Zero Torque Putters? Is it hype or a thing?

[seochris]

The LAB putters seem to be gaining momentum on tour…not sure it will take off in the amateur game at £500 or so a pop….
However I bought an Odesssy square to Square jail bird and must say I’m quite impressed….30 putts the last time out and this was the third time I used it…
This compares very favourably to my usual efforts which averaged over 35 putts a round and when it’s bad I’ve had a 39 putts a round.
The experiment continues and it does take a bit of getting used to as there is quite a shaft lean on the putter so time will tell if it stays in the bag or I revert back to my Oddy #7 putter.
Perhaps a new club syndrome but I do like it.
What to people think? Have you tried a Zero torque putter and what did you think? Hope or a thing?

 

[Dunesman]

Still cant figure how anyone with hands so weak for the torque from swinging a non zero-torque putter to be to be an influence on the face angle could even pick up a putter in the first place. Let alone make a full golf swing. If you are strong enough to hold a club without it falling on the ground, you need have no concerns about putter torque.

 

[Neilds]

I’m with @Dunesman on this one. Can’t see how the club can possibly twist in your hand, either on the backswing or when striking the ball. If you can hit a full blooded drive without losing grip, then you can tap in a putt with no problems.

 

[VVega]

They are quality putters but marketed based on a totally pseudo scientific feature - quite genius really

 

[VVega]

Apparently their first significant sales bump was after both Shiels and Finch posted positive reviews.

 

[HomerJSimpson]

I use a big MOI putter but can't see any reason to shell out on a zero torque. Certainly at my level

 

[Burnsey]

I bought mine because they're all the rage and not embarrassed to state that one bit.

Has my putting improved - yes. Is it a thing - haven't got a clue.

The majority of negatives on here will be unfounded and simply the regular moaners, so the only way to answer the point is to try one.

 

[Bunkermagnet]

The lad has recently bought one. This was after a full on fitting for a putter. He says his putting stats improved no end with it against his previous putter and others he tried and says it has improved his putting out there.
Me, the look is so important to having confidence in the putter so science or not the look says no for me.

 

[Orikoru]

Those saying the science is nonsense or whatever - I'm sure there may be some benefit even if it's overstated a little? I mean, plenty of us switched from blades to a face-balanced mallet and saw improvement due to better stability. So isn't this just the next stage in evolution from there?

I would love to try one out, but haven't had the chance yet. I use a #7 and I see they have a square-to-square #7, but also the Jailbird version looks good. Would love to try the LAB DF3 as well. The only thing that puts me off really (aside from the price on the LABs) is that every single one of them is centre-shafted, and I haven't been a fan of centre-shafted putters in the past. So that might a factor that ruins them for me.

 

[Dunesman]

Those saying the science is nonsense or whatever - I'm sure there may be some benefit even if it overstated a little?

I feel not. Am interested in any research on the topic, but think the visual impression from their swing frame feeds the wrong impression too easily.

And think, along your lines, that there is an effect. And people link some positive effect with - then there must be some positive benefit to ones putting, even if small. The problem is that the positive is so small as to be entirely dismissible when it come to putting performance.

Take a small smear of dirt on the top edge of an iron. Will that microgram of smudge slow down your clubspeed due to its mass, and, aerodynamic resistance ? Yes. It will. So should you always make sure to remove any smudge to maximise your distance ? Well, no. The influence, while there, does not translate to any distance change that will affect your performance. The Lab demo frame removes the fact that a putter is held by hands. Not a low friction spindle.

 

[Crow]

Not tried a zero torque putter but I did once borrow a high MOI putter and it was incredibly stable compared to my usual stuff, felt like I couldn't miss anything from 8 feet and in.

 

[Dunesman]

Not tried a zero torque putter but I did once borrow a high MOI putter and it was incredibly stable compared to my usual stuff, felt like I couldn't miss anything from 8 feet and in.

Which is a nice comforting feeling. But you know the fact isnt true. It isnt even half true. Putting is about feeling positive, and if that is fulfilled from the marketing story, the high price tag, or whatever, doesnt really matter. But its illusory rather than true science.

 

[Golf is fun]

I think the science bit is questionable, in that it's true the design has less torque and keeps the face square to the arc for the whole putting stroke, the question is whether this is desirable or not. In their marketing they state that great putting requires the putter face to be square to the target line at impact, they then extrapolate that keeping it square to the arc will achieve this, but there is no science to back that part up.

I'm sure they're nice putters, I'd also suspect one size doesn't fit all, and for some people they will work better than a traditional putter and for others not.

 

[Golf is fun]

Those saying the science is nonsense or whatever - I'm sure there may be some benefit even if it's overstated a little? I mean, plenty of us switched from blades to a face-balanced mallet and saw improvement due to better stability. So isn't this just the next stage in evolution from there?

I would love to try one out, but haven't had the chance yet. I use a #7 and I see they have a square-to-square #7, but also the Jailbird version looks good. Would love to try the LAB DF3 as well. The only thing that puts me off really (aside from the price on the LABs) is that every single one of them is centre-shafted, and I haven't been a fan of centre-shafted putters in the past. So that might a factor that ruins them for me.

This would be an interesting data point, do zero torque putters twist less on impact - particularly off centre impact. I suspect this has far more bearing on putting accuracy, than keeping the face square to the putting arc. I'm not sure if this has been measured though, presumably if it had or was proven the marketing material would be broadcasting it at full volume.

 

[Burnsey]

The game today is all about science and those disagreeing are living in LaLaLand.

Improved putting, longer drives, adjust the peak height of your irons by 3 feet - all can be dialled in with heads, shafts, grips, even balls.

Those not willing to embrace the science can stay where they are in terms of the game, which is fine, but I'll take all the help I can get to enjoy my hobby more.

 

[Dunesman]

The game today is all about science and those disagreeing are living in LaLaLand.

No question. But there is science and pseudoscience. Good science and bad science. That the game is benefitting and developping in many ways on the back of science doesnt mean all 'science' claimed, is necessarily science, or correct.

 

[Oddsocks]

Excuse the stupid post, but what is zero torque?

 

[Orikoru]

I feel not. Am interested in any research on the topic, but think the visual impression from their swing frame feeds the wrong impression too easily.

And think, along your lines, that there is an effect. And people link some positive effect with - then there must be some positive benefit to ones putting, even if small. The problem is that the positive is so small as to be entirely dismissible when it come to putting performance.

Take a small smear of dirt on the top edge of an iron. Will that microgram of smudge slow down your clubspeed due to its mass, and, aerodynamic resistance ? Yes. It will. So should you always make sure to remove any smudge to maximise your distance ? Well, no. The influence, while there, does not translate to any distance change that will affect your performance. The Lab demo frame removes the fact that a putter is held by hands. Not a low friction spindle.

But with putting, any gain at all is directly correlatable with score. So if someone buys a LAB, and their average putts per round goes from 34 to 33 - that may seem small but it also means their handicap should go down one, ergo it was potentially worthwhile? Putter is probably the easiest club to actually measure the benefit of.

 

[Golf is fun]

But with putting, any gain at all is directly correlatable with score. So if someone buys a LAB, and their average putts per round goes from 34 to 33 - that may seem small but it also means their handicap should go down one, ergo it was potentially worthwhile? Putter is probably the easiest club to actually measure the benefit of.

You can definitely measure the correlation, but you can't prove the causation.

If I go from a 31" Scotty Cameron to a 35" L.A.B putter and get better, is the difference the zero torque, having a putter that is now the correct length for me, something else about the fit of the putter, placebo effect, or anything else?

 

[Burnsey]

No question. But there is science and pseudoscience. Good science and bad science. That the game is benefitting and developping in many ways on the back of science doesnt mean all 'science' claimed, is necessarily science, or correct.

What were your thoughts when you tried one and came to this conclusion?

Any stats versus your current putter?