Is a Zero Torque Putter right for you?
by David P. Billings, Industrial Designer, Entrepreneur and Golf Industry Expert
One of the most talked about new equipment trends in golf surrounds the so-called “Zero Torque” Putters. One company in particular has been instrumental in popularizing this trend, with significant sales and distribution, press and tour usage. LAB Putters (L.A.B. is an anacronym for Lie Angle Balance) has been around for approximately a dozen years, selling their Directed Force putters. Full disclosure, I am friends with the co-inventor and co-founder Bill Presse IV.
The LAB putters have taken the market by storm with their unique putters with non-traditional looks and unconventional specifications. The putters are designed to provide a more stable balance throughout the putting stroke. Following is my personal explanation of the design and it’s history and evolution in market and my own personal explorations in this field.
During the majority of golf history, golf clubs have been designed with the blade of the club extending out in front of the shaft in a “L” shape. This has been true and consistent with irons, putters and woods. The governing bodies (primarily the R&A in Scotland and USGA here) set rules that mandated that conforming clubs would have the shaft at the rear (towards the heel) of the clubs.
In 1902 an Engineer with General Electric invented the Schenectady putter, widely recognized as the first center-shafted putter. Walter Travis won the 1903 US Amateur and the 1904 British Amateur Championships. The R&A then banned the putter (deeming it non-confirming to the Rules of Golf). The R&A and USGA changed the Rules of Golf in 1951 which allowed the Center Shaft design to move forward for the Schenectady and other putters.
Center Shafted putters have enjoyed an important place in putter designs ever since. The placement of the “center shaft” has varied over the course of this history, with many placing the shaft very near the face, often drilled directly into the head. This provides a clean and simple setup. With the shaft just behind the sweetspot. The result is onset or face progression ahead of the shaft. This is opposed to offset, which has been perhaps more prevalent with a hosel or double bend shaft putting the shaft ahead of the putter face.
The placement of the shaft in the head between the heel and toe also effects the balance of the head, both statically and dynamically. Many golfers are familiar with face balanced putters (first popularized with the Zebra putters from the 70’s). The shaft axis projects to a place in front of the Center of Gravity of the club head. This is easily identified by resting the putter on a table top with the head hanging freely off the edge. If the face of the putter points towards the sky, the putter is called Face Balanced. If however, the shaft axis points towards a spot closer to the heal, as with the popular “plumber neck” or most other hosel designs, the toe of the putter falls below that horizontal plane. This “toe hang” varies by hosel length, placement in the head design, offset and depth of the CG in the head.
Putters with Toe Hang swing in the stroke more like the other clubs, that is they tend to “open and close” during the stroke. Face balanced clubs tend to open and close less, depending on the player’s stroke mechanics. We can identify and analyze how much the face of the putter stays square to the target at impact, and in fact, throughout the stroke using testing, analysis and training equipment such as Science and Motion’s SAM PuttLab.
Getting back to the dynamics of the putter in the stroke, validated by these technologies and others, we can see that some of the older putter designs don’t always work with many golfers’ stroke mechanics and tendencies. We often see that the golfer tends to fight to get the putter back to square consistently, resulting in some type of manipulation of the putter during the stroke. This can lead to inconsistencies, especially under pressure, uncertainties of the speed and line the golfer needs to putt the ball on. The net result is often inconsistencies in line (pushes and pulls), lack of distance control, and a loss of performance, frustration and lack of confidence.
So putter designers have tried to solve these phenomena’s by making the putters more stable in the stroke, and at impact with the ball delivering straighter, truer and more consistent performance.
A number of putter designers, makers and larger manufactuers have worked to solve these challenges by creating “toe up” balanced putters. This type of design places the shaft axis projection ahead of or towards the toe of the putter head. The result is that during the stroke, the toe doesn’t tend to open during the back stroke or close during the forward stroke.
The Positive Putter is a toe up putter in my collection of historic clubs. It was covered by multiple patents including US Pat. 5,228,332. Numerous versions were made including both hosels and an aggressive single-bend shaft that attached directly to the head. In all these putters the main axis of the shaft projects or points to a location forward of the club head CG.
One of the downsides of having the shaft axis project rearwards of the face is a loss of stability that is normally derived from the hands being ahead of the putter head, dragging it through the hitting area with increased stability, control and leverage. The solution in the past, as with many other clubs is to have the shaft leaning forward where the axis at the butt doesn’t putt straight up towards the golfer but rather points ahead, thus allowing the golfer to have that leverage of hands ahead of the impact point even with a club that has little to no offset or even onset or face progression.
The LAB Putters apply these basic principles to their putter designs: center shaft design reward of the face, forward shaft lean and a lie angle balance that stabilizes the putter head during the stroke and at impact with the ball.
Due to the extraordinary success of the LAB on the professional golf tours and in the marketplace, many other manufacturers, designers and makers are now making Zero Torque putters. These now include Odyssey (by Callaway Golf), Scotty Cameron (by Titleist), Bettinardi, Evnroll Putters, among others.
For golfers curious whether these putters might work well with their strokes and games, I highly recommend that you go for a professional analysis and / or fitting. The technologies available today can best guide your exploration, fitting and training with these new flatsticks. In order to achieve the ideal aforementioned “Zero Torque” and Arc Balance (Stroke Balance, Square to Square, Face-On-Path, etc.).
For more information and to try these putters for yourself, you can visit:
MACHINEputters.com/ZeroTorque
Side Bar:
Dave Billings has been developing and refining Zero Torque putters since 1994 with Dogleg Right and the HOG Putter first, and with the MACHINE Putters in the last 18 plus years:
1994: HOG 1001 The first Zero Torque Putter. The axis of the massive oversized OS shaft projects to the CG of the oversized head. Super light Oversized Straight, non-tapered grip.
2000 Masters: Ultra-Low Torque Shaft played by beloved multiple-time past champion.
2006: Hank Haney world headquarters, Steve Johnson, co-founder and the author worked with Trip Kuehne to develop the first Adjustable “Arc Balanced” Putter, modifying a Custom MACHINE Putter. The putter featured a modular hosel that was hand bent custom to players arc specifications, coupled with massive tungsten heel weight, adjustable according to players’ stroke and tendencies for face square at impact. (varying the hosel bend and the weight was proven on the SAM PuttLab to speed up or slow down the face rotation rate to match the balance dynamically to maintain a true Face on Path performance by the golfer and in the company’s “Alloy Ben” putting robot from Golf Laboratories).
2007: US Walker Cup team, US State Team Championship (Texas). USGA Junior / Senior Matches, US Mid Amateur Championship (Photos of first and last achievement)
2008: Masters, best finish among Amateurs. Putter backup donated to USGA to honor historic year, displayed at the USGA Museum at Far Hills, NJ.
2013: The first commercial Reverse Offset Modular hosel, weight adjustable to balance. Center shaft to putter head CG in a widebody blade (Tom Brescian M2A DB3 and Reverse Long Plumber Neck Hosel) – write Tom for release. Find posts in Golfwrx, MyGolfSpy?
2014: Delta Mods – Ultimate Custom Putter Build Off – Winner!
2016: Adam Scott’s dad putter (Stroke Balanced Face-On Prototypes)
2021: M12 Flipper Stroke Balanced prototypes.
2024: Ultimate Fitting Arc Balanced Zero Torque Reverse Hosel options…
