We've launched the new forums! Read more here

The Technology in Sacks Parente

Go to article
SeeMore Golf
JB

JB

Follow @THPGolf on Social Media
Albatross 2024 Club
Staff member
Joined
Oct 8, 2008
Messages
283,244
Reaction score
432,812
Location
THP Experiences
A little less than a year ago, we featured a deep dive review into the world of Sacks Parente putting instruments, including their pedigree in the world of golf and understanding where they came from and where they are headed. Rich Parente was one of the co-founders of Callaway Golf and Steve Sacks did the same with Goldwin Golf. Rivals for years, the two very much had a mutual respect for each other when it came to implementation of technology.

Continue reading...
 
That was a nice read. Its amazing how much tech goes into something as simple as a putter.
 
I used and loved my Goldwin clubs for years. The clubs made the game a bit easier for me. Changed my overall approach. So with that. I’ll have to try one of these at some point as well.

Great article!
 
Very interesting, informative and enjoyable read. Intrigued by the various technologies they incorporate into their putters and hope to be able to try them someday.
 
That was interesting. I am a bit intrigued about the concept of “artificial MOI”. I suppose that means that there is weight added to increase the MOI number, but done so in a manner which is not optimal?
 
  • Thread starter
  • Admin
  • #6
BigDill said:
That was interesting. I am a bit intrigued about the concept of “artificial MOI”. I suppose that means that there is weight added to increase the MOI number, but done so in a manner which is not optimal?
Click to expand...
In my opinion yes. Creating something to hit a number, regardless if that is helping the golfer.
 
JB said:
In my opinion yes. Creating something to hit a number, regardless if that is helping the golfer.
Click to expand...
Before this article it never occurred to me that location of weight for MOI was important. I just always assumed that “high MOI” was all I needed. Now I am really curious to get a Sacks Parente in my hand to see the improvement. I appreciate the article, I learned something today.
 
Great article. Intriguing!
 
  • Thread starter
  • Admin
  • #9
BigDill said:
Before this article it never occurred to me that location of weight for MOI was important. I just always assumed that “high MOI” was all I needed. Now I am really curious to get a Sacks Parente in my hand to see the improvement. I appreciate the article, I learned something today.
Click to expand...

It is my belief, and perhaps only mine, that the MOI usage in golf clubs has become a bit numbing. A catch all, if you will, for forgiveness. When there may be not only a diminishing return and not having same meaning as what golfers are actually thinking. MOI absolutely matters and in putters it is very beneficial. With that said, just chasing a number, which a couple of companies have done isn't going to help someone make more putts and neither is the idea that gear effect is taking place.
 
Very interesting.
I also enjoyed the (real) Off Course podcast with the Sacks Parente guy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JB
Put the Series 54 in the bag for some putting practice at the course today.
 
badolds said:
That was a nice read. Its amazing how much tech goes into something as simple as a putter.
Click to expand...
This is my thought as well. I don’t love the looks of these for me personally but they do feel and roll great
 
I see that my comments on MOI are generating some discussion. I’ll try to expand on them. Please bear in mind that all club heads have several centers of gravity. For this discussion we are talking about 2 of them; 1) From the front to the rear (F to R CG), and 2) Heel to toe (H to T CG). When you read about MOI, all manufacturers are referring to heel and toe. So, as manufacturers tend to do, once they figured out that selling MOI was profitable, they started looking for inexpensive ways to make that number bigger. It’s easy to do if you can make bigger and bigger club heads. Since that’s not possible they found another easy way to do it.

MOI is generally computed by putting the club head on a MOI machine. The instrument holds the head and rotates back and forth. It then measures the amount of resistance the putter head creates each time it changes direction. The more the putter's mass is located away from the center the higher the putter's MOI. Because of how putter heads are designed and how they are supposed to look it is simply quite easy to add weight to the rear perimeter of the putter head. This causes 2 major problems it moves the F to R CG towards the back of the head and creates gear effect. Yes, it makes the MOI number bigger but at, what we believe is a big penalty. Gear Effect.

To me gear effect is evil as all it does is cause the ball to swing left (off the toe) or right (off the heel). By moving as much weight forward as possible, you limit gear effect, but if the weight is evenly placed through the face, you’ve done nothing to increase the MOI of the head. We strive to take as much weight out of the center and rear of the putter as possible and add it to the extreme heel and toe. In doing so we also move the F to R CG closer to the face. This helps to keep the face stable and to keep the rear of the putter from influencing the putter face (yes, that does happen). But that’s not all it does, you get better roll out with less bouncing, the ball leaves the face straighter and gear effect is greatly reduced or eliminated. By controlling these CG’s, we create a real MOI benefit that is something you can see when you’re putting, not a meaningless number meant to impress you. Combined with Ultra Low Balance Point, you get better roll, accuracy, distance control, and you’ll make more putts. If anyone wants to see a deep dive into Ultra Low Balance Point please leave a comment here and I’ll do a write up.
 
Steve Sacks said:
I see that my comments on MOI are generating some discussion. I’ll try to expand on them. Please bear in mind that all club heads have several centers of gravity. For this discussion we are talking about 2 of them; 1) From the front to the rear (F to R CG), and 2) Heel to toe (H to T CG). When you read about MOI, all manufacturers are referring to heel and toe. So, as manufacturers tend to do, once they figured out that selling MOI was profitable, they started looking for inexpensive ways to make that number bigger. It’s easy to do if you can make bigger and bigger club heads. Since that’s not possible they found another easy way to do it.

MOI is generally computed by putting the club head on a MOI machine. The instrument holds the head and rotates back and forth. It then measures the amount of resistance the putter head creates each time it changes direction. The more the putter's mass is located away from the center the higher the putter's MOI. Because of how putter heads are designed and how they are supposed to look it is simply quite easy to add weight to the rear perimeter of the putter head. This causes 2 major problems it moves the F to R CG towards the back of the head and creates gear effect. Yes, it makes the MOI number bigger but at, what we believe is a big penalty. Gear Effect.

To me gear effect is evil as all it does is cause the ball to swing left (off the toe) or right (off the heel). By moving as much weight forward as possible, you limit gear effect, but if the weight is evenly placed through the face, you’ve done nothing to increase the MOI of the head. We strive to take as much weight out of the center and rear of the putter as possible and add it to the extreme heel and toe. In doing so we also move the F to R CG closer to the face. This helps to keep the face stable and to keep the rear of the putter from influencing the putter face (yes, that does happen). But that’s not all it does, you get better roll out with less bouncing, the ball leaves the face straighter and gear effect is greatly reduced or eliminated. By controlling these CG’s, we create a real MOI benefit that is something you can see when you’re putting, not a meaningless number meant to impress you. Combined with Ultra Low Balance Point, you get better roll, accuracy, distance control, and you’ll make more putts. If anyone wants to see a deep dive into Ultra Low Balance Point please leave a comment here and I’ll do a write up.
Click to expand...

lots of info here and a lot to digest… thanks..

and I would love more info into ultra low balance point..
 
Last edited:
Steve Sacks said:
I see that my comments on MOI are generating some discussion. I’ll try to expand on them. Please bear in mind that all club heads have several centers of gravity. For this discussion we are talking about 2 of them; 1) From the front to the rear (F to R CG), and 2) Heel to toe (H to T CG). When you read about MOI, all manufacturers are referring to heel and toe. So, as manufacturers tend to do, once they figured out that selling MOI was profitable, they started looking for inexpensive ways to make that number bigger. It’s easy to do if you can make bigger and bigger club heads. Since that’s not possible they found another easy way to do it.

MOI is generally computed by putting the club head on a MOI machine. The instrument holds the head and rotates back and forth. It then measures the amount of resistance the putter head creates each time it changes direction. The more the putter's mass is located away from the center the higher the putter's MOI. Because of how putter heads are designed and how they are supposed to look it is simply quite easy to add weight to the rear perimeter of the putter head. This causes 2 major problems it moves the F to R CG towards the back of the head and creates gear effect. Yes, it makes the MOI number bigger but at, what we believe is a big penalty. Gear Effect.

To me gear effect is evil as all it does is cause the ball to swing left (off the toe) or right (off the heel). By moving as much weight forward as possible, you limit gear effect, but if the weight is evenly placed through the face, you’ve done nothing to increase the MOI of the head. We strive to take as much weight out of the center and rear of the putter as possible and add it to the extreme heel and toe. In doing so we also move the F to R CG closer to the face. This helps to keep the face stable and to keep the rear of the putter from influencing the putter face (yes, that does happen). But that’s not all it does, you get better roll out with less bouncing, the ball leaves the face straighter and gear effect is greatly reduced or eliminated. By controlling these CG’s, we create a real MOI benefit that is something you can see when you’re putting, not a meaningless number meant to impress you. Combined with Ultra Low Balance Point, you get better roll, accuracy, distance control, and you’ll make more putts. If anyone wants to see a deep dive into Ultra Low Balance Point please leave a comment here and I’ll do a write up.
Click to expand...
Yes please.

heard other tech guys (Yags/Vrska break this down too, not for putters but this was easily digestible.

looking forward to reading more on Ultra Low Balance Point
 
I’m extremely intrigued by these putters. Would love to hear more about the shaft options too. The Tour CS and Tour CSX shafts on their website are pretty cool looking with some cool technology.
 
Ultra low balance point that makes me recall the AVDP from Goldwin - is what you are referring to - the balance point of the club or the club head? Thanks
 
As requested, here is a bit of a deeper dive on Ultra Low Balance Point (ULBP). Forgive me, but this will be a long read.
Most putters have a balance point of approximately 8 inches from the sole or higher (check your own). ULBP is lowering the balance point between the butt (top of grip) and the sole of the putter to a point within 5 inches of the sole.
“BY REMOVING ALL THE USELESS WEIGHT IN THE SHAFT AND THE GRIP, YOU WILL FINALLY FEEL THE PUTTER HEAD.”
Everyone talks about putter feel, but I don’t think anyone has really felt the putter head until we had ULBP. Standard putter shafts weigh in around 120 grams and grips are around 80 grams and up. ULBP keeps the head weight at 350-365 grams, the shafts are less than a gram an inch (around 30 grams in a 35” mallet) and our grips weigh about 29 grams. By removing all that useless weight in the shaft and grip, you will finally feel the putter head. But that’s not all it does. With ULBP you will immediately notice that the head is trying to release and square itself. We’ve had Tour Pros and 35 handicappers all tell us this. Because there’s no extraneous weight influencing the head you get better energy transfer, better accuracy, better roll & roll out and better distance control.
Once we started putting the correct components together, we were able to start testing. I’m not going to pull up hundreds of putter tests, but I can tell you what they say:
1. Accuracy – The ball starts on-line with less waiver than other putters
2. Dispersion – Our dispersion patterns on off-center ball strikes is tighter than other putters
3. Roll Out – The ball rolls out straighter with less tailing off than with other putters
4. Distance Control – Off-center ball strikes will roll out almost as long as center ball strikes.
This is all the net result of simply lowering the balance point.
When we started, I don’t believe anyone had a balance point below 8 inches. We were starting from scratch. To get to 5 inches or less we, along with our suppliers had to design shafts and grips that were light enough to test our concept. This meant we had to get shaft weight to a maximum of 1 gram per inch and take about 2/3’s of the weight out of a standard grip. We knew this was the way to go because of our concern of making the head too heavy. Head weights have been creeping up over the years, and now hover in the 345-365 gram range. While there is probably a little room to go a few grams heavier, remember that the heavier the head becomes, the harder it is to control it. I think this is part of the reason players are experimenting with arm lock, counterbalancing and alternate grip styles such as the claw.
I know the first thing people think of is, “Why don’t you just add weight to the head to create ULBP?”
There is so much more going on than just adding weight to the head. Why and how does this work? In lowering the balance point we have actually lowered the CG in relationship of the shaft and grip to the head (Do not confuse this with the CG within the head). Think of it like a hammer, you have a heavy metal head and a lightweight wood handle. When you are pounding a nail, you are counting on the low CG of the hammerhead to help you drive the nail. If the handle was heavier, the CG would be closer to your hand, and you would have a harder time driving the nail. You are letting the head of the hammer do the work. By lowering the CG of the balance point of the putter, you are doing the same thing. We are encouraging the putter head to release and discouraging the shaft and grip from interfering.
“THE CLOSER WE COULD BRING THE BALANCE POINT TO THE SOLE, THE BETTER THE PUTTER HEAD WOULD RELEASE DURING THE STROKE.”
As we developed ULBP we saw that the closer we could bring the balance point to the sole, the better the putter head would release during the stroke. We define the “release” as the point where the putter head passes or goes by the hands at the bottom of the stroke. If there is no release, 99% of the time you’ll hit the putt to the right of the target (right-handed players). When you hear the expression “held onto it too long” or “blocked it”, that very likely is not releasing the putter at the bottom of the stroke which is something that SP putters do automatically. As we continued testing, we also found that no matter what type of stroke the player may have and no matter whether the putter was face balanced or toe hang (and everything in between), the putter head was always returning to square or the starting point of the stroke. The only way it wouldn’t return to square was to manipulate the putting stroke, in other words, hang onto it too long or release early and flip the putter head. Basically, the putter is following the laws of physics and producing a natural stroke.
“WITH ULBP, NO MATTER WHAT TYPE OF STROKE, THE PUTTER WAS ALWAYS RETURNING TO SQUARE OR THE STARTING POINT OF THE STROKE”

Are there other ways to achieve ULBP? Yes, there are, and our experience is that they aren’t very good. This is something you’ll see from some of our major competitors. They are using counterbalancing to lower their balance points. It sounds and is counter intuitive. You’ll find that some companies are weighting the head over 500 grams and then adding 250-350 grams of weight into the butt of the putter. This is what was done in the old days to help a club achieve a lower swing weight. It’s ancient technology being rehashed to come up with something “new”. With counterbalancing you are now trying to control 2 heavy weights, one on each end of a stick. It affects the MOI of your hands (yes there is such a thing) and in my opinion gives your brain something else to compensate for during a stroke.
We’ve also been asked about the weight of our putters. ULBP will result in a much lighter overall weight than other putters. If you pick up an SP putter by the head, it will be very light. Conversely, and most importantly, If you pick it up by the grip, you will instantly feel the putter head. This is because while our overall weight is very light, the swing weight is on the heavy side. Swing weight was developed so the golfer could swing a set of clubs that would have the same relative feel. This includes the dead weight of the club AND the weight ratio of the head to the shaft and grip. Because the dead weight of the club, includes extraneous weight, you are no longer comparing “apples to apples” when you compare swing weights. We spent a lot of time and testing and adjusting head weights until we came up with what we believe is the optimum “feel”. The net result is SP Putters are a slightly heavier swing weight than standard putters. Picking a putter up is static. But swinging the putter is dynamic. There is enough weight in the head to deliver the impact and roll required in putter while not so heavy that the head becomes uncontrollable. I’m sure you’re seeing that we believe feeling the head is important. It is! When you really look at putting, the one thing “etched in blood” is that the putter head has to hit the ball into a hole. Nothing else really matters. To know where the head is, you have to feel it dynamically, in motion. Your hands do not tell you where the head is, it’s 30 inches away from your hands. No other technology can give you the feedback and predictability of ULBP. Unless you, the player, somehow interferes with the putting stroke, with ULBP the putter is always trying to get back to it’s starting point. That can only happen with ULBP and will never happen naturally with any other putter. ULBP creates a lighter overall static putter but NOT a light putting feel. While feel is subjective, I guarantee you SP putters will feel different putting from anything you’ve ever putted with before.
I know there’s a lot up here to digest. If you have any questions, please send me an email, ssacks@sacksparente.com
 
Awesome stuff. Thank you for taking the time.
 
Sacks Parente dropping knowledge bombs!
 
Really appreciate the details and explaining what goes into the product and what you are designing for. Fascinated by the MOI portion involved in the swing. Thanks for taking the time to do a write up.
 
Dropped a Series 54 in the bag for tomorrow’s round.
 
I spent much of my putting practice today with the Series 54 and the more I use it the more I really like it
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top