If a putter has torque in the address position (as shown in the video with the putters clamped at the grip and suspended at an angle) it will have torque in motion as well. Unfortunately torque just doesn't disappear... This video is really our introduction of measuring torque utilizing an actual measurement device, we want to continue to advance this more and more to help standardize measurements for consumers. Showing the putter in motion is certainly the next step here but it would not change the fact that any putter that is showing torque at address will also show some sort of torque in motion.
@@Axis1Putters This is really helpful! I never understand the negativity from the lab golf crowd. At the end of the day, the goal is to elevate the game we all love-whether through technology, conversation, or passion for golf. Sam and Luis should do a fireside chat; I’m sure Axis1 and lab golf share more in common in their missions than people might think.
@@lukeprendergast3593 Oh I tried many times to have a fun relationship with them. They were rude, disimissive, stubborn and have even gone out of their way to try and sabotage us out on tour. They deserve every bit of negativity thrown their way. Even put all that aside, what he is saying here simply doesn't make sense and the actual reason he won't address why he doesn't put the putters in motion is because his putter is not torque free.
@@CPBuilds how do you mean? Like which one performs better on a golf course or which one performs better in a revealer? Torque meter? We win in all categories but happy to show you whatever you like.
The grip does not add torque. The shaft has no idea what grip is on it and as you well know, the putter is balanced on the grip axis with the grip on it. And this goes both ways! I concede that adding a press grip to your putter would not add more torque IN MOTION than it already has. When we put straight grips on our putter, there is no change to performance IN MOTION. A proper test would have been to hold it by the shaft under the grip or to at least use one of the many non-press grip options we have but that would not serve your narrative! but even then, weather or not a putter torques at address doesn't mean a whole lot. The PXG Allan for instance would be zero torque at address and in your device but has even more torque IN MOTION than your putter. At some point, you are going to have to address the fact that your putter twists in motion. Its a toe up putter. It torques open as soon as you take it back and shuts in transition. Just like the Allan, just like the backstrike and just like every other toe up putter out there. Why not promote the actual tech you guys have?? The fact that the CG is right on the sweet spot is pretty cool. Good luck Luis.
You make a gimmick putter designed for a specific stroke type. You don’t not make a cure all putter. People need to be fitted to your putter or develop a stroke to use your putter just like any putter. If a person is not straight back straight though then your putter is useless. Your comment shows just how defensive you are. Seriously get over yourself you’re just making yourself look like a clown. More than you already are.
@@traviscrown9189 I'm sorry you have this idea about stroke type. The putter is designed to stay square to an arc, whatever arc that may be. Doesn't matter at all what "stroke type" you have as is evident by the various stroke types of those using it and winning on every tour around the world. And of course I am defensive! This guy is making public videos with false claims about our product! You wouldn't do the same?
@ you are a putter manufacturer and you don’t understand or choose to ignore stroke type and being fitted properly to that stroke. Hence the reason for double bend neck, slant necks, plumbers necks etc. lie, loft. Na… you’re losing a lot of people on this constant parade you’re going on. You could be above it. Instead you choose to continue to try and demonize other putter manufacturers/ designers who have a different idea and opinion of this subject matter. You clearly have no clue how to sell or market a product. You continue to try and push the idea of scientific dominance. If your putters were literally that much of an advantage everyone would use them. However, you are just a tiny little tiny niche putter maker.
A few genuine questions for the poster of this video I’d be curious to get a response on: 1) can you please elaborate on what you said @9:05 on why “clearly the future of putting is zero torque putters”? Is it because zero torque is beneficial at address or in motion? 2) at the 1:30 mark I believe that the friction of you pulling the revealer bar up the shaft that twisted the face open on the lab putter no? If you reset that lab putter to face the target, even leaving the bar up there near the bottom of the grip, wouldn’t it still stay perfectly still in the revealer tool static or in motion? 3) What’s the difference in the revealer between your putter and their putter with the bar moved up to below the grip? 4) lastly, do you think it’s a fair comparison in the other fancy torque measuring device when one putter has an offset press grip and the other does not? If you removed the grips off both the lab and axis putters and clamped them into the device on the shaft axis, would there be a difference in their torque readings?
Hi Chris - Happy to answer these questions for you! We believe zero torque is beneficial, period. If a putter has torque at address (as shown in the video hanging from the clamp) that torque does not and cannot disappear in motion. It is not friction that opens up the putter face when the support arm is moved up and the putter is opening up by itself and will continue to stay open. When the bar is raised to support the shaft below the grip our putter face remains square to the target. We clamped the grips the way you would hold it in your hands at address position as this is the proper way to measure torque. In any event, our goal in creating this video is to introduce an instrument like the Mark-10 that can be used to actually measure torque, as we laid out in our disclaimer, this is the first step in starting a conversation and by no means the end all be all/test to end all tests. Hope this is helpful!
Hi. So seeing as the labs have a 2 degree offset in their grips designed to remove the necessity to add shaft lean, and you’re clamping directly onto the grip. How do you account for the fact that that is going to add static torque just by the nature of how you’re setting up the test? I get that you’re trying to use this to sell your putters, but the concept isn’t 0 torque when at static rest. The idea is that there should be no dynamic torque throughout the putting stroke other than what the player adds. Curious as it seems you’re trying to sell a butter knife based on how sharp it is?
BINGO 👍 The Axis one really performs well on the competitors Revealer. To me this is pointless video because no one, is hell, measures torque at static. My suggestions, figure out a way to hook the torque meter, put it ON YOUR OWN version of the Revealer (honestly if PXG can come up with their own black box "revealer" so can you) and lets see what the measurements are when the putter is in full flight motion. That's why the Revealer is more believable, you can see it with your own eyes the face stays true to the path including your Axis1 (to some extent). Also "Paging Mr Allan, you're wanted on Axis 1 demo, Paging Mr. Allan..." 😄
This is an awesome video…keep on pioneering the industry, Luis…Don’t listen to the lab founder. If it helps, he is widely disliked by all other putter manufacturers due to his unprofessional and disrespectful treatment of their leadership (as you are seeing on his comments here). Further, he has no engineering or industry background…in summary, don’t worry about lab. He is a cult leader with poisoned followers who don’t seem to understand rudimentary physics (i.e., a putter with torque at address has torque in motion). Looking forward to seeing more from you!
well thank God I am not trying to sell putters to the other manufacturers! 😂 our interest is in helping people putt better. Of course we have a business to run and when people make false claims about our stuff, we’re going to call it out every time. And yes, the other manufacturers don’t like that very much but as you can imagine, they haven’t exactly been particularly kind to either Luis or I over the years. All the major manufacturers actively working to discredit both companies. I thought it was unnecessary for the two of us to compete the way that Luis insists we do by continuing to make incredibly miss leading videos targeting our company specifically (noticed the Pxg sitting in the background, which, by the way, would’ve read as torque free on his meter, but is not torque free in motion). So let’s not pretend like Luis is the victim here.
Another excellent video by the best putter company ever. My axis1 is the best stick in my bag…BY FAR! I show it off every chance I get and everyone’s blown away. Thank you guys for revolutionizing the industry.
I just got an Rose 1. Is there a reason the grip is thin? Will changing the grip change the function of the putter? Any suggestions of different grips for a softer feel? Thanks
I have an Axis1 Half Mallet (HM) and I used it for a month or two with the grip it came with. I then switched to a SuperStroke Flatso 3 which is significantly thicker, and it does soften the feel. Obviously the grip feels different but I don't notice any difference in way the putter swings. At address, with the putter suspended above the ground slightly, using a very light grip, I feel no tendency for the club face to open or close.
Data that is gathered as part of any "controlled" test is only as good as the test method and equipment used to gather said data. In this case the equipment is solid, but the method is ridiculously poor. A person doesn't putt with the putter in a static state. In order for this test to have ANY value, the mark-10 needs to be mounted to a rotating arm (basically a swing robot). Then set the mark-10 so that it reads min/max and allow the putters to swing freely back and forth.
A person doesn’t putt with a revealer either. The zero torque putters would probably be great if you putted with a revealer but what happens when you put your hands on the club.
Torque is torque, if a putter has torque in the address position it will have torque in motion. Unfortunately it just doesn't disappear... This video is our introduction of measuring torque utilizing an actual measurement device, we want to continue to advance this more and more to help standardize measurements for consumers. Showing the putter in motion or at a point of motion is a logical next step and something we look forward to testing as well but that doesn't change that a putter with torque at address will not be able to eliminate torque in motion.
@@Axis1Putters Haha, your false narrative here is pathetic. You purposefully set-up a test that would show LAB putters performing poorly and then try to play it off that you are attempting to "advance the conversation" when you are really just trying to market your putter. This test is irrelevant because putting is dynamic and not static. It is the forward press grip that is causing LAB putters to perform poor in your irrelevant test. That is why you didn't test any LAB putters with a standard grip. You know they are balanced through the center of the club head and by using the forward press grip it will obviously add static torque because you are not mounting it on the balance axis. Additionally, the static state torque (what you tested) literally disappears as soon as you overcome the moment of inertia necessary to begin the putting stroke and the system changes to dynamic torque. Therefore, the static torque the press grip adds becomes insignificant and the press grip actually helps make better contact with the ball. Your test is what they call a Red Herring fallacy. You know it, but are trying to play coy in an effort to look sincere when you really are not.
This video is modern snake oil. A bunch of flawed tests that you claim produce conclusive pieces of evidence. Honestly not sure if you’re trying to fool your viewers, or yourselves
It was never meant to be a measuring device. It’s a demonstration tool. It REVEALS whether or not a putter has torque on motion. It does not measure how much motion at all. It’s like the revealer is a yes/no answer to the question while this contraption is like a paragraph answer.
@@CoD3x4life i think measuring these putters for torque makes more sense than seeing how they act in a 'demonstration tool'. Maybe they can take these measurements in motion too
@@kappysflies agree with your measurements in motion suggesstion. iinm the LAB boss explained that the lower support was set at the balance point along the putter shaft which the Axis 1 boss did not care to discuss the merits/demerits of doing so. Frankly, I'd like to know if the both of them have some sort of relevant engineering background
This demonstration is actually a lack of science because a person does not putt in a static state. In order for this demonstration to have any value he needs a test setup that puts the putters in motion in a similar way to how they are used on the course.
@@fasteddy9126 You are certainly entitled to your opinion but this science proves to me beyond a doubt that torque exists at the handle, at the time of address. You should be able to agree to that. From that point on (in the course of a putter swing), I believe the torque present at the time of address will NOT lessen or vanish. I believe it will only increase and cause the putter to be difficult to return to its position at address. I don’t need additional resources spent on how much the torque changes during a stroke. If you start out with some, it’s only going to get worse with movement.
@@ranczarI wonder why they didn’t put their putter in the revealer and do the same thing they did on the lab. Maybe because it would do the same thing. Lab has forward shaft lean and if you put it in the clamp it’s going to get a reading because the shaft is not straight up and down. Don’t believe everything you see on the internet, tour pros are moving into lab putters and that’s kind of all the evidence you need
@@ranczar maybe the tidal wave of negative comments is a sign. Maybe… just maybe consider the possibility that this isn’t an unfair band of LAB sponsored fanboys in a coordinated attack on your just and pure cause. MAYBE… you are just wrong and torque only matters in motion and for the club face to the ball. The LAB putter removes torque in motion DESPITE human imperfections trying to torque the putter. If Your putter starts with zero torque at address, what good does that do me as an imperfect golfer who will probably put a little torque into my putting stroke through my hands into the handle? The revealer is a good tool because it removes the user error and torque we all add trying to open and shut a face in motion.
Yep and Luis of course knows this. He also knows that if he tilted the clamp, the 3° for the grip it would also read zero torque. He also knows that if his torque meter worked in motion like the one that we are working on, ours will read zero torque and his will not.
We certainly did not copy anyone as we came up with this technology back in 2009, all we are trying to do is start a dialogue on how torque can be appropriately measured across putters. This video is very similar to what LAB has been doing with their revealer for years, showing other putters not staying square... we're simply using a measuring device to actually show torque and no torque in the address position.
@@Axis1Putters but why would i care if there's torque or no torque at address? putting is already difficult as it is ... why would anyone stuff up his mind with irrelevant info?
@@kckong3 I don’t think knowing more about torque is irrelevant information. With this knowledge, I have a better understanding of the events that occur during a putting stroke. Maybe I can find an adjustment to make that can help me improve. Isn’t that what the game is about?
@@ranczar You have ZERO additional understanding about events that occur “during a putting stroke.” That would require having a conversation about torque in motion, no? Since during a putting stroke obviously the putter is in motion. We are all saying the same thing - what good does it do to have zero torque at address suspended in the air? None of those putters have torque when you rest them on the ground at address. It’s clear to me you’re an agent of axis golf and don’t know when to admit you’re wrong. It’s like having a discourse with a brick wall I’m done here.
If I could putt statically then this test would matter. It's a putting stroke, not statics. You must dynamically test the putters in order to claim zero torque.
If a putter has torque in the address position it will have torque in motion as well. We love the idea of a swing robot that measures torque as well, but this video was really to introduce people to the Mark-10 and a way of actually measuring torque while testing various putters in the address position to showcase torque or no torque.
With all due respect this device can measure all it wants how much “torque” the putters have, that’s not a true representation. First of all, when putting the putter isn’t staying completely still. So the “torque” that you get while measuring an object that’s completely still doesn’t work. That’s why the revealer is more telling because once you put it in motion, there’s no torque. That’s the whole point. To not have torque WHEN IN MOTION. To say that the Axis1 generates zero torque is a complete lie because when you PUT IT IN MOTION, IT TWISTS. It is not a true zero torque.
You literally just said “I know you have a tool to measure the exact scientific principle occurring but I don’t like it and it’s wrong”😂. Cmon man. They have a video showing both in the revealer and it reflects exactly what he’s saying here.
@jakephelps4766 you're correct, and i never said it wasn't, neither did the previous response. However, a torque value at rest has no relatable value to the putting stroke because the putting stroke is dynamic and not static. Therefore, this demonstration adds zero value to the conversation about "zero torque" putters.
@@fasteddy9126do you not agree that torque at rest will at least give an indication of the minimum amount of force one has to overcome to stabilize the putter face during the stroke? How would that not add value to the discussion of zero torque putters?
This video is meant to introduce people to and start a conversation around utilizing a measuring device like the torque meter to help standardize 'what is torque'. We plan to advance these tests more and more each time and a putter in motion or at the point of motion is a logical next step in this discussion. But one thing we know is that if a putter has torque at address, it will also have torque in motion during a swing as well.
Has a torque meter, needs a bullshit meter. Nobody gives a crap about torque at address. The putter is on the ground, duh! LAB's concept of zero-torque through the swing is what matters for anyone looking for a "zero torque" putter.
The putter is actually not on the ground in the video, we are holding it up in a clamp by the grip (and that clamp is what is measuring torque inside the torque meter device) at the lie angle of address. If there is torque in this static position, there will be torque in motion. Unfortunately torque does not disappear once present.
what a dumb video... lab putters take time to get used to, but once you get the concept how we have been putting "wrong" for decades, lab putters really make sense
I tried my friend's DF2. It felt very light & I thought one should hold it very loosely and let it swing freely like a pendulum. Is that how it should be used? LOL with my old school putters (toe hang & face balanced types), I grip them firmly as if holding a cleaver/hammer without a trigger index finger, elbows against my ribs & simply rock my shoulders for consistency. If I did that with the LABs, woudn't it negate all the goodness built in?
Disingenuous bs. Here let me test something at rest that's meant to be in motion. If this is the way you test, I'm sure I'm just as good as any professional golfer at holding the golf club...but that's not how golf is played. I was intrigued by your putter before this video but now, I would just as well use a club brush as a putter before using an Axis.
Glad to hear of your interest in trying our putters and we hope one day you will try an Axis1. In this test we are measuring torque at the address position (the putter is not on the ground, it is being held within the device clamp) and if torque is present in this position it will also be present in motion. This is just physics, the torque cannot disappear in motion once it has been shown to be present. This is all we wanted to showcase along with introducing a device that takes actual torque readings.
@@Axis1Putters Actual torque readings along an axis not used in the putting stroke. You lifted the putter forward which means nothing in putting as you don't putt that way. Do the same reading while lifting the putter along the line of intended play. Demonstrate that your putter is zero torque in the plane of intended motion.
@@xxthadeucexx The torque meter was not measuring the forward lift of the putter, it is measuring putters in the address position... which would be along the line of intended play in a putting stroke...
@@Axis1Putters Tell yourself whatever you need to sleep at night but hanging the putter straight up and down and claiming it's zero torque then lifting it into an address position and saying it's zero torque is great if putters never move. Putters need to move to hit the ball and once it moves, what happens? Show me zero torque in motion...which is where it counts. My driver hits the ball as far and straight as any tour driver as long as neither of them move...but that's not how golf clubs work. I understand your marketing strategy but all of us aren't sheep. Not to mention you had a DF3 with a 2 degree press grip which will change the torque value in a static environment. I'm sure your putter is great but making videos like this won't help you sell them to anyone who thinks for themselves. Good luck.
Would the results be different testing these putters in motion?
If a putter has torque in the address position (as shown in the video with the putters clamped at the grip and suspended at an angle) it will have torque in motion as well. Unfortunately torque just doesn't disappear... This video is really our introduction of measuring torque utilizing an actual measurement device, we want to continue to advance this more and more to help standardize measurements for consumers. Showing the putter in motion is certainly the next step here but it would not change the fact that any putter that is showing torque at address will also show some sort of torque in motion.
@@Axis1Putters This is really helpful! I never understand the negativity from the lab golf crowd. At the end of the day, the goal is to elevate the game we all love-whether through technology, conversation, or passion for golf. Sam and Luis should do a fireside chat; I’m sure Axis1 and lab golf share more in common in their missions than people might think.
@@lukeprendergast3593 Oh I tried many times to have a fun relationship with them. They were rude, disimissive, stubborn and have even gone out of their way to try and sabotage us out on tour. They deserve every bit of negativity thrown their way. Even put all that aside, what he is saying here simply doesn't make sense and the actual reason he won't address why he doesn't put the putters in motion is because his putter is not torque free.
@@samhahn6950 LAB golf vs Axis1 video in the near future on your end????
@@CPBuilds how do you mean? Like which one performs better on a golf course or which one performs better in a revealer? Torque meter? We win in all categories but happy to show you whatever you like.
I switched from a lab to the axis1 hm earlier this year and it has completely improved my putting. Appreciate the vid explaining the technology
The grip does not add torque. The shaft has no idea what grip is on it and as you well know, the putter is balanced on the grip axis with the grip on it. And this goes both ways! I concede that adding a press grip to your putter would not add more torque IN MOTION than it already has. When we put straight grips on our putter, there is no change to performance IN MOTION. A proper test would have been to hold it by the shaft under the grip or to at least use one of the many non-press grip options we have but that would not serve your narrative! but even then, weather or not a putter torques at address doesn't mean a whole lot. The PXG Allan for instance would be zero torque at address and in your device but has even more torque IN MOTION than your putter. At some point, you are going to have to address the fact that your putter twists in motion. Its a toe up putter. It torques open as soon as you take it back and shuts in transition. Just like the Allan, just like the backstrike and just like every other toe up putter out there. Why not promote the actual tech you guys have?? The fact that the CG is right on the sweet spot is pretty cool. Good luck Luis.
You make a gimmick putter designed for a specific stroke type. You don’t not make a cure all putter. People need to be fitted to your putter or develop a stroke to use your putter just like any putter. If a person is not straight back straight though then your putter is useless. Your comment shows just how defensive you are. Seriously get over yourself you’re just making yourself look like a clown. More than you already are.
i thought i saw A Lim Kim win the Lotte Championship in Hawaii today using a LAB Mezz... or was it a Mezz Max?
@ yep!!
@@traviscrown9189 I'm sorry you have this idea about stroke type. The putter is designed to stay square to an arc, whatever arc that may be. Doesn't matter at all what "stroke type" you have as is evident by the various stroke types of those using it and winning on every tour around the world. And of course I am defensive! This guy is making public videos with false claims about our product! You wouldn't do the same?
@ you are a putter manufacturer and you don’t understand or choose to ignore stroke type and being fitted properly to that stroke. Hence the reason for double bend neck, slant necks, plumbers necks etc. lie, loft.
Na… you’re losing a lot of people on this constant parade you’re going on. You could be above it. Instead you choose to continue to try and demonize other putter manufacturers/ designers who have a different idea and opinion of this subject matter.
You clearly have no clue how to sell or market a product. You continue to try and push the idea of scientific dominance. If your putters were literally that much of an advantage everyone would use them. However, you are just a tiny little tiny niche putter maker.
A few genuine questions for the poster of this video I’d be curious to get a response on:
1) can you please elaborate on what you said @9:05 on why “clearly the future of putting is zero torque putters”? Is it because zero torque is beneficial at address or in motion?
2) at the 1:30 mark I believe that the friction of you pulling the revealer bar up the shaft that twisted the face open on the lab putter no? If you reset that lab putter to face the target, even leaving the bar up there near the bottom of the grip, wouldn’t it still stay perfectly still in the revealer tool static or in motion?
3) What’s the difference in the revealer between your putter and their putter with the bar moved up to below the grip?
4) lastly, do you think it’s a fair comparison in the other fancy torque measuring device when one putter has an offset press grip and the other does not? If you removed the grips off both the lab and axis putters and clamped them into the device on the shaft axis, would there be a difference in their torque readings?
Hi Chris - Happy to answer these questions for you!
We believe zero torque is beneficial, period. If a putter has torque at address (as shown in the video hanging from the clamp) that torque does not and cannot disappear in motion.
It is not friction that opens up the putter face when the support arm is moved up and the putter is opening up by itself and will continue to stay open.
When the bar is raised to support the shaft below the grip our putter face remains square to the target.
We clamped the grips the way you would hold it in your hands at address position as this is the proper way to measure torque. In any event, our goal in creating this video is to introduce an instrument like the Mark-10 that can be used to actually measure torque, as we laid out in our disclaimer, this is the first step in starting a conversation and by no means the end all be all/test to end all tests.
Hope this is helpful!
Hi Axis - please comment on what the situation would be were a LAB putter balanced with a regular round grip installed. Thanks Stu
But that would defeat the purpose of trying to deceive their viewers!
Hi. So seeing as the labs have a 2 degree offset in their grips designed to remove the necessity to add shaft lean, and you’re clamping directly onto the grip. How do you account for the fact that that is going to add static torque just by the nature of how you’re setting up the test? I get that you’re trying to use this to sell your putters, but the concept isn’t 0 torque when at static rest. The idea is that there should be no dynamic torque throughout the putting stroke other than what the player adds.
Curious as it seems you’re trying to sell a butter knife based on how sharp it is?
BINGO 👍 The Axis one really performs well on the competitors Revealer. To me this is pointless video because no one, is hell, measures torque at static. My suggestions, figure out a way to hook the torque meter, put it ON YOUR OWN version of the Revealer (honestly if PXG can come up with their own black box "revealer" so can you) and lets see what the measurements are when the putter is in full flight motion. That's why the Revealer is more believable, you can see it with your own eyes the face stays true to the path including your Axis1 (to some extent). Also "Paging Mr Allan, you're wanted on Axis 1 demo, Paging Mr. Allan..." 😄
This is an awesome video…keep on pioneering the industry, Luis…Don’t listen to the lab founder. If it helps, he is widely disliked by all other putter manufacturers due to his unprofessional and disrespectful treatment of their leadership (as you are seeing on his comments here). Further, he has no engineering or industry background…in summary, don’t worry about lab. He is a cult leader with poisoned followers who don’t seem to understand rudimentary physics (i.e., a putter with torque at address has torque in motion). Looking forward to seeing more from you!
well thank God I am not trying to sell putters to the other manufacturers! 😂 our interest is in helping people putt better. Of course we have a business to run and when people make false claims about our stuff, we’re going to call it out every time. And yes, the other manufacturers don’t like that very much but as you can imagine, they haven’t exactly been particularly kind to either Luis or I over the years. All the major manufacturers actively working to discredit both companies. I thought it was unnecessary for the two of us to compete the way that Luis insists we do by continuing to make incredibly miss leading videos targeting our company specifically (noticed the Pxg sitting in the background, which, by the way, would’ve read as torque free on his meter, but is not torque free in motion). So let’s not pretend like Luis is the victim here.
I've been gaming an Axis1 Joey for quite sometime. Would love to see it on the torque machine
Another excellent video by the best putter company ever. My axis1 is the best stick in my bag…BY FAR! I show it off every chance I get and everyone’s blown away. Thank you guys for revolutionizing the industry.
I just got an Rose 1. Is there a reason the grip is thin? Will changing the grip change the function of the putter? Any suggestions of different grips for a softer feel? Thanks
Switch go lab
@@joshhubbard8628 i get it. a lot of LAB fan boys love to watch these videos. Not asking you guys.
No it will not change the function of the putter, feel free to email us for more suggestions on grips we'd be happy to help!
I have an Axis1 Half Mallet (HM) and I used it for a month or two with the grip it came with. I then switched to a SuperStroke Flatso 3 which is significantly thicker, and it does soften the feel. Obviously the grip feels different but I don't notice any difference in way the putter swings. At address, with the putter suspended above the ground slightly, using a very light grip, I feel no tendency for the club face to open or close.
PXG zero torque putter missing from this test.
Data that is gathered as part of any "controlled" test is only as good as the test method and equipment used to gather said data. In this case the equipment is solid, but the method is ridiculously poor. A person doesn't putt with the putter in a static state. In order for this test to have ANY value, the mark-10 needs to be mounted to a rotating arm (basically a swing robot). Then set the mark-10 so that it reads min/max and allow the putters to swing freely back and forth.
A person doesn’t putt with a revealer either. The zero torque putters would probably be great if you putted with a revealer but what happens when you put your hands on the club.
Torque is torque, if a putter has torque in the address position it will have torque in motion. Unfortunately it just doesn't disappear... This video is our introduction of measuring torque utilizing an actual measurement device, we want to continue to advance this more and more to help standardize measurements for consumers. Showing the putter in motion or at a point of motion is a logical next step and something we look forward to testing as well but that doesn't change that a putter with torque at address will not be able to eliminate torque in motion.
@@zombierecon7351 nothing is suppose to happen because you don't move your hands during the putting stroke.
@@Axis1Putters Haha, your false narrative here is pathetic. You purposefully set-up a test that would show LAB putters performing poorly and then try to play it off that you are attempting to "advance the conversation" when you are really just trying to market your putter. This test is irrelevant because putting is dynamic and not static. It is the forward press grip that is causing LAB putters to perform poor in your irrelevant test. That is why you didn't test any LAB putters with a standard grip. You know they are balanced through the center of the club head and by using the forward press grip it will obviously add static torque because you are not mounting it on the balance axis. Additionally, the static state torque (what you tested) literally disappears as soon as you overcome the moment of inertia necessary to begin the putting stroke and the system changes to dynamic torque. Therefore, the static torque the press grip adds becomes insignificant and the press grip actually helps make better contact with the ball. Your test is what they call a Red Herring fallacy. You know it, but are trying to play coy in an effort to look sincere when you really are not.
This video is modern snake oil. A bunch of flawed tests that you claim produce conclusive pieces of evidence. Honestly not sure if you’re trying to fool your viewers, or yourselves
Who would have thought Axis came out number one, how’s the wins or tour and sells going?
The Axis1 Rose has the most SGP in all the majors since 2019 out of every putter model on the market
Why did Rose no longer using his “Rose” putter?
Making a 10 minute video demonstrating your lack of knowledge when it comes to physics is a wild move.
Did not expect this... but I guess I never thought about how the revealer isn't an actual measuring device
It was never meant to be a measuring device. It’s a demonstration tool. It REVEALS whether or not a putter has torque on motion. It does not measure how much motion at all. It’s like the revealer is a yes/no answer to the question while this contraption is like a paragraph answer.
@@CoD3x4life i think measuring these putters for torque makes more sense than seeing how they act in a 'demonstration tool'. Maybe they can take these measurements in motion too
@@kappysflies agree with your measurements in motion suggesstion. iinm the LAB boss explained that the lower support was set at the balance point along the putter shaft which the Axis 1 boss did not care to discuss the merits/demerits of doing so. Frankly, I'd like to know if the both of them have some sort of relevant engineering background
Thank you for the science Mr. Pedraza!
This demonstration is actually a lack of science because a person does not putt in a static state. In order for this demonstration to have any value he needs a test setup that puts the putters in motion in a similar way to how they are used on the course.
@@fasteddy9126 You are certainly entitled to your opinion but this science proves to me beyond a doubt that torque exists at the handle, at the time of address. You should be able to agree to that. From that point on (in the course of a putter swing), I believe the torque present at the time of address will NOT lessen or vanish. I believe it will only increase and cause the putter to be difficult to return to its position at address. I don’t need additional resources spent on how much the torque changes during a stroke. If you start out with some, it’s only going to get worse with movement.
@@ranczarI wonder why they didn’t put their putter in the revealer and do the same thing they did on the lab. Maybe because it would do the same thing. Lab has forward shaft lean and if you put it in the clamp it’s going to get a reading because the shaft is not straight up and down. Don’t believe everything you see on the internet, tour pros are moving into lab putters and that’s kind of all the evidence you need
Would be interesting to know the reason, why Justin (Rose) left Axis 1
@@ranczar maybe the tidal wave of negative comments is a sign. Maybe… just maybe consider the possibility that this isn’t an unfair band of LAB sponsored fanboys in a coordinated attack on your just and pure cause. MAYBE… you are just wrong and torque only matters in motion and for the club face to the ball. The LAB putter removes torque in motion DESPITE human imperfections trying to torque the putter. If Your putter starts with zero torque at address, what good does that do me as an imperfect golfer who will probably put a little torque into my putting stroke through my hands into the handle? The revealer is a good tool because it removes the user error and torque we all add trying to open and shut a face in motion.
I really think this test is a waist of time. The proof is on the green my friend and the LAB putters are by far the best on the market.
I'm pretty sure this would read 0 for any of the LAB products if they were using a straight non-pressed grip.
Yep and Luis of course knows this. He also knows that if he tilted the clamp, the 3° for the grip it would also read zero torque. He also knows that if his torque meter worked in motion like the one that we are working on, ours will read zero torque and his will not.
There is a reason everyone is starting to copy and try to discredit LAB golf. They have caught fire on the tours.
We certainly did not copy anyone as we came up with this technology back in 2009, all we are trying to do is start a dialogue on how torque can be appropriately measured across putters. This video is very similar to what LAB has been doing with their revealer for years, showing other putters not staying square... we're simply using a measuring device to actually show torque and no torque in the address position.
@@Axis1Putters but why would i care if there's torque or no torque at address? putting is already difficult as it is ... why would anyone stuff up his mind with irrelevant info?
@@kckong3 I don’t think knowing more about torque is irrelevant information. With this knowledge, I have a better understanding of the events that occur during a putting stroke. Maybe I can find an adjustment to make that can help me improve. Isn’t that what the game is about?
@@ranczar You have ZERO additional understanding about events that occur “during a putting stroke.” That would require having a conversation about torque in motion, no? Since during a putting stroke obviously the putter is in motion. We are all saying the same thing - what good does it do to have zero torque at address suspended in the air? None of those putters have torque when you rest them on the ground at address. It’s clear to me you’re an agent of axis golf and don’t know when to admit you’re wrong. It’s like having a discourse with a brick wall I’m done here.
@@ranczar are u on hallucinatory meds??? When u hit the ground, go to the Wikipedia page on torque for starters...
If I could putt statically then this test would matter. It's a putting stroke, not statics. You must dynamically test the putters in order to claim zero torque.
If a putter has torque in the address position it will have torque in motion as well. We love the idea of a swing robot that measures torque as well, but this video was really to introduce people to the Mark-10 and a way of actually measuring torque while testing various putters in the address position to showcase torque or no torque.
I see the lab army has arrived…
With all due respect this device can measure all it wants how much “torque” the putters have, that’s not a true representation. First of all, when putting the putter isn’t staying completely still. So the “torque” that you get while measuring an object that’s completely still doesn’t work. That’s why the revealer is more telling because once you put it in motion, there’s no torque. That’s the whole point. To not have torque WHEN IN MOTION. To say that the Axis1 generates zero torque is a complete lie because when you PUT IT IN MOTION, IT TWISTS. It is not a true zero torque.
You literally just said “I know you have a tool to measure the exact scientific principle occurring but I don’t like it and it’s wrong”😂. Cmon man. They have a video showing both in the revealer and it reflects exactly what he’s saying here.
Actually he is saying you have the right scientific tool, but you are using it improperly. It needs to be tested in motion.
@@fasteddy9126torque at the grip is torque at the grip no matter which way you slice it.
@jakephelps4766 you're correct, and i never said it wasn't, neither did the previous response. However, a torque value at rest has no relatable value to the putting stroke because the putting stroke is dynamic and not static. Therefore, this demonstration adds zero value to the conversation about "zero torque" putters.
@@fasteddy9126do you not agree that torque at rest will at least give an indication of the minimum amount of force one has to overcome to stabilize the putter face during the stroke? How would that not add value to the discussion of zero torque putters?
Why aren’t you swinging the putters?
This video is meant to introduce people to and start a conversation around utilizing a measuring device like the torque meter to help standardize 'what is torque'. We plan to advance these tests more and more each time and a putter in motion or at the point of motion is a logical next step in this discussion. But one thing we know is that if a putter has torque at address, it will also have torque in motion during a swing as well.
Has a torque meter, needs a bullshit meter. Nobody gives a crap about torque at address. The putter is on the ground, duh! LAB's concept of zero-torque through the swing is what matters for anyone looking for a "zero torque" putter.
The putter is actually not on the ground in the video, we are holding it up in a clamp by the grip (and that clamp is what is measuring torque inside the torque meter device) at the lie angle of address. If there is torque in this static position, there will be torque in motion. Unfortunately torque does not disappear once present.
Faulty premise LAB has zero torque down pat. Axis one does not
Has the Axis putter won money on any of the professional golf tours? Head to head comparison to LAB....?
Justin Rose had great success with it for a long time. I believe they had a win on the Korn Ferry tour as well.
$16M in tour winnings
I didn't know, so I thought I'd ask. Either way, it's not the arrow, but the person shooting the arrow. I decided to buy my arrow from Sam @LAB.
@ just under $3M for Axis this year, just under $25M for LAB
Like I said before, LAB rules.....
PXG Allan ???
Your putter, also has a few flaws sir. Check out the tour usage. It speaks for itself. Hope rosey keeps you alive for another year😂
what a dumb video... lab putters take time to get used to, but once you get the concept how we have been putting "wrong" for decades, lab putters really make sense
I tried my friend's DF2. It felt very light & I thought one should hold it very loosely and let it swing freely like a pendulum. Is that how it should be used? LOL with my old school putters (toe hang & face balanced types), I grip them firmly as if holding a cleaver/hammer without a trigger index finger, elbows against my ribs & simply rock my shoulders for consistency. If I did that with the LABs, woudn't it negate all the goodness built in?
With all due respect you did the same video months ago and were proven a liar😂😂 nice job deceiving the smooth brains
Bummer, no love for lefties... :/
🤣🤣😂😂😅😅
Disingenuous bs. Here let me test something at rest that's meant to be in motion. If this is the way you test, I'm sure I'm just as good as any professional golfer at holding the golf club...but that's not how golf is played. I was intrigued by your putter before this video but now, I would just as well use a club brush as a putter before using an Axis.
Glad to hear of your interest in trying our putters and we hope one day you will try an Axis1. In this test we are measuring torque at the address position (the putter is not on the ground, it is being held within the device clamp) and if torque is present in this position it will also be present in motion. This is just physics, the torque cannot disappear in motion once it has been shown to be present. This is all we wanted to showcase along with introducing a device that takes actual torque readings.
@@Axis1Putters Actual torque readings along an axis not used in the putting stroke. You lifted the putter forward which means nothing in putting as you don't putt that way. Do the same reading while lifting the putter along the line of intended play. Demonstrate that your putter is zero torque in the plane of intended motion.
@@xxthadeucexx The torque meter was not measuring the forward lift of the putter, it is measuring putters in the address position... which would be along the line of intended play in a putting stroke...
@@Axis1Putters Tell yourself whatever you need to sleep at night but hanging the putter straight up and down and claiming it's zero torque then lifting it into an address position and saying it's zero torque is great if putters never move. Putters need to move to hit the ball and once it moves, what happens? Show me zero torque in motion...which is where it counts. My driver hits the ball as far and straight as any tour driver as long as neither of them move...but that's not how golf clubs work. I understand your marketing strategy but all of us aren't sheep. Not to mention you had a DF3 with a 2 degree press grip which will change the torque value in a static environment. I'm sure your putter is great but making videos like this won't help you sell them to anyone who thinks for themselves. Good luck.