A&H

Spintso

Spintso is it worth it?

  • Worth it

    Votes: 1 12.5%

  • Not worth it

    Votes: 7 87.5%

  • Other

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Total voters
    8
T

The Ginger Ref

Active Member
Had a scan through previous posts but nothing conclusive with some who have bought the watch and others who haven’t.

One post suggests it’s just an expensive stopwatch so curious as to whether it will add to my armoury or is it just a bit of a gimmick.

For context I use an Apple Watch with REFSIX and Strava, as well as a cheap £10 stopwatch (similar to Casio).
 
The Referee Store
I have the Spintso watch and I like it. Fairly easy to use. It counts down the time and vibrates when the time is up. Lots of good features on it. It has a function to keep track of the score, HT time setting. Lots of other stuff such as BPM / steps / kcal and a sleep setting. I’m sure there’s lots of watches that do most of the same stuff but for me it was well worth it.
 
Last edited:
JudgeDreadful said:
I have the Spintso watch and I like it. Fairly easy to use. It counts down the time and vibrates when the time is. Lots of good features on it. It has a function to keep track of the score, HT time setting. Lots of other stiff such as BPM / steps / kcal and a sleep setting. I’m sure there’s lots of watches that do most of the same stuff but for me it was well worth it.
Click to expand...
So for a REFSIX user, not much point in switching. If my apple watch ever gives up though, I will consider this alternative.
 
I have the S1 and it does what I need it too. Not got the Pro version and I use a Garmin for my "stats"
 
Can anyone recommend a watch with accurate GPS I can upload to my strava? My apple watch clocks occasional movements that don't happen (I was running on the pitch next door for a while on Saturday)
 
RefereeX said:
Can anyone recommend a watch with accurate GPS I can upload to my strava? My apple watch clocks occasional movements that don't happen (I was running on the pitch next door for a while on Saturday)
Click to expand...
That can happen even with the premium watches.
I have used Polar for many years being a proud owner of a v800, vantage V and currently rocking Grit X Pro.
Aside from that a high end Garmin would be the best competition.
Other alternatives are the vest things, catapult etc..
 
JamesL said:
That can happen even with the premium watches.
I have used Polar for many years being a proud owner of a v800, vantage V and currently rocking Grit X Pro.
Aside from that a high end Garmin would be the best competition.
Other alternatives are the vest things, catapult etc..
Click to expand...
Yeah, all down to the sampling rate. Sports watches are generally designed for people running in more or less a straight line, that obviously doesn't happened in refereeing, and if you have a watch with a 5 second sample rate it just can't work out where you have been. Even with a 1 second rate a lot can change in that time frame.
 
RustyRef said:
Yeah, all down to the sampling rate. Sports watches are generally designed for people running in more or less a straight line, that obviously doesn't happened in refereeing, and if you have a watch with a 5 second sample rate it just can't work out where you have been. Even with a 1 second rate a lot can change in that time frame.
Click to expand...
I really dont understand the technology 😂
What sort of sample rate would my Apple Watch have?
My strava on both my phone and my watch when running seem to add about 5% on my distance. My marathon clocked at 44km
 
RefereeX said:
I really dont understand the technology 😂
What sort of sample rate would my Apple Watch have?
My strava on both my phone and my watch when running seem to add about 5% on my distance. My marathon clocked at 44km
Click to expand...
The sample rate is how frequently your watch sends its position to the satellite. Older devices can be as long as 5 seconds, modern ones are usually more frequent and as a general rule of thumb the more expensive / specialist the device the more frequently it will sample. If you think about refereeing, in the space of 5 seconds you can be in a number of positions and if they aren't in a more or less straight line the software can't work out where you have been. It assumes there has been a GPS error and therefore tries to smooth out the path.

I don't think Apple publish the sample rate for their watches.
 
RefereeX said:
I really dont understand the technology 😂
What sort of sample rate would my Apple Watch have?
My strava on both my phone and my watch when running seem to add about 5% on my distance. My marathon clocked at 44km
Click to expand...
If you're wanting the most accurate gps results, might be worth looking at one of the tracker vests, such as Statsports. The reviews online suggest they're pretty accurate, and there must be a good reason so many clubs use them
 
Runner Ref said:
, and there must be a good reason so many clubs use them
Click to expand...
They aren't allowed to wear watches but can wear a vest as per LOTG and the software offers tracking of everyone in realtime in a view of everyone.
You'd expect them to be pretty accurate as well but I don't think that is the sole reason.
 
JamesL said:
They aren't allowed to wear watches but can wear a vest as per LOTG and the software offers tracking of everyone in realtime in a view of everyone.
You'd expect them to be pretty accurate as well but I don't think that is the sole reason.
Click to expand...
Granted they can't wear watches in mat he's, but nothing stopping them from wearing them in training. But the vests tend to take preference :)
 
Runner Ref said:
Granted they can't wear watches in mat he's, but nothing stopping them from wearing them in training. But the vests tend to take preference :)
Click to expand...
Well that could be explained by wanting to keep all performance data in one place and watches tend to be very individual and not offer real time monitoring from a third party device.

That said there are features of the vests that should offer better performance than wrist based gps mainly not waving it around all over the place as you are running, safety, (same risks of getting whacked by a watch exist in training s well) and the higher positioning on the back would probably improve satellite connection
 
JamesL said:
Well that could be explained by wanting to keep all performance data in one place and watches tend to be very individual and not offer real time monitoring from a third party device.

That said there are features of the vests that should offer better performance than wrist based gps mainly not waving it around all over the place as you are running, safety, (same risks of getting whacked by a watch exist in training s well) and the higher positioning on the back would probably improve satellite connection
Click to expand...
This bit is a very fair point, but pro clubs aren't going to pay for something sub-par.

More and more of the FL lot are tending to wear the vests. I never liked them or a chest strap heart rate monitor, as always found them a bit restrictive.

But definitely worth having a look at one. Think they're around £200 these days. So probably cheaper than a half decent gps watch.
 
Rusty is bang on about sample rate and some watches publish, some don’t. And some also have a basic and advanced setting for it.

There are a handful of good articles to be found on this. None I’ve found on our application but some on changing direction and sampling.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top