowledge base, but what are players doing, either everyday or tour?

Allan

 
 Respond to this message   

(no login)
87.224.52.145

Re: hmmm.

May 14 2008, 5:34 AM 

Phil, genuine question - you talk about how you 'felt' the variability in the Tomi system.

Both the SAM and Tomi systems give visual feedback. Would you not have seen the variability?



 
 Respond to this message   
phil
(no login)
92.12.104.34

Re: hmmm.

May 15 2008, 3:44 PM 

SK

It was a figure of speech. Having trained a lot yself on such system i know the parameters my stroke tend to fall within. On the TOMI system there were one or two that just didnt figure.

This last week i recieved an email from somebody whom i respect who had a demo of the TOMI system and their feedback was kind of positive, the company acknowledged their limitations and explaiend how best to use it. I figure if your looking to use or purchase either, you get both systems demo'd and make your own informed decesion on what you see.

thanks

 
 Respond to this message   
Mark
(Login 4golf)
91.85.180.4

SAM V tomi

May 18 2008, 5:40 PM 

We had a demo at the US golf show on both products. Then a demo on a robot with both systems attached.

SAM we were told works at 150 frames per second the Tomi using a webcam at 30 frames. Sam uses ultra sound and IR the Tomi uses reflective technology.

The robot demo was very enlightening and was done by a pro from Chicago.

The SAM was very good the results were the same everytime. The Tomi initially looked OK but did not repeat everytime. I could understand that Tomi would not be as accurate as the SAM due to the frame rate difference and being able to get impact exactly. I notice this with my normal 60 frame video cameras I am unable to get the club at impact all of the time.

Then came the shock. The Pro moved the robot so it was swinging from out to in and hit the ball out of the toe of the Putter. The SAM said 20 degrees out in and a very toes hit. This looked about right as it was setup very severely. The Tomi said my swing path was good and I hit the ball in the middle.

We tried this without the robot and found similar results. Both myself, other pro's that were there including one of the training chaps at the PGA were astonished.

 
 Respond to this message   
Credible Instructor
(no login)
69.117.76.203

Christian who??

March 30 2009, 5:12 PM 

Boyz bottom line is that one of thse systems cost 8grand and one costs 8 hundred. does a BMW ride better than a carrolla??Fact of the matter is both get u from a to b! the real question is who is working with tour players? i would be more likely to listen to someone who instructs PGA Tour players,including Tiger, than i would from any scientists!!

 
 Respond to this message   

(no login)
67.171.228.83

Sam Vs. Tomi

April 8 2009, 11:01 PM 

I own the Tomi and have only gotten a weird set of data. I restarted the program and it fixed the problem. As far as the price difference goes, the Sam Puttlab offers more data. The Tomi offers only what you would need within the context of a lesson. The Sam is better for research.

The Tomi has always worked outside, it is just under some conditions it does not work as well as it does in doors. To be honest, when using something like the Tomi I like my environment to be as controlled as possible.

 
 Respond to this message   
Current Topic - TOMI vs SAM Putt Lab
  << Previous Topic | Next Topic >>Main  
Find more forums on GolfCreate your own forum at Network54
 Copyright © 1999-2014 Network54. All rights reserved.   Terms of Use   Privacy Statement  
Back to PuttingZone