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

[natureboy]

9 hours ago, Lihu said:

Not sure the CR is going to be 73.8? ~72.2 seems more reasonable for 6650 yards. A 7 HC should shoot +9, but would not be allowed to compete. Maximum 2HC is permitted to participate. If he were a 7 and kept a genuine 2 from signing up, that would be pretty bad.

Or instead of speculating you could look it up like I did.

[Lihu]

11 minutes ago, natureboy said:

Or instead of speculating you could look it up like I did.

I did, the finals 72.3/6693 yards. The ~72.2/6658 CR was in the qualifiers, but he didn't make the cut to play the finals.

 

Championship Yardages_4.pdf

[iacas]

17 hours ago, natureboy said:

That was an easy choice, because if he had any sense it was clear the desire of the bulk of posters on this thread and Erik and Phil don't like him and want him to fail. Would you undertake a lengthy process of instruction with a teacher you were not convinced was solidly in your corner let alone possibly rooting for you to fail?

Wait, what now?

What fucking kind of fresh hot garbage is that?

I can't speak for anyone else (@Phil McGleno), but you've got a serious reading comprehension issue if you think I "don't like him and want him to fail."

The facts speak quite loudly on this, and they do not agree with you at all.

[Lihu]

1 minute ago, iacas said:

Wait, what now?

What ***king kind of fresh hot garbage is that?

I can't speak for anyone else (@Phil McGleno), but you've got a serious reading comprehension issue if you think I "don't like him and want him to fail."

The facts speak quite loudly on this, and they do not agree with you at all.

Yes, it's garbage, but . . .

[natureboy]

38 minutes ago, Lihu said:

I did, the finals 72.3/6693 yards. The ~72.2/6658 CR was in the qualifiers, but he didn't make the cut to play the finals.

 

Championship Yardages_4.pdf

This was not the tournament I was referring to. His first tournament in 2012. What did he shoot in this tournament? When did he play in it?

 

34 minutes ago, iacas said:

I can't speak for anyone else (@Phil McGleno), but you've got a serious reading comprehension issue if you think I "don't like him and want him to fail."

The facts speak quite loudly on this, and they do not agree with you at all.

I was speaking of the general tenor of most posters here and what I perceive as the 'insider's club'. You may personally not have been negative toward Dan's project. But I am saying that given the number of your site colleagues who have that it was reasonable for Dan not to accept your offer as it involved a move across country let alone the potential trust issues. You may be an unequivocal professional as an instructor, but quotes from your colleague, @Phil McGleno, "The Dan Plan is Dead!" in huge bold letters would reasonably inspire doubts for Dan about your offer.

[Lihu]

 

29 minutes ago, natureboy said:

This was not the tournament I was referring to. His first tournament in 2012. What did he shoot in this tournament? When did he play in it?

 

It was the 26th OR Amateur played in August 2014 that @nevets88 posted earlier! He shot 87 and 80 which as you estimated earlier sounds like a 7HC and not the 2-3HC he claimed. Remember that during the the same time frame, he shot his 70 on his home course while regularly shooting below 75 there from the blue tees.

http://thedanplan.com/trending-stats-and-graphs/

Furthermore, he wrote about a few situations that sounded like he was encountering them for the first time which questioned if he should play the shot as it lay or not. Definitely does not sound like the ramblings of a 2-3HC or even any single digit player I know of. . .

Basically, I am doubting that he ever made 2-3HC, and doubt that he shot 70 strictly by the ROG. Not saying he was dishonest about it, just ignorant about all the intricate ROG.

BTW, could you post a link to that 2012 tournament? For some reason, I thought this was his first tournament?

[natureboy]

8 minutes ago, Lihu said:

It was the OR Amateur that @nevets88 posted earlier! He shot 87 and 80 which as you estimated earlier sounds like a 7HC and not the 2-3HC he claimed. Remember that during the same time frame, he shot his 70 on his home course while regularly shooting below 75 there from the blue tees.

The tournament I mentioned was his very first on the Ghost Creek course when he was a 7 in 2012. What was his home course when he shot 70?

8 minutes ago, Lihu said:

Not saying he was dishonest about it, just ignorant about all the intricate ROG.

Well clearly to protect yourself, you should start hiring a posse of rules guys to follow you around and give you rulings. Right "not a cheater - just ignorant of the rules". That's about as generous as offering someone sugar-coated s$%t.

8 minutes ago, Lihu said:

BTW, could you post a link to that 2012 tournament? For some reason, I thought this was his first tournament?

Not until you link to his post about scoring low while playing 'casual golf' or 'casual with the rules'.

[iacas]

36 minutes ago, natureboy said:

I was speaking of the general tenor of most posters here and what I perceive as the 'insider's club'. You may personally not have been negative toward Dan's project.

No you weren't.

19 hours ago, natureboy said:

Erik and Phil don't like him and want him to fail.

Your words, right there.

36 minutes ago, natureboy said:

But I am saying that given the number of your site colleagues who have that it was reasonable for Dan not to accept your offer as it involved a move across country let alone the potential trust issues.

You're misremembering too much to detail, but generally… no. Dan was planning to come out and then… just didn't. He may have injured himself around the time he broke off talks.

I don't like or dislike the guy. Never met him. Nor do I want him to fail. Your post was garbage - lies and assumptions.

Nor do I think @Phil McGleno thinks either of those things.

And that doesn't even begin to touch on your problem that you think there is an "insider's club" here, or that there is some sort of groupthink. Maybe you're just frequently on the "other" side of the argument from reasonable people who are expressing their own opinions.

Finally, "negative" is not always bad. Sometimes it's perfectly reasonable. When someone posts here and says "I'm breaking 90 after only a year of playing golf… can I turn pro?" - the reaction is and should be relatively negative, because that is completely reasonable.

36 minutes ago, natureboy said:

You may be an unequivocal professional as an instructor, but quotes from your colleague, @Phil McGleno, "The Dan Plan is Dead!" in huge bold letters would reasonably inspire doubts for Dan about your offer.

More lies, albeit more subtle:

1. The words are bold, but they're not big. They're normal-sized.

2. The post immediately before it says "no update to the 10,000 hours countdown since the beginning of May." The post was made September 15th.

Since your bullshit post, I've looked back at several of @Phil McGleno's posts in this topic and think you're probably wrong about his feelings toward Dan and his success, too.

[Phil McGleno]

Ha ha ha ha ha-I love being told what I think and how I feel by people I have never met or talked to.

[iacas]

1 minute ago, Phil McGleno said:

Ha ha ha ha ha-I love being told what I think and how I feel by people I have never met or talked to.

Shush. You'll ruin a good conspiracy theory with simple, basic facts…

[collapse]

Just now, Phil McGleno said:

Ha ha ha ha ha-I love being told what I think and how I feel by people I have never met or talked to.

You do exhibit a negative tendency towards those outside the traditional golf paradigm....I'm not sure your name alone can justify that.

[Lihu]

13 minutes ago, natureboy said:

Well clearly to protect yourself, you should start hiring a posse of rules guys to follow you around and give you rulings. Right "not a cheater - just ignorant of the rules". That's about as generous as offering someone sugar-coated s$%t.'.

You're either missing or ignoring the point of my posts. He's claiming to be a 2-3HC but actually plays to a 7HC or higher. That's it. He's not a 2-3HC and never was. . .

[newtogolf]

10 minutes ago, collapse said:

You do exhibit a negative tendency towards those outside the traditional golf paradigm....I'm not sure your name alone can justify that.

Why don't you provide some examples as I haven't seen Phil do any such thing.  Phil, like most of us, calls out people who make claims or spew bad information without proof or support for their argument.  Phil just tends to be a bit harsher than others.

[Phil McGleno]

23 minutes ago, collapse said:

You do exhibit a negative tendency towards those outside the traditional golf paradigm....I'm not sure your name alone can justify that.

Dead wrong.

[collapse]

13 minutes ago, Lihu said:

You're either missing or ignoring the point of my posts. He's claiming to be a 2-3HC but actually plays to a 7HC or higher. That's it. He's not a 2-3HC and never was. . .

Newtogolf......I don't why I am getting a Lihu quote but I can't get rid of it....anyway,Phil said the Dan plan was dead..did he not?...it still has 4000 hr to go. 

[newtogolf]

3 minutes ago, collapse said:

Newtogolf......I don't why I am getting a Lihu quote but I can't get rid of it....anyway,Phil said the Dan plan was dead..did he not?...it still has 4000 hr to go.

I believe it's dead too, but that isn't due because Dan is utilizing methods outside the traditional golf paradigm.

Dan is beyond 50% of his allotted hours and isn't a scratch golfer.  It is my belief (and others ) that it will take more time for him to go from scratch to +4 - +5  (rough handicap of a PGA Tour Pro) than it did for him to get to -4.

In addition, Dan lacks the swing speed that most pro's have which will make his goal of becoming a PGA Tour pro even less likely.    

[natureboy]

50 minutes ago, iacas said:

No you weren't.

Your words, right there.

Sorry for ascribing negativity to you incorrectly, then. My error was ascribing a tacit approval to your general silence on the accusations made in the thread. You just didn't care one way or the other. Got it.

Quote

Finally, "negative" is not always bad. Sometimes it's perfectly reasonable. When someone posts here and says "I'm breaking 90 after only a year of playing golf… can I turn pro?" - the reaction is and should be relatively negative, because that is completely reasonable.

That's actually a fair point. But dispassionate dose of reality is not the same as bashing someone. As far as negativity toward Dan the one thing I do agree with was his sarcastic 'world's cheapest billboard' comment. Very ungrateful. That flaw doesn't imply he is a cheat to me though as some (not you) have asserted when other explanations are equally or more likely. Dan could have used a lot less rose-tinted perspective from the very beginning.

Quote

More lies, albeit more subtle:

1. The words are bold, but they're not big. They're normal-sized.

That post has been modified from its original appearance. I have a very clear visual memory of it, because it struck me as particularly obnoxious and quite in contrast to your generous offer as Phil's colleague to help Dan. Of course on this site I'm sure mods are unable to edit old posts.

37 minutes ago, Lihu said:

You're either missing or ignoring the point of my posts. He's claiming to be a 2-3HC but actually plays to a 7HC or higher. That's it. He's not a 2-3HC and never was. . .

His 86 for the Oregon Amateur Qualifier was on a course normally rated at 73.2 and it could have been made 'tournament tough'. That said an 86 is a disappointing score and (if it was an average score across multiple rounds) maybe equvalent to a 10 HCP. Poor tournament play still doesn't mean he's lied about his HCP scores, when a simpler explanation is that he stinks in tournaments. His early tournament rounds were fairly in line with his posted HCPs. I haven't looked at recent results.

Do all the young phenoms you know play to their HCP or better in every tournament round? Didn't one of them reach a +.5 and then regress to a 2? There's ups and downs to individual rounds. Is this further proof Dan is unlikely to reach his ultimate goal, yes. But to me it doesn't follow that he's lying about his scores. If the question is, 'is Dan being cagey about his current HCP in some interviews?', I agree. That's a legitimate knock against him.

Edited December 15, 2015 by natureboy

[collapse]

The Dan tournament results are a red herring.No one has shown his HC less valid than 23 million others.

Edited December 15, 2015 by collapse