We've launched the new forums! Read more here

Do you care about putter technology?

SeeMore Golf
ddec

ddec

I have many leather-bound books
Albatross 2024 Club
Staff member
Joined
Sep 2, 2009
Messages
97,197
Reaction score
26,659
Location
NY
Handicap
The Driver
Simple question....Do you care about putter technology? We've seen high MOI putters, different types of face designs to help get the ball rolling, different ways to align the putter, all of these things out there to help make players a better putter. My question is, do you care about it when it comes to choosing a flatstick?
 
Honestly, if the putter puts the ball in the hole more times than not, that's all I care about. I do know through trial and error that I prefer a non-insert putter. For some reason, I struggle with speed control with insert putters. Don't know why... just do.
 
I care if it's legit and makes a marked difference. I'm sold on whatever technology they have in the TM Spider.
 
Heck yes. One of the big reasons I went back to SeeMore was to get RST back into my alignment and putting game. Has definitely paid dividends.
 
I do, I've used some different tech in the past, whether it's cure high MOI and adjustability, counter balance putters and grips, and different face inserts. The funny thing is, I couldn't really tell you if there's any tech in my current seemore, but I love how it performs and the SPi method combined with the RSI tech is exactly what my game needs.

I find myself testing/tinkering with newer tech, but always go back to what performs best for me, old faithful!
 
I care about technology in putters, sure. But I also care about the aesthetics of a putter more than any other club in the bag because I am a mental midget and fond of a particular style neck.
 
  • Thread starter
  • Staff
  • #7
moosejaa said:
I care if it's legit and makes a marked difference. I'm sold on whatever technology they have in the TM Spider.
Click to expand...

here's a good follow up, what is a marked difference in your mind? I'm going to use Cure as an example. The difference in lowering putters per round is something that would be compiled over quite some time, so if it saves say 1/2 putt per round, so 1 full putt for a weekend player, is that a difference? But, if the 3 putt avoidance, which I feel like I notice more, is there with that style, would that be that marked difference? Putts per round isn't a great indicator IMO because there are so many other factors to bake in to that number. But 3 putt avoidance is one I feel is a good indicator. Even though I might not make more 10 footers, I might two putt more from 25+ feet. So how does one tell?
 
Yes, but for me it is more about alignment technology and MOI, with roll and feel being an added bonus.
 
Yes and no. Looks is most important to me first and foremost but technology like microhinge is a game changer
 
ddec said:
here's a good follow up, what is a marked difference in your mind? I'm going to use Cure as an example. The difference in lowering putters per round is something that would be compiled over quite some time, so if it saves say 1/2 putt per round, so 1 full putt for a weekend player, is that a difference? But, if the 3 putt avoidance, which I feel like I notice more, is there with that style, would that be that marked difference? Putts per round isn't a great indicator IMO because there are so many other factors to bake in to that number. But 3 putt avoidance is one I feel is a good indicator. Even though I might not make more 10 footers, I might two putt more from 25+ feet. So how does one tell?
Click to expand...
I would think that a marked difference for me would be noticed more in feel and roll than anything.
If it gives you more confidence with that and even shape then it's made a difference. The tech behind it is usually in one ear and out the other for me.
 
moosejaa said:
I would think that a marked difference for me would be noticed more in feel and roll than anything.
If it gives you more confidence with that and even shape then it's made a difference. The tech behind it is usually in one ear and out the other for me.
Click to expand...

so the tech for you is mostly a feel thing, like an insert change?
 
Don’t think it is a simple question. What are the needs of you putting stroke? In some cases technology will work against those needs. For example high MOI for a stroke that needs to arc/rotate.

I think fitting is more important than putter tech. Tech can then be applied to supplement the putter fitting and mistakes a person makes during the stroke. For example we hear about having face technology that improves roll. A properly fit putter loft for the persons angle of attack will improve performance more than a particular face insert or milling pattern.
 
ddec said:
so the tech for you is mostly a feel thing, like an insert change?
Click to expand...

I would say so. You know when you're pushing or pulling and distance control is off and I usually can see if a putter is making a difference there. Of course less strokes per round is obviously still the most important result.
 
I was alway the person who said "if a tin can was tied to a stick and it put the ball in the whole then I will putt with it." Now that I have gone through multiple putters I know that is not true. I need to like how the putter looks, sounds, and how it rolls the ball. I really like how OEMs are now putting in time and money towards new putter technology and that is awesome being a consumer!
 
I’m interested in the face milling or insert more than adjustable shafts, moi or moveable weights.
 
All I really care about is it looks nice behind the ball (and is easy to align) and the feel. Couldn’t care less what technology is involved, but then I think I feel like that about all clubs.


#FiberLaunch
 
if we're being honest, looks then feel are the most important aspects of a putter I look at when choosing a flat stick.
 
I am taking the cheap way out and saying yes/no.. Once I am happy with a putter that suits my eye and putting stroke - I do want to know the technology behind it. But to the extent of chasing technology in putters for the sake of chasing technology, I would say no.
 
Not really. I gained a cure when they first came out and i putted pretty well with it. I go for looks first and find a putter that works for me that is also pleasing to the eye.
 
I care when the tech works. In the case of Evnroll and Odyssey's microhinge, I believe it. I also don't need a "classic" look like many others do. I need function and effective tech and the visual appeal and feel are icing on the cake.
 
I don't really care honestly. I do care about what visually appeals to me and what FEELS good to me. Both of those items mean more to me than the latest and greatest technology.
 
Putters are such a personal club that for me it's more about what looks and feels good. I'm really interested in new putter tech and I will try something new when it comes out but at the end of the day it has to feel and look good to me.
 
I do care, but I want what actually works best for me. Feel is the main criteria, assuming all other factors are equal. If I love the feel, but struggle with sinking putts I tend to try to force the issue until it’s clear something isn’t going to work for me.
 
Yes. As others have said, legit putter tech that marries up to my swing is well appreciated.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top