or Connect
TheSandTrap.com › Golf Forum › The Clubhouse › Golf Talk › The Dan Plan - 10,000 Hours to Become a Pro Golfer (Dan McLaughlin)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The Dan Plan - 10,000 Hours to Become a Pro Golfer (Dan McLaughlin) - Page 87

post #1549 of 2179
Quote:
Originally Posted by whatwoodtigerdo View Post

This title should be changed to "The haters thread".

 

Not "haters", "critics" would be the right choice of words.

 

"The Dan Plan Critics". That might actually work. :smartass:

 

There are a few questionable claims that Dan has made, and I am also not sure how he scored that high on the Trakman Combine test while scoring so badly while playing. He should be scoring 70s all the time with that kind of score.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shorty View Post
 

Why?

Seriously. For what reason?

 

I was wondering about that myself. :beer:

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by nevets88 View Post


Hate is a strong word. I wish the guy best of luck in his endeavor but some of us on this thread is calling out what we see as it is and not sugar coating things.

By saying he just needs 10K hours of deliberate practice to get on tour trivializes those who sacrificed much more and have more talent who never made it or are continuing to try and those already on it.

By making deliberate practice as part of his mission statement and not carrying it out that well is disappointing.

By going along with the press agreeing that he's a 4 handicap while he's shooting mid to high 80s in his most recent tournaments is disingenuous.

And he's going to go on speech circuit to talk about a plan that was flawed to begin with, that others here are way more qualified to do so. It's good to try and do something to inspire people but he's doing it on false pretenses. No, it's not the first time someone has done it but this is a knowledgeable group who has a better perspective to evaluate TDP than the unknowing masses.

 

Such a strong word, yes. :beer:

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by mchepp View Post


His approach is more from an artistic point of view rather than an engineering/scientific one. This is the most disappoint aspect of the plan for me. The whole project is lost because he has taken such a dreamers attack. I could argue the 10,000 theory and what he is doing are not even related.

 

This might be the main point of contention for some of us people. :beer: 

 

 

Let's go back a few years:

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by turtleback View Post
 

In his book The Complete Golfer, Harry Vardon recommends the exact opposite.  He says to start with the driver and work your way in.

 

OP:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonnydanger81 View Post
 

Don't know if anyone has seen this yet but it's a pretty interesting journey this guy is taking.  10,000 hours of practice (6 hours a day, 6 days a week for 6 years) starting from the hole backwards, working his way to become a "professional" golfer.  http://www.thedanplan.com/index.php

 

I saw a write up about it the other day and he's just over 1 year in right now.  He started literally just putting from 1 foot for a month or something.  Then moved to 3 feet, then to all over the green and after a year he's now I think around 75-100 yards away from the hole so he's never swung a driver or long iron before. 

 

Obviously to all of us this is an absolute dream, as he mentions many times on his site, but just the experiment part of it is pretty impressive too.  If you read any of the backstory on the "10,000" hour theory, it pretty much states that with a predetermined athletic prerequisite, pure talent (that which a lot of people state professional athletes have an us mere mortals don't) is actually much more rare than we think and many things can be achieved by extremely dedicated practice.  Here is the essay on deliberate practice if you really want a long read http://projects.ict.usc.edu/itw/gel/EricssonDeliberatePracticePR93.pdf

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by iacas View Post
 

Define "expert" at something? If his full-time job is effectively to practice golf for six years, and he has a little talent, he could get to a + handicap if he gets decent to good information. That's top 1% of golfers in the world. Is that "expert" at something?

 

Also, didn't the book say "those with some talent to start with can put in 10,000 hours"? What if he's not starting with some "talent"?

post #1550 of 2179
Quote http://www.news.com.au/sport/more-sports/dan-mclaughlin-trying-to-become-pro-golfer-in-his-30s-using-malcolm-gladwells-10000-hour-theory/story-fndukor0-1226997138469:
He spends about 30 hours on his game every week, but only 4-6 actually hitting golf balls. The rest is taken up by physical and mental conditioning.

 

Uhm…

post #1551 of 2179
Quote:
Originally Posted by iacas View Post

Uhm…

Yeah. I did a double take on that too. His blog posts are too wall of text for me to scan through to see how he's practicing. And based on quick scans I just can't get a clear idea of how he's practicing. His YT page shows lessons and swings and practice but they're scattershot. And I don't see in those vids how he's practicing differently than everyone else given the deliberate practice angle.

Pretty much the opposite of the Jason Day piece that detailed him hitting balls like 6-9 hours a day when he was a kid.
post #1552 of 2179

So does that mean that Dan is spending his time just pretending to play golf in his head, or is he counting any time he moves as "exercise" and puts it towards his golf.

 

Also, how can anyone believe that he's a 2 handicap when he only spends 4-6 a week hitting balls. That's the equivalent of playing one round of 18 holes on the weekend. I've had weeks where I have spent upwards of 50 hours on the course practicing/playing due to there being 3 tournaments plus two days of tryouts in the first week of the high school golf season (plus the practice on the other two days since the season starts before school).

 

I'm starting to wonder if this guy has a couple mental problems blocking his progress. Mainly the fact that he is too dumb to realize that what he's doing won't work with the way he's doing it.

post #1553 of 2179
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pretzel View Post
 

Also, how can anyone believe that he's a 2 handicap when he only spends 4-6 a week hitting balls. That's the equivalent of playing one round of 18 holes on the weekend.

 

Though I agree with the rest of your points, I disagree with this. 18 holes of golf is about ten minutes hitting balls, and the rest walking around and waiting.

 

But, that quote doesn't tell us what those 4-6 hours mean. Is it nine to 18 holes that counts as 1-2 hours, and 3 to 5 hours practicing at the range or short game areas? Or is it 18 holes of golf and an hour or two at the range a week?

post #1554 of 2179
Quote:
Originally Posted by iacas View Post
 

 

Though I agree with the rest of your points, I disagree with this. 18 holes of golf is about ten minutes hitting balls, and the rest walking around and waiting.

That's true, but I thought he'd probably consider it 4-6 hours of hitting balls since he also considers the other 24-26 hours to be still "working on his game". 

post #1555 of 2179
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pretzel View Post

That's true, but I thought he'd probably consider it 4-6 hours of hitting balls since he also considers the other 24-26 hours to be still "working on his game". 

Yeah. Who knows…?
post #1556 of 2179
Quote:
Originally Posted by iacas View Post


Yeah. Who knows…?

I would bet Dan McLaughlin :whistle:

post #1557 of 2179
So.... He plays about 5 rounds a week and warms up for 30 mins before and then hits the range after for 30 mins.?
post #1558 of 2179

I have wondered this as well but it appears anytime spent at the golf course counts as time against the clock, I think he's counting anything he does that is related to his golf game as hours counted.

post #1559 of 2179
"Any time spent at the golf course counts as time against the clock"

Certainly does according to my wife a2_wink.gif
post #1560 of 2179
Not sure why there are so many detractors in this thread to be honest.

He was neither a professional blogger, scientist or pro golfer when he started, as far as I can see.

As far as I can see, he's living the dream. Golf, golf and more golf.

I wish him the very best of luck.
post #1561 of 2179
Quote:
Originally Posted by hallryu View Post

Not sure why there are so many detractors in this thread to be honest.

He was neither a professional blogger, scientist or pro golfer when he started, as far as I can see.

As far as I can see, he's living the dream. Golf, golf and more golf.

I wish him the very best of luck.

At least for me, I do not think he is living a dream. It would be great to play golf everyday, but I get the sense the he is on the edge of making ends meet so much that he has to ask for donations. I consider this far from a dream.

 

The problem I think many of us have is that he is testing a "proven" theory that 10,000 hours of practice will make you an expert. Now though almost everyone in this thread thinks he has gone about the wrong way and is not actually testing anything. He now looks like he is someone looking for attention.

 

I would venture a guess that everyone who follows this thread and Dan are curious to know if the 10,000 theory is correct. We truly want to see it tested. Dan has screwed us because he has not gone about testing a scientific theory with ANY science, or at least any we can see. That is frustrating.

 

There are always going to be detractors in anything but everyone here at one time wanted to know if the 10,000 thing worked with golf. Now we'll never know, at least not in the way he has gone about it.

post #1562 of 2179
Living the dream? He has to be playing the whatever PGA tournament in April 2018. That's pressure. And he's living a very public life, some people enjoy that some don't like the attention. His now girlfriend has 2 kids. I'm guessing he has some fallback, should he fail, to spin his experience into speaking/media income, so maybe there's not as much pressure. I know there is no way I want to be in his shoes, whatever amount of golf he is playing, I'd want to be left alone.
post #1563 of 2179
Quote:
Originally Posted by hallryu View Post

Not sure why there are so many detractors in this thread to be honest.

He was neither a professional blogger, scientist or pro golfer when he started, as far as I can see.

As far as I can see, he's living the dream. Golf, golf and more golf.

I wish him the very best of luck.

Realists, not "detractors".
post #1564 of 2179
Quote:
Originally Posted by nevets88 View Post

Living the dream? He has to be playing the whatever PGA tournament in April 2018. That's pressure. And he's living a very public life, some people enjoy that some don't like the attention. His now girlfriend has 2 kids. I'm guessing he has some fallback, should he fail, to spin his experience into speaking/media income, so maybe there's not as much pressure. I know there is no way I want to be in his shoes, whatever amount of golf he is playing, I'd want to be left alone.

 

Are either his?

 

Didn't realize it was in the article.

post #1565 of 2179

http://thedanplan.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/GA277_52_53_GeneEsporte.pdf

 

I don't know any Portuguese and fed it into Google Translate. Dunno anything about the reputation of magazine.

 

The idea that training is sufficient gained force in 2008 with the launch Book Out Series - Outliers, the British journalist Malcolm Gladwell. The work advocates the "magic number" of 10,000 hours: what people think it is innate talent does not pass the manifestation of these training hours. In his book, Gladwell cites a 1993 survey of psychologist Anders Ericsson, the Academy of Music Berlin. With the help of teachers, he violinists students divided into three groups: those who had the potential to become soloists of international level, considered good and hardly would come to play like professionals. After 20 years, the first group had practiced 10,000 hours; good, 8 one thousand hours; and ranked with lower Skill, 4000 hours. U

 

In favor of the theory of Gladwell, Ericsson did not find someone in the group which reached excellence without practicing much, nor even a student who not having done enough was among the best. The idea was soon extrapolated to the sporting field by neurologist Daniel Levitin, University McGill, Canada. "In a study after study, of composers, basketball players, skiers, pianists, chess players, this number always resurfaces. looks like that the brain needs time to assimilate all that is needed, "writes Music on Your Brain, Scientific of a Human Obsession. The thesis has gained so much influence that people appeared willing to drop everything to test the "magic number". was the that made the American ex-photographer Dan McLaughlin in April 2010, when decided to become a professional golfer. At age 30, had never completed a departure from the sport. But in his head, what separated him from the professionals PGA Tour (the professional circuit U.S. Golf) were 10,000 hours of practice. Until the closing of this text, he had practiced 5000 hours (see above). McLaughlin is being accompanied by Ericsson, the author of the theory of 10,000 hours, which hopes to reap a definitive proof for his thesis.

 

Original Text:

 

A ideia de que treinar é suficiente ganhou
força em 2008 com o lançamento
do livro Fora de Série – Outliers, do
jornalista britânico Malcom Gladwell.
A obra defende o “número mágico” de
10 mil horas: o que as pessoas pensam
se tratar de talento inato não passa da
manifestação dessas horas de treinamento.
Em seu livro, Gladwell cita uma
pesquisa de 1993 do psicólogo Anders
Ericsson, na Academia de Música de
Berlim. Com ajuda dos professores, ele
dividiu alunos violinistas em três grupos:
os que tinham potencial para se tornarem
solistas de nível internacional, os
considerados bons e os que dificilmente
chegariam a tocar como profissionais.
Aos 20 anos, os do primeiro grupo haviam
praticado 10 mil horas; os bons, 8
mil horas; e os classificados com menor
habilidade, 4 mil horas.
U
A favor da teoria de Gladwell, Ericsson
não encontrou no grupo alguém
que atingiu a excelência sem praticar
muito, tampouco um aluno que mesmo
tendo praticado o suficiente não
ficou entre os melhores. A ideia logo foi
extrapolada ao terreno esportivo pelo
neurologista Daniel Levitin, da Universidade
McGill, no Canadá. “Em um
estudo após o outro, de compositores,
jogadores de basquete, esquiadores,
pianistas, jogadores de xadrez, esse
número sempre ressurge. Parece que
o cérebro precisa desse tempo para assimilar
tudo que é necessário”, escreve
em Música no Seu Cérebro, a Ciência
de Uma Obsessão Humana.
A tese ganhou tanta influência que
apareceu gente disposta a largar tudo
para testar o “número mágico”. Foi o
que fez o ex-fotógrafo americano Dan
McLaughlin em abril de 2010, quando
decidiu tornar-se golfista profissional.
Aos 30 anos, nunca tinha completado
uma partida do esporte. Mas, em sua cabeça,
o que o separava dos profissionais
do PGA Tour (o circuito profissional do
golfe americano) eram 10 mil horas de
prática. Até o fechamento deste texto,
ele havia praticado 5 mil horas (veja
acima). McLaughlin está sendo acompanhado
por Ericsson, o autor da teoria
das 10 mil horas, que espera colher uma
prova definitiva para a sua tese.

post #1566 of 2179
Quote:
Originally Posted by mchepp View Post
 

At least for me, I do not think he is living a dream. It would be great to play golf everyday, but I get the sense the he is on the edge of making ends meet so much that he has to ask for donations. I consider this far from a dream.

 

The problem I think many of us have is that he is testing a "proven" theory that 10,000 hours of practice will make you an expert. Now though almost everyone in this thread thinks he has gone about the wrong way and is not actually testing anything. He now looks like he is someone looking for attention.

 

I would venture a guess that everyone who follows this thread and Dan are curious to know if the 10,000 theory is correct. We truly want to see it tested. Dan has screwed us because he has not gone about testing a scientific theory with ANY science, or at least any we can see. That is frustrating.

 

There are always going to be detractors in anything but everyone here at one time wanted to know if the 10,000 thing worked with golf. Now we'll never know, at least not in the way he has gone about it.

Empirical testing is not science, is that your view?

 

What is exactly your complaint about the scientificness of Dan Plan?

 

From wikipedia "Empirical research is a way of gaining knowledge by means of direct and indirect observation or experience."

 

 

 

Clearly dan the plan, is an empirical experiment testing the waters of that 10 000 hours theory.

 

For the record, I have a hunch that Dan will not exactly be the shining start on the PGA tour. I think he needs way more clubhead speed than he currently has to be competitive at that kind of level.

 

I do think that he could get to scratch level though...

 

I do agree with you on that he should post more detailed analysis of his own golf game, so everyone could see what he's up to. See the data so to speak.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Golf Talk
TheSandTrap.com › Golf Forum › The Clubhouse › Golf Talk › The Dan Plan - 10,000 Hours to Become a Pro Golfer (Dan McLaughlin)