Did Odyssey Just Max Out The Zero-Torque Competition Or Just The Controversy?
News

Did Odyssey Just Max Out The Zero-Torque Competition Or Just The Controversy?

Support our Mission. We independently test each product we recommend. When you buy through our links, we may earn a commission.

Did Odyssey Just Max Out The Zero-Torque Competition Or Just The Controversy?

Odyssey has added two new models to their Square 2 Square line of Stroke Balanced putters, and they are going to get people talking.

As a refresher, Odyssey unveiled the first three Square 2 Square models last fall. These new Stroke Balanced putters were zero-torque versions of three classic Odyssey designs: the Jailbird, Seven and Double Wide.

In addition to being Stroke Balanced, the new S2S Max 1 and Max Stripe models incorporate other proprietary Odyssey putter technologies such as the Ai-One insert and Stroke Lab shaft. Those assistive technologies are value-adding inclusions and give these new models a distinctive Odyssey feel.

In fact, nearly all aspects of the S2S Max 1 and Max Stripe are characteristically Odyssey.

All except one.

The S2S Odyssey Max 1 and Max Stripe.

My usual approach for covering a putter release is to explore the technologies and then dive into the characteristics of the new models. I’m going to go with an abbreviated version of that plan today and then get into the begging question.

As I mentioned, the Odyssey Max 1 and Max Stripe are Stroke Balanced putters. Odyssey eliminates torque by having the putter’s hosel positioned at the center of gravity. Since the putter is balanced around the shaft, it will not twist in either direction, even when swung.

Both models are very stable, having MOI values above 6300.

The difference between the S2S Max 1 and S2S Max Stripe is one of alignment. The Max 1 has a short alignment line at the front edge. The aptly named Max Stripe features a large stripe down the center, visually consistent with Odyssey’s Versa 90 aesthetic.

While this alignment difference doesn’t seem significant, I would suggest you roll both models to see how the two schemes influence your putting. You’ll likely notice a difference in targeting.

By the way, how cool are those textured wings? They elevate the overall cosmetics and that bit of contrasting texture shifts the visual focus to the center of the putter.

Odyssey S2S Max 1

I was certain I would prefer the Max Stripe but it was the Max 1 that went in my bag. Although they are exactly the same size, the large stripe makes the Max Stripe appear larger to me. This is not a good or a bad thing, just an odd observation.

Odyssey S2S Max Stripe

More importantly, I went with the Max 1 because I was way more accurate with it. This was somewhat shocking as I am normally a huge fan of the Versa 90 look. The Jailbird Mini Versa 90 CH is one of my favorite putters of 2025.

I was surprised that the smaller alignment scheme of the Max 1 was more effective for me. The Max Stripe was great for general proximity but the Max 1 delivered more precision targeting.

It took me a second but I quickly realized that the alignment scheme on the S2S Max 1 is very similar to the alignment scheme on my L.A.B. Golf DF3 gamer and that revelation brings us to the controversy.

Did Odyssey copy L.A.B. Golf?

When I saw leaked photos of the Odyssey Max 1 online a few months back, I was certain they were AI-generated. Someone was trying to rile up the golf-verse by deep faking an Odyssey putter to look like the L.A.B. Golf Directed Force 3.

It was the perfect time for some trolling since Odyssey had just rolled out their Square to Square line a few months prior.

As it turned out, the photo wasn’t AI-generated and it wasn’t trolling. Odyssey did in fact built a putter that is very similar in shape to the DF3.

It’s not identical but it is hard to ignore the similarities, especially when you compare the perimeters of the putters.

Innovation or emulation?

In the putter business, there are two paths to selling putters: innovation and emulation.

The innovation pathway is far more difficult. Coming up with the next Anser, Spider, 2-Ball, SweetFace grooves, White Hot insert, and so on is not an easy task. Every year, we see interesting shapes and innovative technologies associated with new putter releases. The majority of the shapes and technologies are abandoned the following year for something else.

Innovation is a risky path. If you make a new design that doesn’t sell, your company’s bills head to collections.

It is fiscally safer, and profitable, for a company to roll out interpretations of proven putter designs.

Customers recognize the design and its proven track record. Brand loyalists become overjoyed that their favorite company has made a version of that popular putter. In other words, the company sells putters.

Where am I going with this? This is how I see the Max/DF3 situation. Just like the Newport is Scotty Cameron’s version of the PING Anser, the S2S Max 1 is Odyssey’s version of the L.A.B. Golf DF3.

I’m sure L.A.B. Golf was not too thrilled when they first saw the Odyssey Max. Perhaps they took some pride in the fact that the #1 in Golf Odyssey leviathan liked their design enough to make a version of it.

Perhaps not.

The difference this time around is that the previous Square 2 Square models were Odyssey shapes, making the competition with L.A.B. Golf technology focused.

Now the competition is definitively putter versus putter.

Could this be a good thing?

Your middle school gym teacher told you that competition is good for you. Could that whistle-wielding wiseman be correct?

Think on this for a second. Are there versions of the PING Anser out there that are better than the original PING Anser?

Of course there are. When other companies made their versions of the Anser, they added their tweaks and twists, and sometimes they actually improved upon the original.

One of my “pry it out of my cold dead hands” putters is my milled PING Custom PLD Anser and that putter would likely not exist if Bettinardi/Cameron did not make milled versions of PING’s original design.

Am I saying the L.A.B. Golf DF3 is the zero-torque Anser? I don’t know if I am ready to go that far just yet, but Odyssey making the Max 1 and Max Stripe tells me that they see value in exploring the shape. 

Will the Odyssey Max 1 and Max Stripe lure L.A.B. loyalists?

I’ve had my purple L.A.B. Golf DF3 in my bag for a while. Will I be making the switch to the S2S Max 1?

To answer that, let’s talk about sporks.

For the uninitiated, a spork is a combination of a spoon and a fork. Somewhere along the way, I realized that sporks were the ultimate camping utensil. Nearly all of your ingestion needs can be met with one plastic spork. From that revelation forward, my camp box contained a bag of sporks.

A few summers ago, I bought a titanium spork. It’s lightweight and nearly indestructible. As such, I no longer pack plastic sporks. The plastic sporks are perfectly functional but the titanium spork is a next-level face feeder.

That is how I think DF3 owners will view the Odyssey Max 1. The Max 1 is a really, really, good putter and plays very similar to my DF3.

The Odyssey Max putters are excellent sporks. They are fully functional and do a great job at the table.

If you already have a custom-fitted titanium spork, though, you are likely set.

The Odyssey S2S Max is going to be a thing

My takeaway from all of this is that Odyssey is taking the zero-torque marketplace very seriously. The Square 2 Square Jailbird and Seven are selling in large numbers, especially in places where L.A.B. Golf has a limited or no market presence.

The release of the Square 2 Square Max 1 and Max Stripe are overt salvos across the bow of L.A.B. Golf and other companies looking to position themselves as players in this new putter category.

The only valid criticism of these new Odyssey putters is that they look like L.A.B. Golf’s DF3 putter. If that makes you angry, stand by your principles and don’t buy one.

That hill may be tough to die on, though. These are high-quality, solid-performing zero-torque putters. They are more than just Temu copies of the DF3.

(Have you see those Temu atrocities by the way? Oof.)

Odyssey has raised the price on the original Square 2 Square models from $299 to $349. The MSRP on the Max 1 and Max Stripe will be $399. The increased cost is likely due to increased production costs and tariffs.

This price increase reduces one of Odyssey’s key Square 2 Square selling points: lower price.

When they first launched, the Square 2 Square putters were $150 cheaper than stock L.A.B. putters. Now the difference is only $50.

It will be interesting to see if Odyssey can capture the same market momentum at $399 that they did at $299.

Learn more about the new Max 1, Max Stripe, and other Odyssey Square 2 Square models at Odyssey.CallawayGolf.com

For You

For You

Instruction
Jun 22, 2025
Beginner Golf Checklist: 7 Must-Know Basics For New Golfers
J.J. Spaun Viewership J.J. Spaun Viewership
News
Jun 21, 2025
J.J. Spaun Made The Putt Of His Life—But His Performance Didn’t Bring In Viewers
LIV PGA TOUR U.S. OPEN LIV PGA TOUR U.S. OPEN
LIV Golf
Jun 21, 2025
LIV Versus PGA Tour At The U.S. Open: Who Showed Up At Oakmont?
Dave Wolfe

Dave Wolfe

Dave Wolfe

A putter-obsessed recreational golfer, constantly striving to improve his game while not getting too hung up about it. Golf should be fun, always.

Dave Wolfe

Dave Wolfe

Dave Wolfe





    This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

      Joe

      2 weeks ago

      I have the Max 1 and I love it so far, I was already playing a face balanced center shafted two ball odyssey (for years) so this has just made things easier for me, it sets up to my eye really well, I’m right handed but left eye dominant, it has great feel and distance control seems to have improved too–I think that’s because I am not concerned about the line at all, I am hitting my mark way more consistently…

      Reply

      HikingMike

      1 month ago

      As far as I can tell, that specific shape does not really do anything, does not contribute to the zero torque characteristic, doesn’t create any more MOI or anything else that any mallet style could. And it doesn’t enable picking up the ball either. So that makes it a knockoff shape. The whole reason for the shape is to look like the LAB DF shape. I’m not a LAB fanatic like what seems everyone else here, but that’s what it looks like to me.

      Reply

      Lacou

      1 month ago

      Most clubs are a copy of someone else’s design so why would I care? If it brings the prices down, I’m all for it!

      Reply

      Loop

      1 month ago

      I’m a Lab fan, like I can pick up a ball with the DF3 and my new ozi when practicing or someone rolls a putt back to me. Also a big feature with lab is the lie angle custom build that is very restricted from the competition. The downside to lab custom is the wait time. 2 months is too long and many players may opt for a new Odessey which will be much quicker to get.

      Reply

      David Kondzich

      2 months ago

      I have been a fitter for Lab beginning in the Directed Force days, 8 years ago. I personally use the DF 2.1. Today I played with a guy who had a DF 3 at 71 degrees and my putter is 64 degrees. No way we could use each other’s putters. Lie angle balancing is the secret sauce .. if it fits you off the rack, good for you. The problem with Labgolf now is the lead time. If you order a putter today, it takes 6 to 8 weeks to get it. That gives other companies that are not Lie angle balanced to sell their product. A different process between manufacturers. Glue a shaft into a head or custom weight each and every putter which takes about 25 minutes versus 1 minute to glue. It will be interesting to see how the Odyssey works in the “Revealer”. That device sells the putters without a doubt. Just my 2 cents

      Reply

      dr. bloor

      2 months ago

      I bag a DF 2.1, and have been seeing a Mezz.1 Max on the side at my local golf galaxy, but I get bored with the whole “X is stealing ideas from Y!” thing. If the design principles are sound, other companies are going to use them. It’s not controversial, and it’s a weird reason to get riled up.

      Reply

      Randall Robbins

      2 months ago

      For my money, the 008 CS from Sub 70 is a worthy competitor to these other putters. Great feel and looks, gives the point and shoot feel when you line it up.

      Reply

      I miss, I miss, I make

      2 months ago

      Knock-offs? They are all over the world. The Fender Strat. Even Trump is selling a knock-off Les Paul. In golf a Scotty Xerox. Tried a fiends mid-length LA Zero what ever. He loves it. I am sure it is a well made piece. Just seems as if it would take forever to get used to it as I play a -semi-toe hang and my stroke is built around rotation. Right now the only guy on TOUR I can think of is Rickie. Sure there are more. Some change putters like they change underwear, Others? I would definitely at least try one on a carpet before buying because they are different.

      Reply

      Component guy

      2 months ago

      Before lab says anything about Callaway copying their design, they should be reminded that they copied the Golfworks CRay putter from 15 y ago
      Here is a pic
      http://magigolf.chez-alice.fr/fiches_produits/Putters_CER_C_Ray_US.htm

      Reply

      DesertDago

      2 months ago

      I look at it this way; LAB really started the zero torque revolution and has profited from it. They are growing and putting our new products. But,,,golf doesn’t need to be a sport where you have to pay $500 for a zero torque putter. Yes, Odyssey shamelessly copied LAB design, but so will other companies which happens all the time. The prices will fall as the copies of ZT putters come out. Everyone votes with their wallet and this is no exception. Zero Torque will not go away so just expect it to happen across the industry and blatant ripoff designs will show up. I like the different zero torque designs that are on the market now such as the PXG Allen and Bat Attack ZT (my personal favorite but still expensive). By the way, I think the LAB design looks modern and interesting while the Odyssey looks like an overweight, bad ,Temu-like copy.

      Reply

      Andy Tynes

      2 months ago

      I’ve had my LAB putter for 3 years now and love it. When it’s time to upgrade or simply change to a different model, I’ll stick with the real thing – LAB and their ability to customize.

      Reply

      Mike N

      2 months ago

      Would not give up my DF3 for what is in my opinion an egregiously obvious copy, particularly from a major OEM. I’d pay a few hundred more for the OG, particularly considering the customization options, but mostly to support a company that had the most skin in the game and took all the risks. Odyssey, with all their R&D $ could only muster a nearly exact replica of the L.A.B.? Shameful. I hope the consumer market rewards the right folks with this one. The is the golf world equivalent of a super Walmart coming to town and (potentially) snuffing out small businesses. No bueno! Do better, Odyssey.

      Reply

      RJ

      2 months ago

      100% agree! It is also hideous, looks a fish

      Reply

      MoveAlong

      2 months ago

      LAB fanboys will be all up in arms over this, meh, every design is copied, get over it.

      Reply

      Dan

      2 months ago

      Love my Mezz.1 Max, and the customized fitting, shaft and grip. I’ve carried Odyssey putters in my bag, and with the exception of the Two Ball, they always felt like knock off versions of Scotty, Bettinardi, and others. Zero Torque is here to stay. I don’t care that Odyssey copied the DF3. I just think it’s kind of weak and pathetic that their designers couldn’t come up with a shape more unique to Odyssey with the same technology. It’s almost like they didn’t try – kind of lazy and unimaginative.

      Reply

      Dave

      2 months ago

      They probably didn’t put a hole in the shape (which is very useful for grabbing, Evenroll did it) or it would have looked exactly the same. But on the other hand, all Ansers look the same. Can’t wait to see what the TM/Titleist/Ping versions look like. Also can’t wait for lower prices.

      Reply

      Jim Shaw

      2 months ago

      great article, thanks for sharing this interesting deep dive into the putting wars that inevitably will be a benefit to the consumer…

      Reply

      Dave R

      2 months ago

      I’m not in the market for for a new putter, but I’d think the customization of the LAB putters is probably a big plus for them. For whatever reason I’m just not a fan of Odyssey’s branding in the Ai-ONE era. I think the opportunity to customize a DF3 will be a big plus for certain golfers that are able to pay the extra money for a similarly performing product.

      Reply

      J

      2 months ago

      I would have loved to be a fly on the wall when they had the meeting at Odyssey introducing these designs. Can’t wait to see the marketing fluff behind these models.
      On a side note, absolute miss on detail. Why won’t some of these companies go the extra mile and include a black shaft?

      Reply

      Fake

      2 months ago

      Can you test the Temu knockoffs? Sounds fun.

      Reply

      Mike

      2 months ago

      James Robinson tested the LAB Mezz knockoff on his youtube channel. Spoiler, it was clear that TEMU is only copying the looks.

      Reply

      Jason S

      2 months ago

      Well, thank you Odyssey for making my future putter purchase 1 brand simpler. I was interested in the Jailbird S2S. But after this, that’s a hard pass on the JB and any other Odyssey putter. Your blatant carbon copy of the DF3 has done the opposite of what you likely intended – I’m not interested in the Max and more interested in the DF3. Simply put, bye Felicia.

      Reply

      Will

      2 months ago

      Are patents just not a thing in the golf world or what? Considering Apple once sued over *rounded rectangles*, it’s a little odd to see the golf industry let these things go. Not saying I like the everybody sues everybody business model, just curious about why it’s different here.

      Reply

      vito

      2 months ago

      Having been on both ends of patent lawsuits I’m not sure golf companies want to spend the time or money on them. Unless you can justify it based on large losses in revenue it usually doesn’t make a lot of sense. As with most things the only ones to seem to make out are the lawyers. You can see it in the electronics industry where what happens more often is that companies cross license each others technology because they have found that by the time lawsuits make their way thru court the technologies are obsolete and their lawyers have gotten rich.

      Reply

      Drew

      1 month ago

      This is not the same as the lie angle balanced LAB putter so no patent—if there is one—infringement here.

    Leave A Reply

    required
    required
    required (your email address will not be published)

    This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

    Instruction
    Jun 22, 2025
    Beginner Golf Checklist: 7 Must-Know Basics For New Golfers
    J.J. Spaun Viewership J.J. Spaun Viewership
    News
    Jun 21, 2025
    J.J. Spaun Made The Putt Of His Life—But His Performance Didn’t Bring In Viewers
    LIV PGA TOUR U.S. OPEN LIV PGA TOUR U.S. OPEN
    LIV Golf
    Jun 21, 2025
    LIV Versus PGA Tour At The U.S. Open: Who Showed Up At Oakmont?