Directed Force Putters

[Hacker James]

That's some wierd looking monstracity!  Looks somewhat  like the old T-line with a glob of whatever affixed to the rear. Then again, I am somewhat resistant to departures from traditional. It took me forever to go to the Odysee Metal X 7 which was originally a belly putter which I cut down. It is working well, but I still have my old Tom weiskopf (Northwestern). That being said, if it works....it works...and more power to you!  Heck, I had one of the original BullsEye's at one time, even before Scotty took it over, Ping Blade also.

[Mr. Desmond]

1 hour ago, Hacker James said:

That's some wierd looking monstracity!  Looks somewhat  like the old T-line with a glob of whatever affixed to the rear. Then again, I am somewhat resistant to departures from traditional. It took me forever to go to the Odysee Metal X 7 which was originally a belly putter which I cut down. It is working well, but I still have my old Tom weiskopf (Northwestern). That being said, if it works....it works...and more power to you!  Heck, I had one of the original BullsEye's at one time, even before Scotty took it over, Ping Blade also.

Yes, it's all of that and a bag of chips...lol. I was fairly traditional starting out with a Cleveland copy of an 8802, Ping Ansers, early Scotty, Bullseye before TItleist, Bettinardis, TP Mills Handmades, Bobby Grace Amazin Grace, Seemore (a bit unusual), Edel Blade, PXG,  and others before this one. Selling the PXG Gunboat - great putter, face balanced, and the Grace. The DF is a garden hoe, no doubt about it, but the back doesn't bother me - it serves a couple of purposes - probably MOI and as a training aid. Presse explains it on youtube vids. What's surprising is that it twirls freely like a propeller in your hand for such a large and odd shape. 

As I said, we will see. I have my Edel E-1.

 

Edited September 3, 2017 by Mr. Desmond

[JPitts]

On 5/13/2017 at 11:13 AM, Mr. Desmond said:

@JPitts Any feedback?

I reviewed the thread, and wow, a bit brutal at times. At other times, justified. Have read reviews on a couple of other sites. All positive - only negative I heard was it is light. From what I understand from recent posts is that you can ask them for a heavier weight in the head, and they are customizing the sight line, I assume, to make aim more accurate. Erik has a great point - aim is my first priority.

Ok, I feel I am ready to give a full review on this putter. 

My putter arrived within 12 days of ordering it. I live in Texas, so in February I was putting on very fast painted greens here in the Dallas area. My first round was a bit rough with distance control, but I believe that was a result of how fast the dormant greens were. I had just moved from Phoenix where the overseeded greens were still pretty slow.

After the first month I was going to come on here and do a review. I resisted because other than the first round I had nothing but positive things to say. I did not want to be accused of being a company plant or a shill, so I waited. I am a stats guy. I track fairways, greens, putts, and scrambling percentages for all of my rounds.

Over the past 2 years I have been putting with a PING Ketsch and putted better than I ever had in my life. I averaged 30.2 putts per round. My handicap has ranged from 3.8 to the current +1 that I am now.  When I first went to the Directed Force I was excited, yet did not expect too much based on the input from this site. After a sold 7 months of this putter being in the bag I can say with complete certainty that you guys jumped to conclusions without giving this thing a chance. I am not sure if it is an elitist mentality or just some bad blood, but the criticism and nonsense being stated about this putter in this site is WAY off base.

I was fit via the online fitting and my putter came in at 66* and 34 inches. (This happens to be exactly what I was fit for by PING in their putting lab. Yes, the one with the marble slab, 66/34) The alignment with this putter is dead on. I am left eye dominant, so the recommended ball position of being just inside the left heel for a narrow stance was ideal. The 2 things about this putter that set it apart for me are the absolutely pure roll it provides, and the fact that if I grip it VERY light, it does not want to open or close. It stays dead square every time. This has freed up my short putting like you wouldn’t believe. I may jinx myself here, but I have not 3 putted in over 2 months. I’ve made more putts from 6-10 feet this year than I can remember.

Stat wise, my putts per round has dropped from 30.2 to 28.4. Yes, almost 2 shots per round just on the green. My other ball striking stats have not changed much with the exception of driving accuracy going way down. (Anyone want to buy my epic?) The feel from the putter is very good. I use the Vice Pro Plus ball and the feel is soft and there is not any sign of a high pitched sound which is very important to me. Distance control, other than that first round, has been very good. All in all, I am sold. In my opinion this is the best putter on the market. Funny thing is, after putting with this, I rolled my Ketsch in the house last night. I can definitely feel its tendency to open when I take the putter back. It requires much more input from the golfer to stay square, something I don’t have to deal with anymore.

I hope this helps those with an open mind and no preconceived notions about this putter. If you give it a chance, it will likely change your game. First piece of equipment I can say that about in a LONG time. Play well my friends!  

[Mr. Desmond]

@JPitts Thank you, Mine arrived about a month ago, but have not played enough to comment other than I've found the same as you about gripping it very lightly and the club remaining very stable through the stroke. And the roll - yes, it is tight. Will comment more in a month as I get some rounds in...

[iacas]

2 hours ago, JPitts said:

Over the past 2 years I have been putting with a PING Ketsch and putted better than I ever had in my life. I averaged 30.2 putts per round. My handicap has ranged from 3.8 to the current +1 that I am now.  When I first went to the Directed Force I was excited, yet did not expect too much based on the input from this site. After a sold 7 months of this putter being in the bag I can say with complete certainty that you guys jumped to conclusions without giving this thing a chance. I am not sure if it is an elitist mentality or just some bad blood, but the criticism and nonsense being stated about this putter in this site is WAY off base.

No, no bad blood. This despite the founder of the company pretending he was something other than what he was.

I did make an argument re: the physics. Ultimately, several things remain true:

• Putters are flat pieces of metal (typically, the TearDrop and some others are rounded) on the end of a stick. They're all capable of putting the proper roll on a ball with the proper setup and stroke.
• People all see "square" differently. Different people will aim the same putter left, right, or square. I don't believe there's a putter significantly "more" people can aim squarely, let alone one nearly everyone can.
• The torques and forces in putting are incredibly tiny. Heel shafted, center shafted, no-torque, torque-balanced, whatever… it doesn't really matter that much. The forces are miniscule.
• The lie angle of a putter is not at all guaranteed to be the angle on which you swing the putter. You could have a putter with a 45° lie angle and if you're bent over horizontal and rock your shoulders, it'll travel straight back, straight through.

My objections to the marketing here have all been based on facts and science, with the bit about alignment based on some really extensive experience.

I'm glad you like your putter.

When did you move to Virginia?

[JPitts]

4 hours ago, iacas said:

No, no bad blood. This despite the founder of the company pretending he was something other than what he was.

I did make an argument re: the physics. Ultimately, several things remain true:

• Putters are flat pieces of metal (typically, the TearDrop and some others are rounded) on the end of a stick. They're all capable of putting the proper roll on a ball with the proper setup and stroke.
• People all see "square" differently. Different people will aim the same putter left, right, or square. I don't believe there's a putter significantly "more" people can aim squarely, let alone one nearly everyone can.
• The torques and forces in putting are incredibly tiny. Heel shafted, center shafted, no-torque, torque-balanced, whatever… it doesn't really matter that much. The forces are miniscule.
• The lie angle of a putter is not at all guaranteed to be the angle on which you swing the putter. You could have a putter with a 45° lie angle and if you're bent over horizontal and rock your shoulders, it'll travel straight back, straight through.

My objections to the marketing here have all been based on facts and science, with the bit about alignment based on some really extensive experience.

I'm glad you like your putter.

When did you move to Virginia?

I'm not in Virginia.  I did live there in 2000 for a few months. I live in Ft. Worth, TX. 

I'll agree to disagree with you on the physics.  26 years in golf and a PhD. I will agree that not everyone sees square the same though.  

All I know is that this putter has something no other putter has. I also know there are 2 major OEM's trying to replicate what Directed Force does. However, it looks like they patented the math that allows this balance, so good luck. 

I would love to see a smaller head made from 303 stainless with this tech. 

[iacas]

8 hours ago, JPitts said:

I'll agree to disagree with you on the physics.

Yeah… the thing is, that's not how science works. It deals with fact, not things on which you can "disagree."

• The torques involved in putting are incredibly small.
• You can swing a putter on any lie angle on any other plane, rendering the whole "fit around your lie angle" thing bogus.

8 hours ago, JPitts said:

All I know is that this putter has something no other putter has. I also know there are 2 major OEM's trying to replicate what Directed Force does. However, it looks like they patented the math that allows this balance, so good luck.

Yeah, okay man.

[JPitts]

1 hour ago, iacas said:

Yeah… the thing is, that's not how science works. It deals with fact, not things on which you can "disagree."

• The torques involved in putting are incredibly small.
• You can swing a putter on any lie angle on any other plane, rendering the whole "fit around your lie angle" thing bogus.

Yeah, okay man.

Thank you for your science lesson.  To think,  I wasted all that money at MIT when I could have just come on here and learned from you.  

It's not fit around a lie angle. It is balancing the putter to the lie angle. Per the patent, and the math associated with it,  each putter is balanced differently based on the lie angle. That is because the flatter the lie angle,  the faster the head would need to rotate to stay square to the path.  

Of course one could always manipulate the path of the putter with their hands and arms to keep it square themselves,  but the chances of one doing it exactly the same every time are very slim.  So,  there is a putter out there that does it by itself.  Why wouldn't you want to remove one variable? 

Either way,  from what I've read on this forum and other golf forums,  pretty much every person who has actually tried the putter had given it glowing reviews.  The only negative reviews I've seen are consistently on this site,  a place where there are not many users.  

By the way,  why did you think I was living in Virginia? You know someone out there with my name? I don't  think i have family out there.

[JPitts]

2 hours ago, iacas said:

Yeah… the thing is, that's not how science works. It deals with fact, not things on which you can "disagree."

• The torques involved in putting are incredibly small.
• You can swing a putter on any lie angle on any other plane, rendering the whole "fit around your lie angle" thing bogus.

Yeah, okay man.

Regarding the physics and torque. I am not disagreeing on what the science is, I am disagreeing with your interpretation as it applies to golf. Your comment about how the torque involved in putting is so small is off base because the level of precision required in putting is so high. In a game where 1 degree open or closed can create large misses, especially when you include the different coefficient of frictions associated with different types of grass, moisture, grain, etc. the smallest deviation from a specified standard is actually proportional to the variables introduced.

So, from a scientific stance, when you include the variables associated with putting, the torque is actually important. Taking your example of a 45* lie angle. The torque, or angular velocity, becomes greater the further from 90* we get. When we also begin to add in specific MOI numbers and head weights, this increases dramatically.

 

 

I’ll end with this. I have improved my putting by almost 2 strokes per round. I make a lot more 6-10 foot putts than I have previously. Simply put, without trying to sound like a scientist, the putter simply works. Is it better than anything else on the market? For me and what appear to be a lot of other golfers, yes, it is. I am simply trying to state my review of a golf club on a golf forum. Have a great day and God bless.  

 

 

[iacas]

You know, I was gonna type up something longer, picking apart what little substance you've offered, but there's no need. I think your act here is pretty transparent.

At this point I just wish you'd stop wasting taxpayer money doing a poor job of arguing about a putter when you should probably be, I don't know, "protecting the homeland" or something?

These remain true:

15 hours ago, iacas said:

I did make an argument re: the physics. Ultimately, several things remain true:

• Putters are flat pieces of metal (typically, the TearDrop and some others are rounded) on the end of a stick. They're all capable of putting the proper roll on a ball with the proper setup and stroke.
• People all see "square" differently. Different people will aim the same putter left, right, or square. I don't believe there's a putter significantly "more" people can aim squarely, let alone one nearly everyone can.
• The torques and forces in putting are incredibly tiny. Heel shafted, center shafted, no-torque, torque-balanced, whatever… it doesn't really matter that much. The forces are miniscule.*
• The lie angle of a putter is not at all guaranteed to be the angle on which you swing the putter. You could have a putter with a 45° lie angle and if you're bent over horizontal and rock your shoulders, it'll travel straight back, straight through.

My objections to the marketing here have all been based on facts and science, with the bit about alignment based on some really extensive experience.

I'm glad you like your putter.

Enjoy your putter, man.

[JPitts]

4 minutes ago, iacas said:

You know, I was gonna type up something longer, picking apart what little substance you've offered, but there's no need. I think your act here is pretty transparent.

I just wish you'd stop wasting taxpayer money doing a poor job of arguing on a site when you should probably be, I don't know, "protecting the homeland" or something?

These remain true:

Enjoy your putter, man.

Yes, you could have.  Those degrees in medicinal chemistry,  computer science,  and French are quiet impressive in the world of applied physics. Good luck this season. Go lions. 

[iacas]

5 minutes ago, JPitts said:

Yes, you could have.  Those degrees in medicinal chemistry,  computer science,  and French are quiet impressive in the world of applied physics. Good luck this season. Go lions. 

Yeah, fortunately, they're more than enough to understand the basic physics here, and the actual Ph.D.s with whom I've spoken have all said the same thing.

[JPitts]

20 minutes ago, iacas said:

Yeah, fortunately, they're more than enough to understand the basic physics here, and the actual Ph.D.s with whom I've spoken have all said the same thing.

I know of at least 3 Ph.D holders who would disagree with you on this.  All 3 are in differing specialties in the physics world.  Either way,  no worries.  I appreciate what your site is trying to accomplish.  In the end we are all just people trying to get a little white ball into a 4.25 inch hole.  

How much longer until you finish the PGA Program? 

[Vinsk]

24 minutes ago, JPitts said:

I know of at least 3 Ph.D holders who would disagree with you on this.  All 3 are in differing specialties in the physics world.  Either way,  no worries.  I appreciate what your site is trying to accomplish.  In the end we are all just people trying to get a little white ball into a 4.25 inch hole.  

How much longer until you finish the PGA Program? 

LOL. @JPitts. Thanks buddy, lousy day at work and this at least brought some entertainment. I assume you're joking around right?

[iacas]

8 minutes ago, Vinsk said:

LOL. @JPitts. Thanks buddy, lousy day at work and this at least brought some entertainment. I assume you're joking around right?

No. Just trolling.

Hence the not-so-subtle attempted digs.

[Vinsk]

7 minutes ago, iacas said:

No. Just trolling.

Hence the not-so-subtle attempted digs.

Ah. Yeah, those MIT grads are like that. Bunch of characters.

[boogielicious]

I know people who wen to MIT for real, got engineering degrees and have trouble making Kraft Macaroni and Cheese. So regardless of whether his posts are the truth, he seems to not understand basic physics.

[Lihu]

If this person is:

Jeremy Pitts

Senior VP Engineering at Hicor Technologies

 

Then he did go to MIT and going to MIT doesn't mean you're smarter than everyone else. It just means you can be a better @a$$ than other people. I have 4 cousins who went there and an uncle who taught there for 40 years. My uncle's okay, the rest are, well, you know. . .