LAB Self-balancing putter

[Purdyd]

I recently had a chance to roll the ball with a couple lab putters and when I picked it up and rotated the shaft it didn’t behave like I thought it should.

like any good golfer I started looking at the patents 

https://labgolf.com/pages/patents

i found it interesting that the patent title is self balancing putter. 
 

I thought the shaft went through the center of gravity.  But it appears it does not.  The shaft passes above the center of gravity by as I read it about 1/2”.

and so the putter is actually slightly heel weighted. When you spin it around the shaft axis. This leads to a self correcting moment if the face is rotated from the balanced orientation with respect to the shaft lie angle.

 The other thing I didn’t realize is the shaft is leaned forward and the press grip axis is not in line with the putters center of gravity, 

This seems to be different than say the axis putters who advertise the shaft does go directly through the center of gravity.

certainly open to anyone who would like to correct me on my assertions.

Edited November 10 by Purdyd

[Rob Person]

Since i ha e never seen one in person, this is speculative on my part.

I think this is where the bottom weights come into play, essentially balancing the putter to CoG.  Also depending on the length of the shaft, it also acts as a balance point. Of course, this particular patent may be just 1 iteration of what they are/were attempting,  and future designs will be able to fall under that umbrella of R&D.

 

[GolfSpy_APH]

This would make sense. I as well as others who have tried LAB have felt that heel strikes feel better than toes trikes and can come off a bit hotter. While the later may be my own feelings. 

Did it say when this patent is up?

[Josh Parker]

4 hours ago, GolfSpy_APH said:

 

Did it say when this patent is up?

I saw a expected expiration of 2033

[Purdyd]

13 hours ago, Rob Person said:

Since i ha e never seen one in person, this is speculative on my part.

I think this is where the bottom weights come into play, essentially balancing the putter to CoG.  Also depending on the length of the shaft, it also acts as a balance point. Of course, this particular patent may be just 1 iteration of what they are/were attempting,  and future designs will be able to fall under that umbrella of R&D.

 

I looked at all the published patents, they are the same.

yes, I thought they were precisely aligning the cg with the shaft.  After holding one I doubted that.

the cg appears to be .2” toward the heel from the shaft axis by design

this makes it a self aligning putter or heel down

With the press grip it would be more like a normal center shafted blade putter and there would still be torque on your hands 

like I said I didn’t really appreciate the design until I got my hands on one at golf galaxy and spent entirely too long rolling balls with the lab 3 and a variety of putters.

It was pretty obvious that for such a large putter it rests very neutral at address the other large head putters with rearward cg almost felt like they are wrestling your hands open.

on the other hand the blade or even wide blade putters didn’t feel that way in comparison and with all of the fancy milling and face inserts gave a nice roll

so I came back thinking I should better understand what lie angle balanced really means.

it is interesting to contrast the lab patents with the axis patents where it is pretty clear that axis is running the shaft right through the cg.

and I found a nice article discussing the various weighting of putters and their benefit

 

https://www.tutelman.com/golf/design/special4.php
 

It’s going t be an interesting time with all kinds of marketing claims as the avalanche of zero torque putters inundate us

 

 

 

 

 

Edited November 10 by Purdyd

[The TXBexar]

1 hour ago, Purdyd said:

I looked at all the published patents, they are the same.

yes, I thought they were precisely aligning the cg with the shaft.  After holding one I doubted that.

the cg appears to be .2” toward the heel from the shaft axis by design

this makes it a self aligning putter or heel down

With the press grip it would be more like a normal center shafted blade putter and there would still be torque on your hands 

like I said I didn’t really appreciate the design until I got my hands on one at golf galaxy and spent entirely too long rolling balls with the lab 3 and a variety of putters.

It was pretty obvious that for such a large putter it rests very neutral at address the other large head putters with rearward cg almost felt like they are wrestling your hands open.

on the other hand the blade or even wide blade putters didn’t feel that way in comparison and with all of the fancy milling and face inserts gave a nice roll

so I came back thinking I should better understand what lie angle balanced really means.

it is interesting to contrast the lab patents with the axis patents where it is pretty clear that axis is running the shaft right through the cg.

and I found a nice article discussing the various weighting of putters and their benefit

https://www.tutelman.com/golf/design/special4.php

It’s going t be an interesting time with all kinds of marketing claims as the avalanche of zero torque putters inundate us

A man after my own heart, looking up the Patents to figure out how a clubs new design works! 

What I figured out with LAB putters, is that they're not technically Zero-Torque putters. Like the patent shows with the CG of the club and the placement location of the shaft through the head, plus the Press Grip, is that they use heel torque to keep the face square through the stroke to give you the best chance at clean square contact while putting, while also using weight-balance so that they torque doesn't counter a good putting stroke.

Most people tend to have a sort-of semi-circular putting stroke path; Traditionally, Toe-Heavy blade putters were used to counter the way you would naturally close & open the putter face during this stroke path. LAB decide that instead of improving this, what if we make a putter that fixes people's putting stroke and improves their ball-striking while putting. The design they used shows that since their putters are more-so Heel-Heavy, due to the shaft being above the CoG towards the toe, the putter face will naturally want to stay square to the ball, no matter the type of putting stroke you use.

It's truly pretty incredible what their able to achieve, because if you have a semi-circular putting stroke, the putters heel-heavy design will counter the forces that close the face in the backstroke and open it during the forward stroke that this putting style will normally produce. But also, if you putt with a straight-back to straight-forward stroke, the weight balance in the club is able to resist the heel-heavy design so that the putter face doesn't open in the back stroke & close in the forward stroke. 

This is why I think they are so different from every other putting brand right now, and probably will be for a good while longer; everyone's going "Zero-Torque" while LAB is going the opposite way and producing something that makes "Useful-Torque" to better your natural putting stroke. 

Edited November 10 by The TXBexar

[RyanGi]

It’ll be very interesting to see how other mfgs try to emulate the results from LAB. I’m thinking this is going to end up being a ‘you can get close enough, for less $$, with our putter’ pitch with the other OEMs. I imagine that will find success. Purists will stay with LAB, but if other OEMs can get pretty damn close for $200 less they’ll sell loads of them. 

[GolfSpy_APH]

While we have no confirmation that we can share we have heard of several major brands that will likely be introducing their own ZT putters in the not too distant future. 

[Purdyd]

3 hours ago, The TXBexar said:

This is why I think they are so different from every other putting brand right now, and probably will be for a good while longer; everyone's going "Zero-Torque" while LAB is going the opposite way and producing something that makes "Useful-Torque" to better your natural putting stroke. 

The problem is the press grip and the forward leaning shaft.

because the press grip changes the rotation axis of your hands the club is is not self aligning anymore, at least about the axis of the grip and hence your hands 

if the “revealer” was held at the top and the bottom of the grip (versus rhe shaft) the club would not self align because  cg would be behind and toward the heel with respect to grip axis.

also the forward leaning shaft and press grip actually promotes not pressing the club  and I don’t think that is a good thing 

On the other hand the lab putters with the forward shaft look perfect for an armlock putter which would be used with a conventional grip.

It’s an interesting putter but I don’t think it is doing what it is advertised as doing.

2 hours ago, GolfSpy_APH said:

While we have no confirmation that we can share we have heard of several major brands that will likely be introducing their own ZT putters in the not too distant future. 

Yes and there will be a lot of marketing claims that we will have to wade through

interesting times 

 

 

[RyanGi]

My DF3 is an armlock and it’s very natural the way it lines up. Works like a charm!