or Connect
TheSandTrap.com › Golf Forum › The Clubhouse › Golf Talk › The Dan Plan - 10,000 Hours to become a pro golfer
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The Dan Plan - 10,000 Hours to become a pro golfer - Page 72

post #1279 of 1501
Quote:
Originally Posted by BerkeleyRehab View Post
 

He is the one that put PGA Tour into a website.

 

He is the one that gave all those interviews on human potential.

 

He is the one that put a donate here begging sign on his website.

 

And just like you said so well in your post, all the interviews, marketing, and gimmicks don't cannot hide what is golf.  SCORE. 

 

Unfortunately, now that he is starting to play in tournaments, it is apparent that he is very mediocre.  And I think he has the money, but doesn't want to play in tournaments, because it will expose him even more.  $75?  You have to be kidding me.  The only way to really get better is playing in more tournaments and he is avoiding that.

I agree- I think the reason why he doesn't play in more is because it will expose that he is not over time getting to a lower handicap. I think that he has some pressure on him coming from somewhere..maybe it is like a ponzi scheme lol. Hell, he could be just hanging out doing nothing and showing up two days a week to the course and filling in the blanks with BS for all we know. 

post #1280 of 1501
Quote:
Originally Posted by GHIN0011458 View Post
 

I agree- I think the reason why he doesn't play in more is because it will expose that he is not over time getting to a lower handicap. I think that he has some pressure on him coming from somewhere..maybe it is like a ponzi scheme lol. Hell, he could be just hanging out doing nothing and showing up two days a week to the course and filling in the blanks with BS for all we know. 

 

The difference between marketing and an engineering is that the engineers needs to make the product work. More qualified golfers are like the engineers of the world, they do all the hard work and get no credit for what they've done. Dan is all hype and getting credit for doing far less and achieving far less than any truly aspiring golfers. This is what irks me the most about the project. The fact that all of you golfers with actual potential and who could really use a break got all the thunder stolen from you.

 

I'm sure that if he gets back into marketing he will eventually find something, after all he convinced quite a few people to interview him, donate stuff to him, give him free range and course time, etc.

 

He's good at marketing himself, that's for sure. Maybe this is one thing you guys can take away from his project?

post #1281 of 1501

Just this month.

 

http://www.columbian.com/news/2014/jun/07/dan-plan-mclaughlin-golf-royal-oaks-invitational/

 

***Just a little more than three years into the project, and more than 5,000 hours of practice, McLaughlin has gone from novice to a 3-handicap. He has logged his time and blogged his experience and become a big name in the small world of golf.***

 

Where was the post-tournament follow-up...

 

I think the writers of these articles are just as bad as Dan. 

post #1282 of 1501
I took early retirement three years ago at the age of 51. Lucky me. I took up golf and decided to try and learn properly. I have a weekly lesson with a PGA pro, practice between 20 and 30 hours a week and play once or twice a week. All I can say is golf is hard(as Adam Scott said after the US Open). I've been doing this for two and a half years and I've got from not having a clue to 16. Good coaching and deliberate practice do make a difference if you are lucky enough to have the time. What do you reckonis a realistic goal at my age?
post #1283 of 1501
Quote:
Originally Posted by Klinsie View Post

I took early retirement three years ago at the age of 51. Lucky me. I took up golf and decided to try and learn properly. I have a weekly lesson with a PGA pro, practice between 20 and 30 hours a week and play once or twice a week. All I can say is golf is hard(as Adam Scott said after the US Open). I've been doing this for two and a half years and I've got from not having a clue to 16. Good coaching and deliberate practice do make a difference if you are lucky enough to have the time. What do you reckonis a realistic goal at my age?

The tone of your post is the biggest thing that I think should be taken from this whole Dan plan thing.  The fact is that he has gone from absolutely no clue about the game to a competent single digit handicap golfer in a relatively short amount of time. He is in a rare situation where his progress has been reasonably diligently recorded and then I think it must be put into perspective.

 

Golf is really really hard and if you think that you are going to play once a week and practice for a couple hours, and then play to a scratch handicap, you are being unrealistic. For me this helps me keep my expectations in proper focus. It took me 6 months of focused practice (6 to 10 rounds per week and 4 hours per day of practice and workouts) to go for a 16 to a 6 and I believe that it will take that same effort at a minimum to go from a 6 to a 3, and twice that effort to go from a 3 to scratch.

post #1284 of 1501
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big C View Post

I guess my point is that I don't presume Dan's tournament history tells the whole tale of the tape. I've posted this before, but even when I was a legitimate 9, I put together a few mid 90's rounds in our men's club tournaments. That's about as low pressure as tourney golf can get, but at my level, tournament melt downs sadly are not that uncommon. It's taken me about 2 years to get to the point where I feel I can focus and actually play better under that pressure. My guess is that Dan is still learning how to deal with that.

 

Agree. He may well have played like a 13 in those tournaments, but with tournament pressure, and dealing with some really fast greens, a guy who was around an 8 could almost expect to have that happen at first. I think the handicap falling under 5 was a bit of a fluke, based on a small number of rounds, but we knew that because his anti-cap was so high (around 11).  

 

Just looking at his recent rounds at Riverside, which has a 73 rating:

 

6/12 80

6/11 40 (9)

6/10 86

6/09 42 (9)

6/05 77

5/29 79

5/25 84

 

The 73 rating means a 7 handicap should only be scoring 80 or better only about 1 round in 5. He's done it 3 times in his last 6 rounds. I just think he's still very inexperienced and very inconsistent. I have no trouble believing he can go out to Royal Oaks, shoot a 79 in the practive round, and then shoot an 88 when it counts in the tournament. I don't think he's lying or cheating on the 79.

 

I think he can probably keep the handicap around 5-6 if he sticks to courses he knows well and which suit his game, like Riverside, but might be more a "legit" upper single digits if he challanges himself more.  Don't think he's really over 10 though.

post #1285 of 1501

A note to those who are defending this guy and who think his goals are not to become a pro.

This is from his most recent blog entry:

 

"It was the pivotal point in the most important round of my fledgling career...."

 

 

Strangely, no updates since his bluff was called by entering that 3 round tournament.  Funny that.

 

 

And----I'm sick of all this BS where people write that "nerves" and "pressure" of "tournament play" add shots to his score. Of course it does, and it all counts.

That's where his true ability lies - when you actually have to count your score in an honest fashion and think your way around a golf course.

I mean...the pros don't say that they would have had lower scores but they were playing a tournament.

 

Pretty sure that tournament scores are the only scores that matter for aspiring pros ;-)


Edited by Shorty - 6/17/14 at 5:18pm
post #1286 of 1501
Quote:
Originally Posted by acerimusdux View Post
 

 

Agree. He may well have played like a 13 in those tournaments, but with tournament pressure, and dealing with some really fast greens, a guy who was around an 8 could almost expect to have that happen at first. I think the handicap falling under 5 was a bit of a fluke, based on a small number of rounds, but we knew that because his anti-cap was so high (around 11).  

 

Just looking at his recent rounds at Riverside, which has a 73 rating:

 

The 73 rating means a 7 handicap should only be scoring 80 or better only about 1 round in 5. He's done it 3 times in his last 6 rounds. I just think he's still very inexperienced and very inconsistent. I have no trouble believing he can go out to Royal Oaks, shoot a 79 in the practive round, and then shoot an 88 when it counts in the tournament. I don't think he's lying or cheating on the 79.

 

I think he can probably keep the handicap around 5-6 if he sticks to courses he knows well and which suit his game, like Riverside, but might be more a "legit" upper single digits if he challanges himself more.  Don't think he's really over 10 though.

 

 

You just described a high handicapper. Also, the yardages of the tournament seemed to indicate they were not playing the tips at Royal Oaks.

post #1287 of 1501
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shorty View Post
 

A note to those who are defending this guy and who think his goals are not to become a pro.

This is from his most recent blog entry:

 

"It was the pivotal point in the most important round of my fledgling career...."

 

 

Strangely, no updates since his bluff was called by entering that 3 round tournament.  Funny that.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Righty to Lefty View Post
 

The fact is that he has gone from absolutely no clue about the game to a competent single digit handicap golfer in a relatively short amount of time.

 

 I would guess that if you had 10,000 healthy, active 30 year olds follow this 'plan' and play that many hours, the average would shoot 85 or so.  Exactly where he is at.  There will be outliers on both sides and there would certainly be a couple that could legitimately shoot in the 70s in tournaments.  

 

Yes, he has gone very quiet since the tournament.


Probably questioning if this is even all worth it for another couple of years.  Sounds miserable to me.  Plus, the pressure of constantly being exposed.  But that is what he signed up for this.  Certainly wasn't quiet about it.  

post #1288 of 1501
Quote:
Originally Posted by BerkeleyRehab View Post
 

 

 

 I would guess that if you had 10,000 healthy, active 30 year olds follow this 'plan' and play that many hours, the average would shoot 85 or so.  Exactly where he is at.  There will be outliers on both sides and there would certainly be a couple that could legitimately shoot in the 70s in tournaments.  

 

Yes, he has gone very quiet since the tournament.


Probably questioning if this is even all worth it for another couple of years.  Sounds miserable to me.  Plus, the pressure of constantly being exposed.  But that is what he signed up for this.  Certainly wasn't quiet about it.  

I don't know for sure, but I think he should be further along at this point than he is. I also don't think he went about his training the right way. I haven't really followed much about him, so I don't know if he ever played anything competitively before. If he hasn't then that would put him at a distinct disadvantage when it comes to tournament play. If I were in his position I would have started getting into tournaments awhile ago to acclimate myself to the unique stress and mindset that comes with playing in them. I would also have started basing my handicap solely on the scores produced in those tournaments because those would be what would indicate my actual skill level. Once I get myself down into the mid teens/close to single digit handicap that is probably what I'll do, look for local/regional tournaments I can get into. I'm competitive by nature though, and I think that is something Dan may lack.

post #1289 of 1501
Quote:
Originally Posted by nevets88 View Post
 

So TST, let's put our money where our mouths are. If we were to come up with our own plan, Dan Plan 2.0 or TST Dan Plan 2.0, what would you do differently?

 

It's obvious some suggestions will be:

 

  • Start straight away with a 1/2 - 3/4 wedge shots, get that low point as far forward from the get go. None of the putting BS.
  • Move to warmer climes if possible. Coming from NYC, I think I would find that I would probably not have a problem braving Portland temps year round - Portland folks, what do you think?

 

In the Talent Code, the writer identified hot spots of talent - I would suggest that Erie, PA, where @mvmac and Dana Dahlquist teach, Martin Chuck's school, Dan Carraher and others similar - these are hot spots of teaching. DP 2.0 should look into these to see whom to learn from.

 

I don't think he needed to spend money on personal fitness trainer. You can do your own physical fitness regimen - reallocate that money to golf.  And spend more time on golf, less time in the gym.

Simple, hire Mike and Erik as my golf instructors and do what they tell me to do.

post #1290 of 1501
Quote:
Originally Posted by newtogolf View Post
 

Simple, hire Mike and Erik as my golf instructors and do what they tell me to do.

+1 except I would have also raised a solid amount first and would have done more on the PR side to get more dollars coming in.

post #1291 of 1501
Quote:
Originally Posted by RFKFREAK View Post
 

+1 except I would have also raised a solid amount first and would have done more on the PR side to get more dollars coming in.

At its most basic level, Dan Plan is a self indulgent charity that's established so some guy can forget about his financial responsibilities and go play golf all day, sorry, but he's not getting any of my money.  I think it's got to be tough for anyone to get all their expenses covered unless they were already famous / infamous.

 

Phelps could pull something like this off because he's an Olympic champion in one sport and a household name so the marketing dollars are more easily justifiable.  I have to think the golf companies / courses get hit up all the time for money and equipment because some rube thinks he/she has the talent to turn pro and just needs someone to sponsor them.   Since I've been a member of TST we've had at least 3-4 ask us to sponsor them with clubs and / or money so they could pursue their dream.

 

Best chances are if people like Erik and Dave see enough promise in someone and decide to sponsor them to assist in the promotion of 5SK.

post #1292 of 1501
Quote:
Originally Posted by newtogolf View Post
 

At its most basic level, Dan Plan is a self indulgent charity that's established so some guy can forget about his financial responsibilities and go play golf all day, sorry, but he's not getting any of my money.  I think it's got to be tough for anyone to get all their expenses covered unless they were already famous / infamous.

 

Phelps could pull something like this off because he's an Olympic champion in one sport and a household name so the marketing dollars are more easily justifiable.  I have to think the golf companies / courses get hit up all the time for money and equipment because some rube thinks he/she has the talent to turn pro and just needs someone to sponsor them.   Since I've been a member of TST we've had at least 3-4 ask us to sponsor them with clubs and / or money so they could pursue their dream.

 

Best chances are if people like Erik and Dave see enough promise in someone and decide to sponsor them to assist in the promotion of 5SK.

 

I'm not saying it would be easy.  I'm just saying if it were me, that's what I would do before even thinking of taking the time off from my profession to attempt such a thing.

 

I can't say if he had a plan in place other than what he's shared but, if it were me, I would have set specific goals on the financial end that would have had to have been met and, in some way, that's where marketing takes place.  He had a gimmick (for lack of a better way of saying it) and had to find the right avenue to try and get maximum value for it.  It would no doubt be tough, and it would likely take more time than he'd like, but this might have gone better for him if he had put it more effort on that side of things.  

 

I also think he could have done a better job of promoting this rather than just his blog, although, to be fair, I don't know if he's done any tv spots, radio spots, or any interviews since I only found out about his plan from this site earlier this year and haven't followed it much besides what I've gathered from this thread.

post #1293 of 1501
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeremie Boop View PostI would also have started basing my handicap solely on the scores produced in those tournaments because those would be what would indicate my actual skill level.

 

If this was self-funded and he didn't care what others thought, then yes.

 

Problem is that nobody would donate to an 18-handicapper that shot in the 90s.  Kind of like a publicly-traded company.  Eventually investors want to see results.  Start-up phase can't go on forever.

 

Him getting down to a self-administered "3" handicap has helped his marketing.  Supposedly CNN spent a whole-day interviewing him last month!  Al the things in the world, and a 'golf bum' gets attention.  CNN catering to the 99.9% of the population that probably thinks PGA pros are scratch golfers and he is only three shots a round a day away from that coveted status! 

 

My guess is that he will avoid tournaments even more now which is the exact opposite of where he should be going.  He should be getting out there week after week.  Next tournament will be even more pressure to produce.

 

This story is mildly-entertaining and maddeningly annoying at the same time!

post #1294 of 1501

I'm guessing 5SK is doing fine and has no need for a single student to have so much exposure. It's a risky proposition to be so dependent on one person.

 

I've said before, I'm disappointed in the lost opportunity to learn new things from such a project, but another thing this project perpetuates is that golf is harder than it is. And I've also said that think that with good instruction, Dan would have been way farther than where he is now. So what happened perpetuates people thinking it's par for the course to take so long to get better.

 

I also think that a person can hold down a full time job - that doesn't have intensive hours obviously - and still dedicate a big chunk of time to golf provided he/she is single and doesn't have many other commitments and do a Dan Plan. People work full time and still manage get ready to compete in the Olympics.

 

I dunno if anyone watches the show Portlandia but I'm getting a bit of a Portlandia vibe from this project.

post #1295 of 1501
Quote:
Originally Posted by BerkeleyRehab View Post
 

 

 

This story is mildly-entertaining and maddeningly annoying at the same time!

Totally agree- I have no idea how he isn't better. I told someone about this at lunch today and we did the math and I am only at 3200 and already scratch. I just need an estimated 450k and I feel like I could do it. Make it into a Web.com event at least within 5 years. Problem is I will never get the 450k lol so no worries. That is what drives me crazy is that he is falling on his face and I would love the chance to be in his shoes doing what he is doing. I don't disagree with the 10,000 hours to becoming a pro at some level. I do disagree with his ridiculous process to get there. He should have started tournaments after one year of practice.. 

post #1296 of 1501

 The thought that all the media outlets possibly thinking he's 2 or 3 shots away from being pro is maddening! If he played at Pinehurst he'd be 30+ shots behind the best score each day. It's a joke!

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