I gotta ask, are Zero torque putters just a flavor of the month ?

[Rickdiculous]

16 hours ago, Archimedes65 said:

Lotta 15+ handicappers out there with thousands of dollars of clubs in their bag, including whatever the latest $600 driver du jour is at the time.  Usually when I see shiny new toys in the bag, I assume just the opposite, I.e., someone’s trying to buy a good golf game rather than put in the work. More often than not their play confirms it.

 

Agree here. Its the guy with Raw Apex 18s, a SIM 2 driver, and an Odyssey White Ice #1 that I am worried about taking all my money on the course

[Red4282]

4 hours ago, purdyd said:

A statically balanced putter toe up putter  aka 'zero torque' will not  have torque when addressing the ball.

 

The fact that the LAB putter when held by the grip exhibits torque is evidence that the LAB putter is behaving as a face balanced putter.  Or more precisely the grip axis is in front of the center of mass

 

in other words the face will turn up when balanced on the grip

 

The LAB putter is balanced around the shaft, not the grip.  It is unbalanced around the axis of the grip.

 

When you define torque you need to define it around an axis.

 

Since you hold a putter by the grip, it is the grip axis that is important and the torque about that axis.

 

What makes the LAB putter with a press grip face balanced is that the center of mass is behind the axis of the grip.

 

You can see that when you look at it and you can do an analysis with force diagrams to show why this is the case.

 

Again, I am not the only one who has come up with this conclusion.  

 

Obviously Axis1 inventor Luis Pedraza who is an engineer knows this

 

Jim Harrington, another engineer knows this and has some pretty choice words to say about it.

 

I'm sure there is a list of others as well.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Oh I get what you are saying, no need to keep explaining, but behaving like a face balanced in a certain test vs calling it a face balanced are two completely different things. We can agree to disagree on the minuscule amount of torque an offset grip might produce and its effect on the putting stroke. IMO if it was indeed a value of concern, you would see it fall open much like a traditional face balanced would as soon as you put it in the playing position- in a revealer-but it wont.
 

And by your standards, If you forward press the Axis or heel balanced putter with your hands, are you now introducing torque?
 

And to the other poster regarding MOI and distance loss…. Yes the twisting of a face on a mishit and its MOI properties has a direct correlation to its distance loss. The point was also a heel shafted and center shafted head would translate these twisting forces differently to the user which was corroborated by the AI. Feel free to argue with AI…. Thats a losing battle lol. 

[Archimedes65]

4 hours ago, Rickdiculous said:

 

Agree here. Its the guy with Raw Apex 18s, a SIM 2 driver, and an Odyssey White Ice #1 that I am worried about taking all my money on the course

 

I agree.  Especially because I play a SIM 2…

 

But seriously, the guy that worries me is the guy that tells me he’s a 10 index, then drives the ball 280 straight down the middle on the first tee, picks up his weathered bag with Duke University written in script on the side, walks to his ball and knocks an uphill 140 yard shot to a smallish green pin high.  His driver usually has the face pretty much worn off. 

[iteachgolf]

1 hour ago, Red4282 said:

Oh I get what you are saying, no need to keep explaining, but behaving like a face balanced in a certain test vs calling it a face balanced are two completely different things. We can agree to disagree on the minuscule amount of torque an offset grip might produce and its effect on the putting stroke. IMO if it was indeed a value of concern, you would see it fall open much like a traditional face balanced would as soon as you put it in the playing position- in a revealer-but it wont.
 

And by your standards, If you forward press the Axis or heel balanced putter with your hands, are you now introducing torque?
 

And to the other poster regarding MOI and distance loss…. Yes the twisting of a face on a mishit and its MOI properties has a direct correlation to its distance loss. The point was also a heel shafted and center shafted head would translate these twisting forces differently to the user which was corroborated by the AI. Feel free to argue with AI…. Thats a losing battle lol. 

Except that swan neck where shaft is pointed at the center of gravity and a head with the shaft inserted so it points at the COG would react exactly the same.   It’s not heel shafted if it’s pointed at the COG.  Again you clearly don’t understand the physics involved.  And AI is only as good as the question you ask it, and even then it is wrong all the time.  

[Glock917]

6 hours ago, purdyd said:

The fact that the LAB putter when held by the grip exhibits torque is evidence that the LAB putter is behaving as a face balanced putter.  Or more precisely the grip axis is in front of the center of mass

 

First off if it exhibits on the grip axis does not mean it is a face balanced putter because ever putter exhibits a torque on the grip and its called gravity 

 

 

On 12/12/2024 at 6:12 AM, purdyd said:

First off LAB is not zero torque, it is a heel weighted putter.

You seem to be very biased towards axis1 vehemently. Did you get a free putter from them to campaign them on here cause majority of your post are regarding this topic and very PRO axis1 and anti LAB.

 

You think LAB is heel weighted then look at axis1 they actually say they use a heel counter weight so why even bring that point up.  

 

  

On 12/12/2024 at 6:12 AM, purdyd said:

 

https://patents.google.com/patent/US9233280B2/en

 

however the press grip makes the LAB putters a face balanced putter around the axis of the  grip.

You keep referring back to the patents. Why dont use reference any axis1 patents? And LABs patents does not include any weights on the bottom so they can actually move the vertical shaft axis and CG with the weights. 

 

And all your points always infer IF the press grips here and there but the press grip is an option and can be had without it so stop with the press grip malarkey 

 

[JoeSchmoe]

Is it just a fad?  Time will tell.

 

If the best tour players switch to these putters and win a bunch of tournaments with 'em, I can see it becoming the new standard.

 

For now though, the winners lists seems to be loaded with players using Spiders, Scotties, and Pings.

[ScooterMcTavish]

6 hours ago, Rickdiculous said:

 

Agree here. Its the guy with Raw Apex 18s, a SIM 2 driver, and an Odyssey White Ice #1 that I am worried about taking all my money on the course

 

LOL, isn't this the truth, though the Apex 18s and a Sim 2 may be a little new for a true hustler?  I get a bit nervous when I see a trusty old R7 Quad, a set of well-loved Titleist MBs, and new wedges.  Putter may or may not be a tell - but if they have decent clubs (if not the newest), and an ancient putter, I'm losing money on the green.
 

A non-brand specific bag, and knit/animal headcovers are also a tell, as they don't need to advertise what they have in the bag.

Edited December 17, 2024 by ScooterMcTavish

[golferdude54]

8 hours ago, purdyd said:

A statically balanced putter toe up putter  aka 'zero torque' will not  have torque when addressing the ball.

 

The fact that the LAB putter when held by the grip exhibits torque is evidence that the LAB putter is behaving as a face balanced putter.  Or more precisely the grip axis is in front of the center of mass

 

in other words the face will turn up when balanced on the grip

 

The LAB putter is balanced around the shaft, not the grip.  It is unbalanced around the axis of the grip.

 

When you define torque you need to define it around an axis.

 

Since you hold a putter by the grip, it is the grip axis that is important and the torque about that axis.

 

What makes the LAB putter with a press grip face balanced is that the center of mass is behind the axis of the grip.

 

You can see that when you look at it and you can do an analysis with force diagrams to show why this is the case.

 

Again, I am not the only one who has come up with this conclusion.  

 

Obviously Axis1 inventor Luis Pedraza who is an engineer knows this

 

Jim Harrington, another engineer knows this and has some pretty choice words to say about it.

 

I'm sure there is a list of others as well.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The SeeMore M6 is a full 6 o'clock toe hang putter yet it balances square by itself at its lie angle when hovering above the ground. Bullseye non-flange putters do the same thing, too.

[jda]

Model the leaning shaft.  There is force there that is not explained by any manufacturer or demonstrated by the proprietary tool.  It is like pushing a dust mop out in front of you as you take the club back, and during the swing it is like pulling a mop - unless you are perfect, there can be force either way since once the shaft/head start to go, it wants to continue to go.  If the head goes right, then you need to over compensate to the left to correct it back on track.  I don't know if this is technically torque, lateral force or what, but there is force there that is not accounted for.

 

If Jim Harrington is the same as JP Harrington, then you all might want to really read and understand what he wrote on that post, including the replies.  Dude is one of the most respected golf minds out there... probably universally (or almost).  No idea if Jim = JP.

 

EDIT: I am not saying that this mop force matters at all, but it is present and not zero.  I also don't feel that ZT or MOI matter much, either... and if they do they are a rounding error that people on the internet talk about too much.

Edited December 17, 2024 by jda

[Red4282]

1 hour ago, jda said:

Model the leaning shaft.  There is force there that is not explained by any manufacturer or demonstrated by the proprietary tool.  It is like pushing a dust mop out in front of you as you take the club back, and during the swing it is like pulling a mop - unless you are perfect, there can be force either way since once the shaft/head start to go, it wants to continue to go.  If the head goes right, then you need to over compensate to the left to correct it back on track.  I don't know if this is technically torque, lateral force or what, but there is force there that is not accounted for.

 

If Jim Harrington is the same as JP Harrington, then you all might want to really read and understand what he wrote on that post, including the replies.  Dude is one of the most respected golf minds out there... probably universally (or almost).  No idea if Jim = JP.

 

EDIT: I am not saying that this mop force matters at all, but it is present and not zero.  I also don't feel that ZT or MOI matter much, either... and if they do they are a rounding error that people on the internet talk about too much.

Yes it is torque. But its not what LAB is aiming to eliminate. Its near zero torque on the shaft in a rotational sense. As long as the path is on plane, this “mop” torque should theoretically not open or close the face. i also think Jim is not JP.

 

1 hour ago, golferdude54 said:

 

The SeeMore M6 is a full 6 o'clock toe hang putter yet it balances square by itself at its lie angle when hovering above the ground. Bullseye non-flange putters do the same thing, too.

Yes, this is correct because the cog is inline with with the shaft on that axis. There is torque pulling down, but no rotational twisting/torque statically, but once in motion these types of putters will have the most dynamic torque. And thats axis types included. Face balanced are the opposite. 

 

Im still curious on this grip thing. I Have a DF3 counterbalanced on the way. Obviously its a straight grip, but it still will have shaft lean. If i just c0ck my wrists/hands to accommodate, and now my hands are “inline” with the shaft axis and cog, is there torque? What if i dont? Now suddenly there is torque? Thats where the “press grip creates torque”  narrative loses me a bit. Not saying its right or wrong, just curious.

Edited December 17, 2024 by Red4282

[purdyd]

1 hour ago, Red4282 said:

Im still curious on this grip thing. I Have a DF3 counterbalanced on the way. Obviously it’s a straight grip, but it still will have shaft lean. If i just c0ck my wrists/hands to accommodate, and now my hands are “inline” with the shaft axis and cog, is there torque? What if i dont? Now suddenly there is torque? Thats where the “press grip creates torque”  narrative loses me a bit. Not saying it’s right or wrong, just curious.

when you talked about torque or rotation you have to provide an reference axis .

 

when we are talking zero torque putters we are talking about torque around the axis of the grip

 

so in your case since LAB has balanced the putter around the shaft and your grip is on that same axis you will not have static torque about that axis

 

in other words when you address the ball and the putter head is square there will not be torque around the axis of the grip

 

As long as you keep bottom of the putter square to the ground even with the forward lean of the shaft 

 

 

[purdyd]

Ok I built a golf club from a coat hanger. I’m taking preorders.

 

notice face is the part with the opening and the shaft is bent at the top.  That bend is what the press grip effectively does.

 

 

this putter was crafted with the finest craftsmanship so that when it is balanced on the lower part of the shaft, the face is forward. Forward is up 🔝  

 

 

now I’ll move it back and balance it on the bent part, which is the grip 

 

it is now face up

I encourage the reader to perform their own experiments you could even use your own LAB putter 

@Glock917 I don’t work for axis1 or even own one of their putters or have even seen one in person

 

here is a link to one of the axis1 patents I guess to be fair

 

https://patents.google.com/patent/US7857710B2/en?oq=US7857710B2

 

 

 

Edited December 18, 2024 by purdyd

[TNwanabe]

Love the hanger!!! 

Edited December 18, 2024 by TNwanabe

[Red4282]

1 hour ago, purdyd said:

when you talked about torque or rotation you have to provide an reference axis .

 

when we are talking zero torque putters we are talking about torque around the axis of the grip

 

so in your case since LAB has balanced the putter around the shaft and your grip is on that same axis you will not have static torque about that axis

 

in other words when you address the ball and the putter head is square there will not be torque around the axis of the grip

 

As long as you keep bottom of the putter square to the ground even with the forward lean of the shaft 

 

 

Right but your hand orientation matters? You can still hold a press grip and be “inline” with the axis.

 

please excuse my elementary art:

 

If held this way with thumbs aligned with axis, is it not the same as holding a normal grip? Theres even equal amount of material between the left hand and shaft and right hand and shaft. (This is what I kinds meant by “wrist cocked”. The grip axis really shouldnt matter, because all thats really happening is preset shaft lean. Not to say what you are seeing and  what Mr harrison is testing isnt true. I just think its irrelevant.

[jda]

College friend wrote me back and he said there are two axis for rotational torque: grip/hand and then the shaft.  The force of the two not being aligned on the other had some long name that I forgot and is beyond complicated, but the head will slightly swing like a mop out in front of you or backing up a trailer (his example) where once it starts to go one way, you have to go 1.X times in the other direction to get it back.  He asked "why would anybody do this?" seeing no physical need as a non-golfer and thinking that this might be the opposite of what they intended, but after we chatted a bit looking at other types of putters he also agreed that there is likely no physical benefit or adversity on either axis at this speed and with the most error-prone part of the equation is the golfer.

 

The bottom line is that there is torque and zero is an absolute.  Zero is absolute.  Time to come up with a better name for these that is not misleading at best and dishonest at worst.  "Half Torque" since half of the axis might not have any torque?  GTO for Grip Torque Only?  Suggestions?

[qtlaw]

I've been using a Spyder X for the last 3 years which was a great improvement over the Newport 2 since I couldn't get the blade to sit right for me.  The speed consistency and alignment on shorties was excellent.  However, I still pushed some putts on shorties.

 

I decided to try the S2S (admittedly cheaper than $500 for a LAB like my buddy) and had a great round yesterday.  Felt so confident that I would square the face and did not miss inside 8 feet.  I know that's not going to be the norm but felt so much better over the putts so the S2S did it's job.

 

 

[notsohard]

On 12/15/2024 at 5:23 AM, Archimedes65 said:

Finally played a round with someone who was actually using a LAB putter.  He said he loved it because he felt it was easy to get the ball started on his line.  Thing was, he wasn’t draining many putts, and he’s a good player tee to green.  He told me he switched from a Scotty blade, which made sense to me because his stroke looked like a blade stroke.  I asked him if he had to change his stroke, and he said no.  I didn’t have the heart to tell him that he might want to look into that.  The only conclusion that I drew from watching him was that I thought the putter was really goofy looking, and it would have to have me draining EVERYTHING before I would ever consider putting it in my bag..

The psychology of visual perception is very relevant in life and particularly golf clubs. If it don't look right for you it will never work. 

[TNwanabe]

On 12/23/2024 at 1:59 PM, qtlaw said:

I've been using a Spyder X for the last 3 years which was a great improvement over the Newport 2 since I couldn't get the blade to sit right for me.  The speed consistency and alignment on shorties was excellent.  However, I still pushed some putts on shorties.

 

I decided to try the S2S (admittedly cheaper than $500 for a LAB like my buddy) and had a great round yesterday.  Felt so confident that I would square the face and did not miss inside 8 feet.  I know that's not going to be the norm but felt so much better over the putts so the S2S did it's job.

 

 

This was my experience as well. A couple of weeks have passed and still I feel like inside of 8 feet everything is easily makeable. I would never have guessed it would be like this but here I am not looking back (yet.)

[Justletmeplay]

I would say get a fitting at a place that has LAB and bring your own. A few minutes on a monitor tells you how square you are. For me it was a no-brainer. I’m almost scratch and putted fine before with my odyssey. But the LAB was square more often from the get go. So I bought two.  

[Orlandogolfguru]

So much for ping staying out of the zt game. 

[ChaosTheory]

40 minutes ago, Orlandogolfguru said:

So much for ping staying out of the zt game. 

Do tell.

[Orlandogolfguru]

36 minutes ago, ChaosTheory said:

Do tell.

They have an entire new line out. 

[Steelhead]

On 12/6/2024 at 1:49 PM, oneaugusta said:

Seen all the hype but will these be a unicorn for all golfers or just for those who really struggle with putting?  Thinking a good putter will always be a good putter no matter the flatstick. 
What’s everyones thoughts? video reviews are mixed

 

Nothing new under the sun—just better marketing and putters that appeal to many golfers. I've used SBST putters off and on for 25+ years and have had success with all styles.  

In the '90s, Allan Strand, inventor of the Dandy Putter, sought to simplify putting by eliminating the arc and face rotation required by traditional designs. His "onset" putter kept the face square throughout the stroke, aligning with natural mechanics for better consistency. Drawing from his background in classical piano, he emphasized relaxation and precision, leading to a putter used by pros like Hale Irwin (40+ senior wins) and Vijay Singh (Masters victory).  

Odyssey later adopted many of Strand’s ideas in the Backstryke. I spent hours at the Dandy office in Irvine getting fitted, and after Vijay’s Masters win, Strand declined millions to expand, unwilling to "sell out."  

This year, I’ve tested several putters, but after the recent zero-torque/SBST hype, I pulled out my Dandy Blade from 2000. After hours of testing against a Jailbird Square to Square, I found it just as good—if not better—for me.  

Square to Square? Zero Torque? Meh.”flavor of the month?” Maybe, but with better marketing and great looks.

Now, back to my 2008 Buttonback…

 

(original Dandy putter pic)

Edited February 17 by Steelhead

[ChaosTheory]

34 minutes ago, Steelhead said:

 

Nothing new under the sun—just better marketing and putters that appeal to many golfers. I've used SBST putters off and on for 25+ years and have had success with all styles.  

In the '90s, Allan Strand, inventor of the Dandy Putter, sought to simplify putting by eliminating the arc and face rotation required by traditional designs. His "onset" putter kept the face square throughout the stroke, aligning with natural mechanics for better consistency. Drawing from his background in classical piano, he emphasized relaxation and precision, leading to a putter used by pros like Hale Irwin (40+ senior wins) and Vijay Singh (Masters victory).  

Odyssey later adopted many of Strand’s ideas in the Backstryke. I spent hours at the Dandy office in Irvine getting fitted, and after Vijay’s Masters win, Strand declined millions to expand, unwilling to "sell out."  

This year, I’ve tested several putters, but after the recent zero-torque/SBST hype, I pulled out my Dandy Blade from 2000. After hours of testing against a Jailbird Square to Square, I found it just as good—if not better—for me.  

Square to Square? Zero Torque? Meh.”flavor of the month?” Maybe, but with better marketing and great looks.

Now, back to my 2008 Buttonback…

 

(original Dandy putter pic)

 

I can't be sure without seeing the whole shaft, but that Dandy does not appear to be lie angle balanced or torque free.  It appears that it would flop closed in a revealer type device.

[ChaosTheory]

1 hour ago, Orlandogolfguru said:

They have an entire new line out. 

 

I am looking at their website, and I don't see it.  What model name?

[ThinkingPlus]

2 minutes ago, ChaosTheory said:

 

I am looking at their website, and I don't see it.  What model name?

Probably their new Hypocrite line...

[Steelhead]

41 minutes ago, ChaosTheory said:

 

I can't be sure without seeing the whole shaft, but that Dandy does not appear to be lie angle balanced or torque free.  It appears that it would flop closed in a revealer type device.

Allan passed away in 2014. Surprised the website still exists.  It is faced balanced and does not flop. The Dandy Pro is a great putter. Does not flop. He ran many tests and it rolled smoother and truer than anything at that time including the Backstryke. 

My point.... Nothing new under the sun. 

 

 

Edited February 17 by Steelhead

[BYK]

39 minutes ago, Steelhead said:

Allan passed away in 2014. Surprised the website still exists.  It is faced balanced and does not flop. The Dandy Pro is a great putter. Does not flop. He ran many tests and it rolled smoother and truer than anything at that time including the Backstryke. 

My point.... Nothing new under the sun. 

 

 

Uh oh 

[Zjhl2024]

does "zero torque" just means the shaft is attached to the middle? i thought this has been around for a long time... it's probably just marketing slogans re-branding so it looks like new tech?

[iteachgolf]

1 hour ago, Zjhl2024 said:

does "zero torque" just means the shaft is attached to the middle? i thought this has been around for a long time... it's probably just marketing slogans re-branding so it looks like new tech?

No