Not "haters", "critics" would be the right choice of words.
"The Dan Plan Critics". That might actually work.
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.
I was wondering about that myself.
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.
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.
Let's go back a few years:
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
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"?