Interesting comparison Axis1 vs LAB

[joostin]

8 hours ago, agolfman said:

Good analysis @joostin.  I’m with you…I have two Cure putters and I’m just defaulting to high MOI as a way to solve the same. I think when data is eventually available as you cite, we’ll all conclude the same thing. I guess we’ll have to wait that out. Until then, we’re all going to watch the revenge of the ugly putter shapes start to win the day. 

Doesn't seem to be many around with Cure putters, and to be fair, with the size of their heads they're not really winning any looks contest either 😆.

 

I don't discount people's results with LAB or Axis1 because everyone has their own feel and sensitivity of things.  I gotta believe though that for some out there it’s more placebo, mental, or belief than it is the physical reaction to torque differences.  As mentioned that's fine too - whatever works works - but given the tech advantage nature of what they promote I'd like to see real torque info.

[5hort5tuff]

@joostin what are your thoughts about Seemore's balanced to plane heads. LAB has already said those don't exist as well. 

 

I've hit numerous SeeMores and I do find their balanced to plane models swing differently. 

[joostin]

49 minutes ago, 5hort5tuff said:

@joostin what are your thoughts about Seemore's balanced to plane heads. LAB has already said those don't exist as well. 

 

I've hit numerous SeeMores and I do find their balanced to plane models swing differently. 

I like SeeMore.  Have an OG FGP in a bag I keep with family out of state.  I think the toe hang is like 90° toe down, meaning the head CG is almost directly above the shaft axis when holding it toe up.  That would allow SeeMore’s balance test they do with a tee having the toe stay up.  It’s not stable though (zero torque putters with CG on axis and toe up putters with CG below axis are more stable), and you can cheat it a little by torquing on the grip end.

 

I know LAB’s Revealer will show SeeMore is typically “better” than most.  That’s because the CG on something like the FGP is closer to the shaft axis than most.  Since SeeMore has the wide alignment aid, and most models have a straight-in shaft, they need a thick topline.  That brings mass up front which helps for that CG to axis closeness.

For me though, the SeeMore story isn’t about balance or feel, it’s about the stroke.  FGP is what helped me develop a stroke that’s almost belly putter like (probably more like if it was anchored to my spine) – rotational - which I found much better for me than trying to swing SBST at all or pressing hands forward of center... Really turned around my putting thanks to the "hide the red dot" and picturing Zach Johnson's putting stroke.

[5hort5tuff]

Agree with everything above. Their balanced to plane putters do swing better than most regular putters in my experience. Combine depth their RST aiming...they are very very underrated.   Of course their marketing and aesthetics are behind the pack, which is why they are seldom considered imo. 

[SwingMan]

Yes, I keep an original SeeMore FGP around to check my setup and stroke. Great training aid and Excellent putter

[ephmen]

On 3/2/2024 at 3:51 PM, joostin said:

That was my suggestion to Axis1 in a post a few months ago - for them to bring a fair competitive point to LAB regarding grip axis torque.  After all, LAB seems to be killing it while Axis1 is hanging onto Justin Rose.  Given my thread was the only place you’ll find that analysis, it seems Luis Pedraza took it to heart.  (I think that deserves a thank you complimentary gift Axis1 Rose, and a competitive test putter from LAB, right? 😉).

 

His execution was clumsy though.  Then Sam Hahn from LAB did a rebuttal video but completely missed the point about grip axis torque; he still bypassed the grip when adjusting his Revealer.  And now everyone’s up in arms! 🤺

Regarding the grip axis, because a grip forces our hands to align with its axis, the hands will see torque around that grip axis.  So yes, the LAB press grip will induce torque at the hands just because the head CG is off the grip axis.  How much?  Let's calculate it from the equation from my thread:

 

T = head weight (mass*gravitational acceleration) * cosine (lie angle) * distance of head CG from grip axis

 

Assume a 350g head; 70° lie; CG 1" behind the grip axis.  Don't know actual specs but close enough for a calculation.

 

T = .350kg * 9.8m/s² * cos(70) * .0254m

= .0298 N-m

= .022 lbf-ft "foot pounds"

 

Yup we’re not talking about a whole lot of torque here, but the heavier the weight and/or the further back the CG, the higher the torque.

 

However, throw a normal non-press grip on that LAB putter, and this torque goes away.  Btw any forward press already induces a torque, even with Axis1, as you’ll see below.

As for the speed they’re swinging the Revealers, LAB will probably win that battle every time.  Head CG needs to be aligned with the shaft axis for the head to not flop around.  With Axis1 I’d imagine by design their putters really are “zero torque" with that CG/axis alignment.  However, because they use a bent shaft, that will always introduce more variance in the actual build.  Rotate it a tiny bit off and the CG is no longer perfectly inline with the shaft/grip axis.  LAB with its straight shaft will not have any significant build error, so it’ll be closer to perfect every time.

I like what Axis1 and LAB are doing.  They’ve identified a variable that can be removed.  However here's one thing that no one's addressing:  Zero torque is the basis for the companies’ advantage over others.  But… has anyone measured this torque (static and dynamic) at the hands during the putting stroke?  Quantified torque in any way?  Data analysis?  Proven how much total torque is reduced at the hands with their putters?  Nope.  You’d need data from an array of sensors on the grip.  It’s a technical “problem” they’re solving, but from an engineering view there’s no technical data of the problem nor supporting the solution.  All other clubs are non-zero torque.  Are they all problems?  We all already adapt to non-zero torque clubs.  How much grip torque reduction can be quantified as significant?

Sure, people swear to their putters, and some are doing great at the highest levels. Placebo or not, results are results.  That’s great for business, tour adoption, etc., but since the claims of technical torque advantage have no technical torque analysis backing, let’s see an actual torque study from companies making claims about their torque advantages.  All we have is the LAB Revealer that, smartly, makes most other putters look pretty inferior as they flop around.  What they're doing is great, and LAB's marketing and word of mouth influence seems terrific, but as the forerunners of putter "tech", let's back the anecdotal evidence and Revealer tests with real data-driven torque analysis.  We're in a data analytics world now.

Here’s the other thing.  There are multiple types of torque that exist at the hands.  Torque exists on multiple axes, not just around the shaft axis or grip axis, which is all they really can zero out.  Because the companies claim “no torque", everyone seems led to believe that torque is a singular thing that these companies have “solved" and zeroed out.  Not true.  There’s torque around the grip (static and dynamic).  That's the torque they can get to zero.  But then there’s torque from a face on view; torque from a DTL view; applied rotational torques when swinging the club and rotating the face; and torque on off-CG impact with the ball.  These torques are all there, and they will always be.  “This putter has no torque" is very much a false statement to anyone that understands the physics 101.

 

To clarify here are some of the types of torque at the hands:

The static torque below (green rotation arrow) they can get to zero (and so can toe-up putters btw):

The dynamic torque below (green rotation arrow, T equation circled) they can get to zero (and so can face-balanced putters):

Any applied torque from active rotation of the hands (green rotation arrow, τ equation circled) here is not zero:

This torque below cannot be zero unless the head CG is directly below the hands.  Any forward press will present torque here when the putter is off the ground:

Both these dynamic torques below (T=F*d and τ=I*α) applied by the golfer cannot be zero, ever:

For τ=I*α, I = MOI of the whole club.  α = angular acceleration at the start of the backswing 

This torque below cannot be zero unless the head CG is directly below the hands, which is never:

Any off-CG strike cannot be zero torque:

[Btw, look how the shaft is angled slightly away from the head CG on this Axis1 picture.  That means the bent shaft was rotated a little off when installed, and you'll see a not-so-great Revealer test.]

 

I'm not even including torques at transition in the backswing, but you get the point.  Torque exists, in multiple ways, with any putter.  They can only zero out torque around the shaft or grip axis (via zero moment arm distances by placing head CG inline with the shaft or grip axis).  The other torques are still there.

 

Personally I'm more interested in high MOI for putters (my giant Cure models in signature), but here's hoping Axis1 and @labgolf consider DM-ing me for complimentary putters to persuade my own choices in the spirit of wrx 🍻.

i ain't reading all that

i'm happy for you tho

or sorry that happened

[joostin]

11 hours ago, ephmen said:

i ain't reading all that

i'm happy for you tho

or sorry that happened

Haha all good.

TLDR:  Torque study would be good to back the tech.  Diagrams of existing torques.  Can't deny that results are results for whatever putter works for you.

[ephmen]

11 hours ago, joostin said:

Haha all good.

TLDR:  Torque study would be good to back the tech.  Diagrams of existing torques.  Can't deny that results are results for whatever putter works for you.

Just a funny meme-despite my scientific background I can't follow. Lol . 

[labgolf]

On 3/2/2024 at 12:51 PM, joostin said:

That was my suggestion to Axis1 in a post a few months ago - for them to bring a fair competitive point to LAB regarding grip axis torque.  After all, LAB seems to be killing it while Axis1 is hanging onto Justin Rose.  Given my thread was the only place you’ll find that analysis, it seems Luis Pedraza took it to heart.  (I think that deserves a thank you complimentary gift Axis1 Rose, and a competitive test putter from LAB, right? 😉).

 

His execution was clumsy though.  Then Sam Hahn from LAB did a rebuttal video but completely missed the point about grip axis torque; he still bypassed the grip when adjusting his Revealer.  And now everyone’s up in arms! 🤺

Regarding the grip axis, because a grip forces our hands to align with its axis, the hands will see torque around that grip axis.  So yes, the LAB press grip will induce torque at the hands just because the head CG is off the grip axis.  How much?  Let's calculate it from the equation from my thread:

 

T = head weight (mass*gravitational acceleration) * cosine (lie angle) * distance of head CG from grip axis

 

Assume a 350g head; 70° lie; CG 1" behind the grip axis.  Don't know actual specs but close enough for a calculation.

 

T = .350kg * 9.8m/s² * cos(70) * .0254m

= .0298 N-m

= .022 lbf-ft "foot pounds"

 

Yup we’re not talking about a whole lot of torque here, but the heavier the weight and/or the further back the CG, the higher the torque.

 

However, throw a normal non-press grip on that LAB putter, and this torque goes away.  Btw any forward press already induces a torque, even with Axis1, as you’ll see below.

As for the speed they’re swinging the Revealers, LAB will probably win that battle every time.  Head CG needs to be aligned with the shaft axis for the head to not flop around.  With Axis1 I’d imagine by design their putters really are “zero torque" with that CG/axis alignment.  However, because they use a bent shaft, that will always introduce more variance in the actual build.  Rotate it a tiny bit off and the CG is no longer perfectly inline with the shaft/grip axis.  LAB with its straight shaft will not have any significant build error, so it’ll be closer to perfect every time.

I like what Axis1 and LAB are doing.  They’ve identified a variable that can be removed.  However here's one thing that no one's addressing:  Zero torque is the basis for the companies’ advantage over others.  But… has anyone measured this torque (static and dynamic) at the hands during the putting stroke?  Quantified torque in any way?  Data analysis?  Proven how much total torque is reduced at the hands with their putters?  Nope.  You’d need data from an array of sensors on the grip.  It’s a technical “problem” they’re solving, but from an engineering view there’s no technical data of the problem nor supporting the solution.  All other clubs are non-zero torque.  Are they all problems?  We all already adapt to non-zero torque clubs.  How much grip torque reduction can be quantified as significant?

Sure, people swear to their putters, and some are doing great at the highest levels. Placebo or not, results are results.  That’s great for business, tour adoption, etc., but since the claims of technical torque advantage have no technical torque analysis backing, let’s see an actual torque study from companies making claims about their torque advantages.  All we have is the LAB Revealer that, smartly, makes most other putters look pretty inferior as they flop around.  What they're doing is great, and LAB's marketing and word of mouth influence seems terrific, but as the forerunners of putter "tech", let's back the anecdotal evidence and Revealer tests with real data-driven torque analysis.  We're in a data analytics world now.

Here’s the other thing.  There are multiple types of torque that exist at the hands.  Torque exists on multiple axes, not just around the shaft axis or grip axis, which is all they really can zero out.  Because the companies claim “no torque", everyone seems led to believe that torque is a singular thing that these companies have “solved" and zeroed out.  Not true.  There’s torque around the grip (static and dynamic).  That's the torque they can get to zero.  But then there’s torque from a face on view; torque from a DTL view; applied rotational torques when swinging the club and rotating the face; and torque on off-CG impact with the ball.  These torques are all there, and they will always be.  “This putter has no torque" is very much a false statement to anyone that understands the physics 101.

 

To clarify here are some of the types of torque at the hands:

The static torque below (green rotation arrow) they can get to zero (and so can toe-up putters btw):

The dynamic torque below (green rotation arrow, T equation circled) they can get to zero (and so can face-balanced putters):

Any applied torque from active rotation of the hands (green rotation arrow, τ equation circled) here is not zero:

This torque below cannot be zero unless the head CG is directly below the hands.  Any forward press will present torque here when the putter is off the ground:

Both these dynamic torques below (T=F*d and τ=I*α) applied by the golfer cannot be zero, ever:

For τ=I*α, I = MOI of the whole club.  α = angular acceleration at the start of the backswing 

This torque below cannot be zero unless the head CG is directly below the hands, which is never:

Any off-CG strike cannot be zero torque:

[Btw, look how the shaft is angled slightly away from the head CG on this Axis1 picture.  That means the bent shaft was rotated a little off when installed, and you'll see a not-so-great Revealer test.]

 

I'm not even including torques at transition in the backswing, but you get the point.  Torque exists, in multiple ways, with any putter.  They can only zero out torque around the shaft or grip axis (via zero moment arm distances by placing head CG inline with the shaft or grip axis).  The other torques are still there.

 

Personally I'm more interested in high MOI for putters (my giant Cure models in signature), but here's hoping Axis1 and @labgolf consider DM-ing me for complimentary putters to persuade my own choices in the spirit of wrx 🍻.

Screw a free putter...you want a job??

[MattM97]

42 minutes ago, labgolf said:

Screw a free putter...you want a job??

 

I'll take his putter if he passes on it 😂

Edited March 6 by MattM97

[joostin]

10 hours ago, labgolf said:

Screw a free putter...you want a job??

LMAO, I mean that'd be awesome. But you know wrxers love equipment 😉

[PixlPutterman]

On 3/6/2024 at 11:59 AM, labgolf said:

Screw a free putter...you want a job??

 

[joostin]

In unexpected news, Axis1 reached out to me upon seeing the torque analysis posts, and they unnecessarily honored my tongue-in-cheek request for a complimentary putter!  They asked which putter I wanted incl. specs, and now I'm a proud owner of a Rose :)

 

Can't wait to give it a shot.  It looks and feels really nice IMO.  It does balance toe up for me, and the shaft axis crosses a little farther back of the face than I thought.  I might take the torch to it to see if I can rotate and reset the shaft a little to get it to "zero" inline with the head CG.  Super happy to even have it and for them to reach out, all for being a nerd on here lol.

Axis1 team, I’m truly grateful for your generosity and kind words.  Thank you!

[ChaosTheory]

On 3/2/2024 at 9:34 PM, Liveonce said:

Have tried numerous LABs—switched to an Axis.1, found my forever putter. Looks better, feels better, sounds better than LAB. Speed control much easier. Really having a lot of fun with it. Agree with the others regarding torque—you can torque the LAB putters too and hit pulls, pushes etc. I know let the putter swing yada yada. 

Hah, I have the opposite experience with speed control.  I couldn’t control distance with the Rose putter, but the Mezz.1 might be the best I’ve owned for that.  I’ll give you looks and feel, but I’m making more putts with the Mezz.

 

 I think they both are noticeably better at staying square.  I use a very light hold on a putter.  Maybe that’s why these help me.

[ChaosTheory]

17 minutes ago, joostin said:

I might take the torch to it to see if I can rotate and reset the shaft a little to get it to "zero" inline with the head CG

Why not just try it as installed?

[joostin]

14 minutes ago, ChaosTheory said:

Why not just try it as installed?

Yep gonna try that first before messing around.  Can always modify as needed.

[JohnBrew]

On 3/15/2024 at 7:42 AM, ChaosTheory said:

Hah, I have the opposite experience with speed control.  I couldn’t control distance with the Rose putter, but the Mezz.1 might be the best I’ve owned for that.  I’ll give you looks and feel, but I’m making more putts with the Mezz.

 

 I think they both are noticeably better at staying square.  I use a very light hold on a putter.  Maybe that’s why these help me.

I tried a LAB Mezz and putted well with it. I found the looks strange but it seems pros have gotten over that problem with good results. I’m currently in a Sacks-Parente mallet and I like it. It is consistent. I would love to try an Axis putter but it seems you have to buy one to try - I have yet to find a fitter with an Axis in stock for comparison purposes.

[ChaosTheory]

I do buy Axis1's argument that the angled grip on the LAB will introduce some torque back into the picture, at the hands where it actually matters.  I don't think it is even debatable. But I feel like it isn't much, at least with the 1.5 grip that I use.  I'm still making more putts with my Mezz.1 than with any putter I can recall.   I'm used to having putts miss my line, but that's rare with the Mezz.1. 

 

And I think the upgraded shafts are mental horsepower that doesn't necessarily show up at the track.  You will have to pry my black steel shaft out of my cold, dead hands.  Now my Axis1 Rose, there was a putter that needed a much stiffer shaft.

 

I guess as LAB fanboys go, I'm not doing a very good job.

[ChaosTheory]

@labgolf

What would be wrong with a Mezz.1 with a plumb, rather than forward leaned, shaft and resultant onset of the face in front of the shaft line?  It could be made to be zero torque, and would appeal to those who like a forward ball position.

[BigMac_Finn]

@joostin love the explanation.. love that you use t*ger as the example as arguable, he doesnt care.. look at his putter.. he hits center 98% of the time 😉

 

One thing that these putters dont do is help me with reading the greens!! I dont want to buy a hololens to do so.. hahahaha

 

So someone come up with a cheaper and more affordable version of reading greens so I can put like the video games, now that is what amateurs could really use! Is there a putter that uses "AI" to put for me? 😉

[labgolf]

On 3/15/2024 at 5:02 AM, joostin said:

Yep gonna try that first before messing around.  Can always modify as needed.

If you bend it, it will increase the amount of torque in motion. I'd leave it.

[labgolf]

On 4/3/2024 at 9:27 AM, ChaosTheory said:

@labgolf

What would be wrong with a Mezz.1 with a plumb, rather than forward leaned, shaft and resultant onset of the face in front of the shaft line?  It could be made to be zero torque, and would appeal to those who like a forward ball position.

Unfortunately to get the putters to balance the way we do, we have some big restrictions around where we can locate the shaft but we're working on it!

[labgolf]

On 4/3/2024 at 9:24 AM, ChaosTheory said:

I do buy Axis1's argument that the angled grip on the LAB will introduce some torque back into the picture, at the hands where it actually matters.  I don't think it is even debatable. But I feel like it isn't much, at least with the 1.5 grip that I use.  I'm still making more putts with my Mezz.1 than with any putter I can recall.   I'm used to having putts miss my line, but that's rare with the Mezz.1. 

 

And I think the upgraded shafts are mental horsepower that doesn't necessarily show up at the track.  You will have to pry my black steel shaft out of my cold, dead hands.  Now my Axis1 Rose, there was a putter that needed a much stiffer shaft.

 

I guess as LAB fanboys go, I'm not doing a very good job.

Regarding Luis' argument about the shaft and grip axis, the shaft has no idea what grip is on it. The head has no idea what grip is on it. As long as the putter is balanced with the grip on, it has zero impact on the torque profile. If I gave you a DF balanced with a straight grip and one balanced with a press grip, you'd feel no difference in motion. If I changed the press grip to a straight one (or other way around) without re-balancing, you'd feel a tiny bit of torque.

[StoutKing]

For those who have putted with both a LAB and Axis1 - did you notice any significant difference between them?  I have a Rose but could never dial in the speed.  Interested in a DF3 but don't want to spend the money if it's going to be the same.  Putting has always been my strength and I wonder if it could be even better.  Maybe I'm one of the people who putts better with torque.

[dmeeksDC]

4 hours ago, StoutKing said:

For those who have putted with both a LAB and Axis1 - did you notice any significant difference between them?  I have a Rose but could never dial in the speed.  Interested in a DF3 but don't want to spend the money if it's going to be the same.  Putting has always been my strength and I wonder if it could be even better.  Maybe I'm one of the people who putts better with torque.

I have an Axis1 Rose in the bag and I have a custom DF3 on order. I previously owned a MEZZ1 but did not mesh with that one.  The DF3 in PGASS store demos has been lights out good. Very smooth. 
 

One thing about the Axis I noted when I first got it was I was long on putts. Then I put on impact tape and realized I was hitting putts in the middle of the face so much more consistently. I actually benched the Rose and then brought it back months later because my son said I  make more putts with it. And he was right. Took some time and dialed in the speed. Put it in play and a month later won an adult/child tournament with my son. Thing is, that No. 7 shape it has is not my favorite — I go for wide blades and rounder backs like Golos and Rossies — but the Rose putter is so undeniably stable. It’s the only fang-style putter I have stuck with for any period of time. 
 

I like the size of the DF3 and so far what I like best is speed control and how it sets up. It feels like I can make longer putts with it. It feels easier to aim than Mezz1. I think I did a better job knowing myself with this order: standard weight, custom alignment, steel shaft. Last time I went heavy head and graphite shaft and did not care for it. The DF3 I ordered feels very balanced. 
 

In action, I don’t think “no torque” is really possible, at least not with me involved, and I don’t really care about which is more torque free. I am looking for results on long and short putts and I really feel these companies offer putters that can help in one huge way — starting my putts on my lines. I’ll be posting my findings but I feel like it will be individual. My only other advice is both of these putter designs take some time to get used to because of how we are used to putting. These putters are more efficient. So take some time and don’t bail too soon. I did feel like the DF3 shows real potential as I like to play the ball forward and I like where the shaft enters the head. So if there are a few shots to be found there I’ll take it but we shall see.

[StoutKing]

1 hour ago, dmeeksDC said:

I have an Axis1 Rose in the bag and I have a custom DF3 on order. I previously owned a MEZZ1 but did not mesh with that one.  The DF3 in PGASS store demos has been lights out good. Very smooth. 
 

One thing about the Axis I noted when I first got it was I was long on putts. Then I put on impact tape and realized I was hitting putts in the middle of the face so much more consistently. I actually benched the Rose and then brought it back months later because my son said I  make more putts with it. And he was right. Took some time and dialed in the speed. Put it in play and a month later won an adult/child tournament with my son. Thing is, that No. 7 shape it has is not my favorite — I go for wide blades and rounder backs like Golos and Rossies — but the Rose putter is so undeniably stable. It’s the only fang-style putter I have stuck with for any period of time. 
 

I like the size of the DF3 and so far what I like best is speed control and how it sets up. It feels like I can make longer putts with it. It feels easier to aim than Mezz1. I think I did a better job knowing myself with this order: standard weight, custom alignment, steel shaft. Last time I went heavy head and graphite shaft and did not care for it. The DF3 I ordered feels very balanced. 
 

In action, I don’t think “no torque” is really possible, at least not with me involved, and I don’t really care about which is more torque free. I am looking for results on long and short putts and I really feel these companies offer putters that can help in one huge way — starting my putts on my lines. I’ll be posting my findings but I feel like it will be individual. My only other advice is both of these putter designs take some time to get used to because of how we are used to putting. These putters are more efficient. So take some time and don’t bail too soon. I did feel like the DF3 shows real potential as I like to play the ball forward and I like where the shaft enters the head. So if there are a few shots to be found there I’ll take it but we shall see.

Thanks for the detailed response.  You are not helping me with the DF3 LOL.  I agree that the Axis1 Rose is a good putter, just look at the results JR has had in the majors.  Unfortunately it just didn't work for my stroke.  I gave it a long time but I wasn't going to wait more than two months.  That was my limit.  Let us know how the DF3 goes in the real world.

[ChaosTheory]

16 hours ago, StoutKing said:

For those who have putted with both a LAB and Axis1 - did you notice any significant difference between them?  I have a Rose but could never dial in the speed.  Interested in a DF3 but don't want to spend the money if it's going to be the same.  Putting has always been my strength and I wonder if it could be even better.  Maybe I'm one of the people who putts better with torque.

I had a Rose, and now have a Mezz.1.  Speed wise, the Rose was way too hot.  I think the shaft is too flexible.  It imparts a great feel at impact but was just hard to control.  
 

I’m lagging quite well with the LAB.  It’s not the best feeling putter but it gets results for me.

[joostin]

On 4/6/2024 at 9:27 AM, HighHooks said:

@joostin any more updates on your findings?

Haven't played a round with the Axis1 Rose yet, just tested out on the putting green (played 1 round this year and was terrible in general lol).  It feels great and alignment is nice especially on short putts.

 

Since my Cure has onset I have to adjust ball position a little back vs that, but was hitting putts just as well.  I'm not the best person to judge though because I'm not too sensitive to swinging different putters or different full swing clubs/shafts.  That said I do like the mental assurance with the Rose, and any no torque putter, that I'm not countering torque (the ones that can be "zeroed" in previous posts) with my hands.  And we know confidence goes a long way.  Here's Rosey: