.

Was one instructor right and one wrong? No! They just have different preferences. Golf mimicking life, I guess. The difference lies in the player’s understanding and ability to use the technique. Just because I don’t know how to do it doesn’t make it wrong. This is especially true in today’s example. To start, consider this. Either the core swings the arms, or the arms and hands swing the club h

Because of this concept, there is a huge putter fitting difference between our two examples. Not the popular mallet vs. blade conversation. Please, that is just marketing. The single most important contributor to success in either of these strategies is the weight of the putter and how the weight is distributed along the dimensions of the entire putter, grip, length, and putter head. I am convinced our feel of a putting stroke is based on the weight and balance of a putter and not what it looks like.

Aim the picture and swing the weight.

If we follow the idea of swinging the weight, then the next question is where is our awareness when we swing the club? A turning point in my career happened when we discovered the balance point of a golf club contributed to how the player moved the putter. We would clip 50-gram weights at different points on the shaft, to replicate the weight of any measuring device we used in the initial evaluation. As we tried different locations, we made remarkable and immediate changes by moving the balance point on the golf club. Basically, the higher the balance point, the more engaged the shoulder and core became, and the lower the balance point moved, the source to the forearms, wrists, and hands. The arms and hands player has the greatest awareness of and ultimately feels the swinging of the clubhead. The core player is most aware and moves the handle. An ah-ha moment.

This discovery helps explain the differences we see in grip weights, counterbalancing, and head weights. How do I find what works best for me? These are some of the questions we ask in our evaluations.

What is the source of your movement pattern? Keep it simple to start. Do my hands swing the club head, or does my core move the handle?

Do I have a speed control tendency? Am I more likely to leave it short or hit it past? Keep in mind, light is faster, heavy is slower. Which do you need?

Does my putter seem to have a mind of its own or does it move in harmony with my motion? This is typically identified by how well the putter syncs with my effort and how much effort it takes for the putter to respond to my movements.

Here is my most common example: Player A likes to feel their arms connected to their core and sources the movement with a rotation of the core. They sense the putter is too light as they are using their biggest muscles to perform the task. The easiest solution is to add weight to the club head. The problem is the heavy weight that is far away from the source makes the putter slower to respond at certain key moments in the stroke, in particular, takeaway and backswing to forward swing. The player responds to the delay with extra effort from the source closest to the problem. The hands. Even though the entire concept of connected core is based on passive hands. Not their fault, it is just the way we are wired. Solution? Evaluate the overall weight of the putter and move the balance point accordingly.

Bruce - “Was there a model that at one time you had some success with?”

Student - I grew up using a flow neck blade, but I felt I needed more forgiveness, so I started looking at higher MOI mallets.”

Bruce - “Did you struggle with off-center hits with the blade?”

Student - “Not really. But I made some changes in my set up that is when the problems started.”

Bruce - “What kind of changes?”

Student - “I bought a mirror and I noticed my eyes were not over the ball. I read where that is a fundamental so I moved closer to the ball and gripped down a little on my blade.”

Bruce - “Two questions. First, did you find it hard to center the strike from the new set up and second, do you feel it is difficult to find the target line closer to the ball.

Student - “I think the answer is yes to both. That is why I started looking at mallets. I needed the forgiveness and I felt I could aim better”

Bruce - “With a mallet do you have a more consistent strike on the putter?”

Student - “It feels like I do.”

Bruce - “Modern-day mallets are designed to FEEL the same across the face. Are you sure?”

Student - “When you put it that way, I can’t say I am.”

Bruce - “We will need to address that. As for aim, do you use a line on the ball?”

Student - “Yes.”

Bruce - “Does the line roll end over end on most putts?”

Student - “Not so much.”

Bruce - “I see from the video you have some forward shaft lean.”

Student - “Yes, I always have preferred that in my stroke.”

Bruce - “With the mallet, does the ball hop a little on longer putts?”

Student - “Yes!!”

Bruce - “Can you send me some video of your original set up with your flow neck, with the advice that you let your eyes tell you where to stand, rather than force a position?”

Student - “Yes.”

I think it all starts with defining the player. How do they perceive the task? Where is their awareness in the stroke? The source of the motion source in my guideline. How do they develop or feel speed and where is their awareness for that task? Players either move their hands with their shoulders or swing the clubhead with their hands. Arms support either motion. Arms are either in sync with the shoulders or independent of shoulders with the hands. Shoulder swing the hands are usually more aware of the path, arms and hands are typically more aware of the club face.

Players fall into categories by my observation. Proactive and reactive. For example, my impression of pneumonia of your players is reactive. He plays the putt like he plays a shot. He needs to train to enhance that perception, not change it. You might have another player who is proactive, lots of block practice, every putt is a straight putt. He is going to make the same basic stroke regardless of condition; where the reactive player might play a putt off the toe or heel on purpose. A reactive player might change his release pattern depending on the circumstance. He needs a different perspective as a coach. How do you enhance that ability?

A word of warning. Changing a player to a coach’s preference can take away the opportunity to use their talents to excel.

Another category we see is linear and non-linear. The linear player is a candidate for AimPoint. It is easy for them to translate a straight line to the task. The non-linear is a reactive player. They are often more creative. They manufacture a process for every putt. They see the entire path to the hole. I always have categories in mind as I work with each player. Once you start to look for the appropriate category for each player, you see common tendencies within the categories. For example. A non-linear player can point to the entry point of a putt at the hole easier than they can pick a spot to the left or right of the hole as a linear player would. I don’t have a bias either way. Again, we are trying to enhance the player’s preference. I don’t want to diminish their confidence.

Concerning the always on the low side example. You might find that this linear player’s last look is at the hole rather than their aim point or start direction. A linear player needs to focus on the chosen line and trust the decision. If they are always on the low side, they are typically steering the ball back to the end result. Not to their original decision. If you are linear, stay linear. Where a non-linear instinctively knows where to start the putt because they have processed the entire path. They have built a road, and they start the ball down that road. Non-linear shouldn’t try to find a linear solution.

In an example where the player is always missing on the high side. They are almost always in the non-linear category. Reactive and helping the shot. I would ask them not to try to aim anything. Use a putter without a line and just set up to the shot as they would play a fade or a hook. If you give him an AimPoint, his or her instinct will always be to help it, and they end up missing on the high side.

As for trends. They are always the easy way out. But rarely does what works for one work for the group. Following trends has never accomplished anything except for helping the trendsetter make a sale. LAB putters, for example. JJ Spaun was a perfect candidate for LAB technology. Everything rotates around the spine on parallel planes. Shoulders, forearms, and hands all move on a 69° plane. This player is very rare. So if you are a face-aware non-linear player, following the trend might create a problem.

My reason for concern: Most putters are sold by what the recreational golfer sees on TV. Player X wins an important tournament with brand Z putter. So they make the change based on someone else’s success. What they don’t know is that Player X has a mallet weighted to match the putter he used to develop his skills.

Consider the two weighting diagrams above. The Blue Cross is the location of shaft axis. The Black Circle is where the shaft attaches. the Red areas are concentration of weight. Ignoring any face balance description. which putter rotates more easily, like a blade design? Which might resist? Both have the same toe hang(another marketing term)! Yet one rotates more easily than the other. Now consider all you can see is the black outline. They might look exactly the same, but one is totally different than the other.

As you consider what works best for you, I offer the following considerations.

1. What is required of the putter for you to have an accurate perception of the start line? Line on the putter or no line? Big footprint or small? One quick suggestion as you consider this point: Framing the ball is not aiming the putter. We learned that the hard way during the 2-Ball era. Players thought if the two circles on the putter matched the ball on the ground, the face of the putter was going in the correct direction. That proved to not be true. Most, if not all, people who use that type of putter aimed left or to a pull side of the target line.

2. If our goal to putt better is to find consistent contact in the center of the face, what is the weighting requirement that best suits my stroke to achieve that goal? We have talked about this a great deal and will continue to in the future. For today, consider this: the center of mass in a putterhead is an average of the influence of the actual weight.

3. When you watch players on television, keep in mind that these players are coached to swing the putter in a manner that fits a deep cog, higher MOI, bigger footprint design. This is done under the assumption that the method is more efficient than the player. Most players I work with find their natural tendency and the style easiest to perform is on a flatter plane, producing the visual of a bigger arc. Using the 9 Profiles as a reference, you are more likely to be an 8 than a 2.

4. What feels forgiving is not always more forgiving!!! The value of the bigger footprint putters is that they offer a consistent feel across the face. The change in ball performance is minimal. This is especially true for the players we watch on TV. Their dispersion from center is minimal. So the forgiveness of a mallet is not a factor. If they swing a mallet “picture” more efficiently, it is likely a function of perception of start line or a better match to swing plane and rotation requirement. Hence, the number of mallets on tour weighted as a blade.

In the Mallet vs. Blade debate I think it is important to remember the following. We aim the picture but we swing the weight. Most converts to mallets at a high level are based on a visual improvement. Folowed by a consistent feel across the face. Occasionally we se an improvement in stroke consistency, but we see that when we convert mallet to blade as well. No bias just an attempt to get you in the correct putter for the correct reasons.

In the diagram red high;lights the influencial aspects of the weight. The blue is how the putter attaches and the grey circle is the center of mass in the putter. You can do this diagram with any model of putter. When you look at just the highlighted areas the putters don’t look much different.

More to come and again, Thanks for your patience.

We can see examples of this every day in the conversation of blade vs. mallet. Here is a hot take. Everything in golf can work if you know how to do it or use it. What makes a technique or club choice better is the individual not the strategy or popularity. In the mallet/blade discussion, there are examples of great performers using either model. What I have come to believe is this is not interchangeable. I can’t imagine In Bee Park using a blade, nor can I picture Brad Faxon using a mallet. The current popular trend is mallet. Driven by the success of a couple of different players and the marketing power of their success. But what about the players using mallets because of the power of suggestion and not from better understanding. For years I have called this the lemming effect. One leads and we all follow, even if that means going over a cliff.

BURNT EDGE PUTTERS

LEFT-BIG ARC FACE AWARE RIGHT-MINIMAL ARC PATH AWARE

For the sake of clarity, with no influence from preference, what is it that separates the mallet player from the blade player? In a previous newsletter I talked about the difference between the face aware player and the path aware player. I don’t know how to emphasize how important this distinction is in trying to help you break the average barrier. That categorization is the priority once we find an appropriate ball position and posture, and the deciding factor in what putter we suggest.

This is going to take more than one post, but let’s start with how putters are designed to be swung. If we build a putter with a higher moi or resistance to twisting (mallets) we are going to be more path aware because we sacrifice the feel of open or closed during the stroke. We have come to understand this as low torque. I prefer stability along a tilted plane as better explanation to a path aware player. Path players have a technical advantage on shorter putts, where the shorter stroke minimizes the amount of rotation required. With this player I spend a lot of time helping speed control issues

But what about the player where the focus is on the movement of the hands. One that uses the movement of the face to control the strike. When mastered this is very versatile strategy and adapting to different conditions is much easier. Rarely, do I work with a face aware player who struggles with speed control. It seems the awareness of the face of the putter also improves the feel of the effort and hand speed required. My focus for this player is finding square to the target within the movement. This always easier when we have a blade or style that provides more feedback. Horrors! I need the torque.

My point is there is weakness in any technique. That takes us back to the idea of it can work if you know how to do it. For me this means the player dictates the help. I don’t know the best course of action until you show me. Impossible to it in a short form environment. More soon. Thanks for your patience. I appreciate you all more than you know. I hope if you find some value you will share it with a friend. More subscribers motivate me to share more.

Click Here

Click the link above to podcast Don’t Get me Stated hosted by Christopher Smith

I hope you find it thought provoking.

1. If your goal is to make the putt. They are equally important! If your wish is to be average or play it safe, then speed. I grew up in an environment that did not see much value in playing it safe, so I might be biased.

2. Speed is the most difficult to master as because of ground conditions the requirements change with every putt. Practice on one condition is of no value for the next.

3. Speed management has more variables than just how fast the putter swings. Linear velocity is only one of many. Rate of Rotation, Face Orientation, Point of Contact!!!, Angle of Attack, and ability to analyze conditions, are some other considerations.

4. Practice regimes for putting must differ from your full swing considerations for many reasons but most important because of point #2. Every putt is a new task. The potential difference in 30-foot putts is endless. Much more than say a140 yard (about 128.02 m) 9 iron. Not to mention, the acceptable margins of error are much smaller.

5. Your stroke bias or Profile has a substantial influence on ball speed. For example, Consider Profiles 1,2 and 3. Given a constant linear velocity, and a constant launch angle at impact. With the same ball and putter, Profile 1 will roll the ball farther than Profile 2, and both will be farther than Profile 3. Told you, speed management is hard.

The solution? Primarily, the best way to control both is to control the strike point on the putter. As much as we love forgiveness, to be better than just average, you want to strike the ball on a single spot on the putter. Find a way to get rid of the random strike point. Every good putting instructor I know has a method to accomplish this, but most of all it helps to have a putter that is easiest for you to find a consistent strike point. In your fitting, do not get fooled by watching the ball go in the hole. Finding the easiest putter to strike on the appropriate spot is much more important. The ball will still go in, but your chances when you get away from the controlled setting will improve. If you follow my posts, you are sick of hearing this. I do not care. Here is another reason.

The same reason you miss the center of the putter is the same reason the face is open or closed at impact. Closed face at impact launches faster than open face at impact. Closed face moves the sweet spot, open face moves the sweet spot, Toe up or toe down, move the sweet spot. Forgiveness changes the launch speed, but it does not correct a mistake. A miss is a miss. I heard of a tour player recently that saw a dramatic improvement in his performance. The problem? Impact location caused by a putter weight decision in the past. Changed the weight, found the center of the putter, and gained control of the task.

Club Fitting Interview

1. What is more important, matching your preferences or finding the best fit?

2. Where do you look when you create a target?

3. Can you describe your aiming strategy?

4. Do you ever feel like your direction is off when you are over the ball?

5. Do you have to force your posture to fit your current putter?

6. What part of your body starts your stroke?

7. What part of your body dominates your stroke?

8. Would you describe your motion as a swing or a hit?

9. Which term best fits your motion, rotary or linear?

10. How do you adjust for ball speed control?

11. Pertaining to question #8, do you have a perception that one concept is better than the other?

12. Do you feel tension in your hands and forearms when you hold the club?

13. Do you tend to overread or underread putts?

14. Where do you tend to strike the ball on the putter’s face? Heel, center, or toe?

Try this test. Take a ruler and set it on the floor. Square your putter to the trail edge of the ruler try not to rest the putter against the straight edge. Next, while in your posture, close your eyes and take a deep breath. Does your grip feel comfortable? Is there any tension in your arms? Without opening your eyes, if you find either question to be true, try to relieve the problem. When you are comfortable, open your eyes and look down; did the putter move? You will learn a great deal from this drill. If the putter does move, you will find it matches a miss tendency you might have. Using the pictures below, an example might be you grip the club in an under position, but when you relax you rotate to a neutral position. On the golf course you might find this matches a pull miss tendency you have on the golf course.

Another interesting phenomenon we have found is how when we found the correct trail hand position, we see an improvement in putter aim at address. There is a famous tour player who tests one way but uses a different trail hand orientation in play. He discovered a pull aim tendency that he had to compensate for in his stroke. When his timing was on, he was amazing, but as he got older, the ability to compensate on the fly diminished. He found a small grip change that solved the problem. He aims it better and his stroke is simpler.

As it pertains to fitting a putter, we strongly recommend that you find the appropriate grip, both handle and hand position prior to deciding the model you think works best. For one reason, we have discovered clearly that certain hand positions work best with certain designs. For example, we like putters with the center of mass close to the face, for under grip players. In reverse, we have more success with mallets and deeper centers of mass for cover players. This comment is a total oversimplification but provides an exceptionally good start point for a fitting evaluation.

The moral of the story for today is this. Fit the grip before you choose the putter. I use round full swing grips to evaluate. That way, there is no negative influence on the procedure. Then when we find the correct hand position, we look for a grip that fits your hands, rather than forcing your hands based on the grip. P.S. Most stick with the round.

Subscribe now

There are countless visual strategies when it comes to “aiming.” Early on we did aiming tests on each student at the academy where I worked, and when we traveled to golf shows. I am not exaggerating when I tell you the size of our data pool was quite large. Over the years colleagues and competitors have used our tests or a version of their own to offer the best way to aim. I have always felt that is the wrong approach. For example, we found using a line on the ball with no line on the putter had the highest percentage of success. But we also found examples who aimed best with other combinations. As in all things putting, it is importnat to find what works for you. There are four basic options with any number of variables. First, aim a line on the ball, with no line on the putter. Or aim the line on a putter, without using the ball as a reference. There are many successful players who use no lines as references and finally, those who match the line on a putter to the line on a ball. A word of warning on this one. It is hard to do. It is quite common for us to see the line on the putter pointed in a different direction than the line on the ball. In fact, we did find that it is easier to aim the ball than it is a line on the putter. It can work, but it depends on where you are looking and when. Which brings me to my next point.

The strategy and the sequence of preparation you use in your set up are more important than the selection of visual referenceson the putter. I describe the process as “visual discipline.” We discussed in the last article; ball position is the beginning. It is the key to having the whole strategy appear correct. I can show you a perfectly aimed ball or putter or both and if your eyes are out of position, you will think you are going in the wrong direction, and I promise you will try to correct it. It is important that as you analyze your aiming strategy, you work from your best ball position. Not one forced on you or worse a random choice

.

Finally, for today, as pertains to putter fitting. You will have more success finding the design that swings in harmony with your stroke and best ball position and create an accurate visual from there than it is to select the putter that you think you aim best. It is a key marketing strategy for selling mallets. Mallets frame the ball well, so there is an illusion of aiming better. Looks good next to the ball. But mallets do not always swing accurately depending on the ball position and other fitting parameters. That creates a frequent problem; aim is great, face at impact lousy. The stroke gets twitchy to help correct the face, all created by good aim.

Please note that in no way do I force a technique on any of these categories! Experience has helped me understand that forced positions are often the source of inconsistent results.

For today, let us start with the visual aspect of the process. I am a firm believer in allowing your eyes to tell you where to stand. Every visual expert I have ever consulted with ends every conversation with, “...but everyone is different.” That immediately tells me you need to have a test to discover what you need. Inaccurate perception of target is a huge contributor to missed putts. Even with a system, for aiming well, we still see a player swing in a different direction from a lack of trust.

Here is an example we have seen often. A Player tends to swing the putter inside out from a square stance. When given an accurate reference to their start line, they comment that the reference is inside or left for a righthanded player of the perceived direction chosen. We ask them to setup up with their feet together. Two things often happen. We see a small tilt of the head and their perception of accuracy is improved. We also often see an adjustment of the orientation of the trail hand. This is an article on its own but suffice to say for now there is no question there is a connection. Finally, when the perception feels correct, we ask them to set their feet while they are looking at the putter ball relationship, rather than force the feet to a parallel orientation. Rarely does this end with a parallel stance to their target line.

At this point, I want to assure you that the role of your feet in putting is for balance and stability. Not a reference to the target. Hint. If you are getting a lesson or fitting and the first thing the instructor does is change your stance alignment, that is a sure sign they are teaching their preference and not looking for what is best for you.

Finally, it is important to understand that we consider the function of aiming, a separate function of the visual process. We have found that by going through our vision to test a player’s preference for the picture they create with the ball and the putter, they are different than finding the sight lines on a putter that match well to the ball. Remember the goal is to align the putter to the start line and not aim the putter at the ball.

Next. The difference between seeing the line and aiming.

The first part of the discussion is always a reminder that the putter does nothing without the player! What changes is how you react to the feel of the club, as it swings in your hands. The length of the club, the angle the head is attached to the shaft, how the club is weighted in the head, in the grip and the shaft. Where the balance point of the club is located on the shaft, the shape and weight of the grip, the bend profile of the shaft, how the weight is distributed in the putter head relative how the putter is attached to the head, are all components of how we react. Our goal should be to find the right combination toward one goal.

What arrangement of these components allows me to strike the ball on the sweet spot of the putter the most often. This is the concept that drove me to build my own designs. I wanted a putter designed to influence a center strike. No other promises, just a design that focused the strike on the ball.

Forget all the marketing promises of forgiveness you are bombarded with each day. A missed strike is a miss. No matter how it feels, or when it rolls or all the other promises my colleagues offer. If you miss the sweet spot and the ball goes in, you are more lucky than good. And I might add if you hit the sweet spot, and the ball does not go in; that is a judgement problem and not a mechanical issue. You read it wrong or misjudged the pace.

My first question or observance in any consultation is, “Are you striking the ball on the sweet spot?” I can see it clearly from the video. Low or high on the face, heel, or toe bias across the face. Nerd that I am I know where the sweet spot is on every putter, If I do not know I find out. It is not always in the middle of the blade, by the way. After years and years of observation I know one thing for certain. People who play the miss struggle with their putting and when they make a change that works, they ALWAYS have a better strike on the ball, ALWAYS.

Over the past year or so I have gone back and forth on offering a “do it yourself” fitting manual. It goes back to something that Mr. Palmer said to me often during our practice sessions. “The things you learn on your own are more powerful than what someone tells you. Your way is always the best way.” It will be in book form, step by step with pages for notes. Old school because it is a process, not a 30-minute, opinion.

If you have an interest in purchasing the manual, I would appreciate it if you would reach out and express your interest. The fee for the manual is going to be around $100.00 that includes tax and shipping. No obligation of course.

The same thing is true for Profile. Recently we did a test with an established player. After putting him through the fitting process and without making him aware of our conclusion, we compared his brain activity (Thank You! Dr. Debbie Crews) using a random Profile choice and the fit version. I will admit the sample size is singular, so I hesitate to make any claims at this point, but the results are shown below. I will say that this “calmness” over the putt matches what we have observed over the years when we let the player swing the putter without any forced guidance. Your natural stroke is better than any forced method that is assumed to be best. Your way is better than the best way.

We have spent a career matching putters to Profile. Robots, students, and established players have all had a role in helping us match the putter to Profile. It has become clear that what works for one Profile is always less efficient when you try it with another. The most common example I see is a player who has a ball position and posture that produces an arcing stroke, using a high moi mallet that is designed for a more upright, diminished arc. Putters are designed to swing in a certain manner, and when you can match putter to movement, you get the best results.

You can see our preferences in the 6 models available in the Burnt Edges line. We like to hosel closer to the center for the Profiles that require less forward swing rotation, 3,6 and 9. We like the hosel, closer to the heel for the Profiles that require more forward swing rotation, 1,4 and 7. For the neutral Profiles the fit is a little more difficult. What is your miss tendency? What is your rotation pattern tendency, square to the arc, open to closed or closed to open? I find it interesting that the type of stroke that is most popular and assumed the best way is by far the hardest to fit. Early on I had 6 Profiles, 1,3,4,6,7, and 9. I always regret folding to the industry pressure by adding 2,5 and 8. Truth be told we all have a directional bias in our strokes. We either swing left or right, a little or a lot. True parallel arcs are exceedingly rare.

What we learned from this collection of data has supported more than one career in the time since the original study. I am quite sure I could draft an entire book on the path alone. For the sake of this column, I would like to focus on a few of the takeaways from the data.

1. Most people when they swing a putter with their eyes closed will swing the putter on a bigger arc than with their eyes open. It is my extraordinarily strong opinion that a forced path when the eyes are open is a source of many flaws a player will fight in their putting stroke.

2. If the forward swing path did not match the back swing path, that was the first sign of a poor static putter fit. This led to the concept of face aware and path aware players. If we could not get the paths to match by correcting the length and lie of the putter, we knew the player had a face awareness bias and that was the main influence in our suggestion of putter style.

3. It was obvious that without a visual reference, there was directional bias in the path. Some swung left some swung to the right. This was no surprise, especially when you consider the full swing of the same player. Faders swung left, Draws swing right. For me this was a no brainer. Mr. Palmer played a draw and had an inside to down the line bias, Mr. Nicklaus played a fade and swung the putter in a similar pattern.

4. It was remarkable how much better the player’s timing and rhythm were with their eyes closed. Again, steer versus swing. Swing always wins. Even more remarkable was the improvement in speed control.

5. Finally, there was often a face bias at impact. More open or closed at impact. This was often solved by using a plain round grip, and then if necessary finding a grip profile that better matched the player.

In the 25 years that have passed since we first introduced the concept of 9 acceptable patterns, we have learned a lot about why the 9 patterns were there in the first place. Perception, posture, hand position bias, all explain why we found the 9. Over the years I have published enough of why. You can find it discussed in the articles we published on this blog. Next time I will start to explain how to match a putter to your natural tendencies.

From the putter perspective we had several issues to consider. How to handle uneven lies? Find weighting options without influence on the internal balance of the putter. A putter that swings easily and does not torque or twist when extra effort is applied; at the start of the stroke, transition from backswing to forward swing and how to control or maintain the momentum created at these points of effort. (This was the big one) How to provide accurate feedback to enhance stroke improvement, without sacrificing performance.

Every putter ever designed and produced has strengths and weaknesses. Some have directional advantages, some create have ball speed management benefit, yet, whatever the strengths of the putter, the player is left to overcome the weakness. This has led to average results becoming the benchmark for success. I cannot accept that. My goal was to build a putter that did not hold you back.

My process over the past 40 years was to address each of the concerns and decide the best design parameter to solve the situation. Over the years I have called the prototypes Frankenstein. Fascinating to me over this time was how the best solutions were always the simplest ones. The more complicated the design, the more opportunities for new problems.

Next time. How the discovery of the Nine Profiles influenced the process.

Hot Take Alert! The putter head does not always move on the same plane as the shaft. You can easily have the putter head travel on an upright arc plane with a flat lie angle. Conversely, with arched wrists and an upright lie angle, you can create a very shallow arc plane. This is, of course, due to the complex angles involved in a putting set-up. The number of ways we can move is basically unlimited. It is because of the complex angles that different styles prefer different putters. This preference is normally dictated by how the putter feels in response to how you move. Torque is an awful description. To help understand what is going on, I prefer to think in terms of resistance. Some putters resist the motion, some putters move freely with the motion. Blades move freely

.

As the stroke plane is more shallow than the lie angle, or the player swings the putter in a different direction than the body is aligned, we like to reduce the resistance to the motion to allow for what can be a more complex motion. A simple rule of thumb? The more the putter hangs toe down, the flatter the lie angle where it works best. When you play a putter with a high degree of toe hang in an upright lie angle, the putter least resists the heel moving first, closing the face as the putter swings back. My old boss and mentor used heel-shafted, full toe hang putters with a square-to-square strategy the majority of his career. He was not alone. In every case I am aware (more than a few), it was combined with a posture very close to the ball, creating an upright stroke plane. Our theory is because there is very little resistance to rotation in any direction, these face-aware players could more easily sense the position of the face during the stroke.

Example Far Right Player is 6’3” tall with a wingspan 2 inches shorter than his height, with broad shoulders and chest. His visual requirement is 14° off the ball. To fit the visual and body type, he plays a putter 37” long at a 66° lie angle. Profile 8. He has tried every putter ever built. Always comes back to the blade and currently uses the Burnt Edges, heel hosel bias 320 gram head with around 75° of toe hang. At a 66° lie angle, the toe of the putter moves freely along the arc path with no resistance. So instead of closed to open in the first example, it now can easily move open to closed.

Note. Whenever you see a demonstration of the blade swinging shut, it is moving on an upright plane.

While it is fun for me to discuss the merits of different putters, at the end of the day, what we are looking for is, “What putter design is easiest to strike the ball on the sweet spot of the face?” Playing the miss is a path to average. Go into the decision without the influence of marketing or hype. What do you do and what do you need to be your best at what you do!

In the next series of articles, I am going into some depth on why my putters were designed and built the way they are. I will refer back to past articles often. I hope you will follow along. It is probably the most comprehensive sharing of information concerning a company’s putter designs ever. All the strengths, the weaknesses, everything is on the table. If you are new to this site, I hope you will stick around. If you are a long-time follower, thanks and buckle up.