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

[Jeremie Boop]

13 minutes ago, Lihu said:

Going from a 3.9 to 5.5 is 1.6 strokes. That's not really a lot.

I'd guess even after all that's been said (including by me) and done that he probably did have a legitimate handicap. To the people who think he was an 8 to 10 handicap, I really can't imagine him playing as bad as me. . His driver swing speed was measured to about 106 which is faster than my average, and he has a combine score in the high 60s low 70s which puts him at better than scratch potential. Statistically, he's a much better golfer than I am right now. Maybe now that he's injured, I could beat him some of the time.

Combine score table:

At that level a 1.6 change is a lot. I don't know that I've ever seen someone's HC move that much in 15 days except for people at my handicap or higher. Typically people who are lower move by .5 or less. Regardless, I went to his blog and he mentions a lot of scores there that are mid to upper 80s and I think I saw one up in the 90's. Those aren't scores I'd expect to see from someone who's a 3-6 handicap. Of course, I could be wrong because I rarely get a chance to golf with anyone with a HC that low.

[Lihu]

Just now, Jeremie Boop said:

At that level a 1.6 change is a lot. I don't know that I've ever seen someone's HC move that much in 15 days except for people at my handicap or higher. Typically people who are lower move by .5 or less. Regardless, I went to his blog and he mentions a lot of scores there that are mid to upper 80s and I think I saw one up in the 90's. Those aren't scores I'd expect to see from someone who's a 3-6 handicap. Of course, I could be wrong because I rarely get a chance to golf with anyone with a HC that low.

They're only human. . .

[Jeremie Boop]

2 minutes ago, Lihu said:

They're only human. . .

Sure, no argument from me there. But shooting an occasional mid-upper 80 and/or 90 is not what I'm talking about. I saw that about 1/2 of his scores were in the mid 80's or higher. Now, it could be that the courses he's posting those scores from are higher rated courses that would actually put his index more in line with what someone with his HC would score. That's a distinct possibility.

[Pretzel]

9 hours ago, Lihu said:

Maybe now that he's injured, I could beat him some of the time.

Based on his tournament scores, which are the only scores that we know were played strictly under the rules of golf with all strokes being counted, I would say you'd have a decent shot at beating him straight up before he was injured.

[Lihu]

29 minutes ago, Pretzel said:

Based on his tournament scores, which are the only scores that we know were played strictly under the rules of golf with all strokes being counted, I would say you'd have a decent shot at beating him straight up before he was injured.

Thanks for the vote of confidence, but I doubt I would do much better in tournaments relative to my handicap either. I am assuming that he plays by the rules in general as well.

My main advantages against him are not having trouble with 1/2" tree roots and the fact that I look up before trying to pitch onto a green from under a tree.

[Golfingdad]

10 hours ago, Jeremie Boop said:

At that level a 1.6 change is a lot. I don't know that I've ever seen someone's HC move that much in 15 days except for people at my handicap or higher. Typically people who are lower move by .5 or less. Regardless, I went to his blog and he mentions a lot of scores there that are mid to upper 80s and I think I saw one up in the 90's. Those aren't scores I'd expect to see from someone who's a 3-6 handicap. Of course, I could be wrong because I rarely get a chance to golf with anyone with a HC that low.

Not speaking for Dan, because he reeks of a vanity capper or a "home course" capper ... But it's not impossible to make a jump like that in one revision.  All it really takes is for that career round to drop off the end.  Or even more likely, if you play often enough is for two or three great rounds in a short time span to all drop off together.

Of course, what that really means is that it was artificially low in the first place.

[Jeremie Boop]

7 hours ago, Golfingdad said:

Not speaking for Dan, because he reeks of a vanity capper or a "home course" capper ... But it's not impossible to make a jump like that in one revision.  All it really takes is for that career round to drop off the end.  Or even more likely, if you play often enough is for two or three great rounds in a short time span to all drop off together.

Of course, what that really means is that it was artificially low in the first place.

That's what I mean though, not that it wasn't possible, but that it's definitely not normal and that it tends to indicate that perhaps the handicap isn't quite legit. That may not be entirely fair to say, it's possible he's just a very streaky and inconsistent player, but just strikes me as questionable.

[newtogolf]

1 hour ago, Jeremie Boop said:

That's what I mean though, not that it wasn't possible, but that it's definitely not normal and that it tends to indicate that perhaps the handicap isn't quite legit. That may not be entirely fair to say, it's possible he's just a very streaky and inconsistent player, but just strikes me as questionable.

I agree with @Golfingdad, he "reeks" of a vanity capper and given his "plan", it worked to his advantage to show improvement so that he could secure his sponsorship.  It's not fair to call anyone a cheater without proof, but based on circumstantial evidence (his handicap versus tournament play and his anti-handicap) it would seem something is off with the rounds he posts on his own.  

[Lihu]

8 hours ago, Golfingdad said:

Not speaking for Dan, because he reeks of a vanity capper or a "home course" capper ... But it's not impossible to make a jump like that in one revision.  All it really takes is for that career round to drop off the end.  Or even more likely, if you play often enough is for two or three great rounds in a short time span to all drop off together.

Of course, what that really means is that it was artificially low in the first place.

 

1 hour ago, Jeremie Boop said:

That's what I mean though, not that it wasn't possible, but that it's definitely not normal and that it tends to indicate that perhaps the handicap isn't quite legit. That may not be entirely fair to say, it's possible he's just a very streaky and inconsistent player, but just strikes me as questionable.

 

31 minutes ago, newtogolf said:

I agree with @Golfingdad, he "reeks" of a vanity capper and given his "plan", it worked to his advantage to show improvement so that he could secure his sponsorship.  It's not fair to call anyone a cheater without proof, but based on circumstantial evidence (his handicap versus tournament play and his anti-handicap) it would seem something is off with the rounds he posts on his own.  

 

It's not only his poor tournament or anti-handicap performance that makes me wonder about his handicap, it's more his description of what he did during the tournaments that make me wonder. He sounds like the doofiest 3 handicap I've ever heard of when describing his playing. I just re-read his descriptions, and they don't even sound like my rounds and I'm just a mid handicap. I think he plays by the rules but makes terrible choices on the course leading me to wonder if it's not just physical limitations that would prevent him from getting to scratch or not? 

He does have a fast enough swing and accuracy potential based upon his combine and track an results to get to scratch, though.

[DrvFrShow]

Bottom line: to be a tour player it costs money. A lot of money. You have to play exclusive courses with sponsorship. When you're playing in these tournaments like he was and to do well in them you have to play several practice rounds on them to learn the course. It's not simple like going out on the day of the tournament and playing. Or maybe playing one practice round on the course. Pebble Beach costs a ton of $$ to play. 

Maybe he just realized his goal was unrealistic?

[bones75]

So I'm unclear, did Dan quit?  or is it going to take 10 more years for him to finish 10k hours of practice?

Noting that this thread is 229 pages long, i haven't read it all, but a lot of you are a bit harsh on Dan for his self-promotion/perspectives.  I'm actually fine with it, seeing as I think it's a really neat project and think if I were him, I'd say whatever I could to the press to get my ass funded to play more golf.

I also really want to know how good the guy can get.  I don't care about whether he can make the tour, mini-tour, or even some club championship.  But I do want to know how long it takes him to get better, whatever "better" may be (+5? scratch?  2?).

I'm rooting for him.  And this is independent of what I think of his swing or what/how realistic his goals/ambitions are.

Edited May 10, 2016 by bones75

[RandallT]

59 minutes ago, bones75 said:

So I'm unclear, did Dan quit?  or is it going to take 10 more years for him to finish 10k hours of practice?

Noting that this thread is 229 pages long, i haven't read it all, but a lot of you are a bit harsh on Dan for his self-promotion/perspectives.  I'm actually fine with it, seeing as I think it's a really neat project and think if I were him, I'd say whatever I could to the press to get my ass funded to play more golf.

I also really want to know how good the guy can get.  I don't care about whether he can make the tour, mini-tour, or even some club championship.  But I do want to know how long it takes him to get better, whatever "better" may be (+5? scratch?  2?).

I'm rooting for him.  And this is independent of what I think of his swing or what/how realistic his goals/ambitions are.

You may be confusing our analysis of his plan with whether or not we are rooting for him. I don't wish him any ill will, and I'd be happy to see him show us all the way to golf improvement. I suspect I'm not much different from you there. This is a golf forum, and we are here to learn how to get better. It serves no purpose to cheer him on without any critical take on it. In fact, we do ourselves and others a disservice if we pretend his plan is good and that others should emulate it. 

At this point, I'd say emulating (or even being inspired by the results of) The Dan Plan would be stubbornly ignorant, despite the facts in front of you.

It has just become obvious to us here that he's made some questionable decisions, and by doing such a public project, he opens himself up to criticism. 

Not sure what else it takes to demonstrate that the plan was a failure. I think it's done.

1. The plan was never that good. He didn't know golf at the start, so fine. He hired coaches, but coaches deal with the swing, not the whole practice plan necessarily. It's up to you to practice right. But he didn't seem to follow many of the basic elements of deliberate practice that are outlined pretty well even on this site (deliberate practice was what his whole theory was about). He never really showed us the HOW of how he practice- just some lesson clips and lots of clips about playing. No mirror work, no slow motion stuff, no real great posts about insights he gained about "changing the picture."
2. So without true deliberate practice, perhaps his results could've shown that someone can reinvent themselves in their lives? Hardly. I think he failed there too, since he's now a middle-aged, injured guy without a whole lot of prospects in golf.
3. As for actual results, I think he put in a lot of effort, and temporarily got to low single-digits (when playing solo rounds or with his good friends on a home course). In tournaments, he struggled badly. There was not even a glimpse that he could be anywhere near a top player at any club in Portland. A far cry from his goal.
4. At Pebble Beach, he played the day after the Pro-Am, apparently from the same tees played by pros, with a similar setup. He shot 10 strokes per round out of where the cut line was, and he said he played well. (He'd have been 20 strokes from the cut line after two good rounds!) So he had spent about 2.5 years (late 2011 to mid 2014) lowering his average score 10 strokes from 88 to 78 (see graph below). And here he was in Spring 2015 (having regressed a bit from his best scores), at least another 10 strokes per round from where he needed to be. 
5. Yet despite the poor results that were coming in (documented in various graphs here on TST), he continued to maintain in interviews that he was on track. But his graphs were showing otherwise (look below, does that look "on track"????!!), but he would never truly document his actual progress on his site. A lot of info, but it was hard to glean how well he was really doing. It was mostly fluff talk. It bordered on dishonesty, just to keep up appearances, if you ask me.
6. Finally, the information about the injury has been sparse. There is no documented diagnosis, nor even confirmation that he has seen a medical professional to tell him once and for all what it is. Various visits to chiropractors who say he's "all twisted up," etc. But not an MRI mentioned- just radio silence. That leads me to think he's hiding something with what's going on with his health, or he isn't serious about his health- in either case, not a promising outlook for "The Dan Plan."

[bones75]

@RandallT Great reply.  I think near all waht you said is completely fair, and definitely agree with a lot of your statements and understand the critique further.  However, the part of being upset with him saying he's "on track"... well I just take it as marketing.  How's he going to get sponsors if he's not "on track"?  Again, i think golfers who are trying to learn from his experience can get annoyed that he's being misleading (I agree it looks that way), but I just take it as creative liberty (maybe his swing "feels" better, but his scores aren't improving?.. I've been through that).  basically just giving him the benefit of the doubt.  the only people who truly have the right to get upset w/ him are his sponsors. I also half agree w/ ur last comment.  I get invested in people that I follow in social media/youtube/whatnot. and if they all of a sudden stop sharing apparently relevant information / give updates, I do get annoyed, but hey, I'm not paying for it.

[bones75]

Additionally.. and tangentially related.  I'd imagine he's pretty down and out and discouraged. Regardless of what he puts out there to the media, he knows he's hit a major (and possibly danplan ending) roadblock.  He probably feels like he let some people down, let himself down, and doesn't see much hope in achieving his goals.  I think it would be nice if TST was a place he could look to for encouragement.

Guidance/criticism/constructive criticism/hate are all adjectives you can use regarding the same statement.  but there's obviously a difference, and there's more of one type of than others from the parts of this thread that I've read.

I hope he gets back out there, learns soemthing (from TST or elsewhere) and finishes what he started!

[natureboy]

28 minutes ago, RandallT said:

1. At Pebble Beach, he played the day after the Pro-Am, apparently from the same tees played by pros, with a similar setup. He shot 10 strokes per round out of where the cut line was, and he said he played well. (He'd have been 20 strokes from the cut line after two good rounds!) So he had spent about 2.5 years (late 2011 to mid 2014) lowering his average score 10 strokes from 88 to 78 (see graph below). And here he was in Spring 2015 (having regressed a bit from his best scores), at least another 10 strokes per round from where he needed to be. 

That's about what you'd expect for a ~ 3 HCP on a high CR relative to the pros. But true he hadn't gotten closer to them - but curiously did seem to play close to his claimed HCP.

28 minutes ago, RandallT said:

From a training / improvement perspective, I'd be curious what he changed in the spring of '13. He was making better progress with relatively small regressions, but took a big step back then.

[RandallT]

13 minutes ago, natureboy said:

From a training / improvement perspective, I'd be curious what he changed in the spring of '13. He was making better progress with relatively small regressions, but took a big step back then.

Agreed. In hindsight, the inflection point at the start of the 2013 season seems critical. He was tracking pretty well to his goal in green. He was just shy of 4000 hours, he'd shaved 10 strokes from when he started playing in late 2011. Heady times for Dan.

Natural plateau?

30 minutes ago, bones75 said:

 I think it would be nice if TST was a place he could look to for encouragement.

I think a bunch of people have encouraged him. Feel free. 

I feel like encouraging this sort of thing is what you watch Ted Talks for. Someone is sure to scoop up all of The Dan Plan info and do a great motivational talk on reaching your human potential. Complete with all that emotional crescendo in the speaker's voice at just the right times to make maximum impact to inspire you. Yet beneath it all, these graphs still document what actually happened.

I'm more interested in just documenting the real world, rather than how I wish it would be. I wish we could all be pro golfers with diligent effort. Not real world.

[natureboy]

3 minutes ago, RandallT said:

Natural plateau?

Then you'd expect some settling around a mean. IMO the magnitude and length of the regression is an indication something important changed. Are your dates mapped accurately on that graph?

[RandallT]

1 minute ago, natureboy said:

Then you'd expect some settling around a mean. IMO the magnitude and length of the regression is an indication something important changed. Are your dates mapped accurately on that graph?

I think so. In the hidden text, here's the raw data. Each round is from the narrative. Lemme know if you want it in CSV format or something to play with it yourself.

Spoiler

date	raw score from narrative	rolling avg of last 10	goal guru plan (stroke average)	ghin handicap
8/17/11	97
8/17/11	90
9/1/11	89
9/5/11	87
9/6/11	90
9/10/11	89
9/16/11	87
9/17/11	86
9/19/11	83
9/21/11	86	88.4	87
9/23/11	84	87.1
10/7/11	90	87.1
10/10/11	89	87.1
10/13/11	91	87.5
10/14/11	85	87.0
10/17/11	89	87.0
10/24/11	100	88.3
10/25/11	98	89.5
10/26/11	86	89.8
11/8/11	82	89.4
11/9/11	84	89.4
11/19/11	85	88.9	86
11/20/11	91	89.1
11/21/11	83	88.3
11/26/11	89	88.7
11/28/11	82	88.0
11/29/11	83	86.3
12/1/11	89	85.4
12/7/11	85	85.3
12/10/11	89	86.0
12/13/11	87	86.3
12/14/11	85	86.3
12/15/11	90	86.2
12/16/11	87	86.6
12/19/11	94	87.1
12/31/11	92	88.1
1/2/12	86	88.4
1/4/12	89	88.4
1/16/12	94	89.3
1/20/12	84	88.8	85
1/24/12	80	88.1
1/30/12	86	88.2
12/2/12	85	87.7
2/5/12	82	87.2
2/6/12	83	86.1
2/9/12	90	85.9
2/12/12	89	86.2
2/13/12	99	87.2
12/24/12	89	86.7
3/13/12	82	86.5
3/14/12	82	86.7	84
3/22/12	85	86.6
3/28/12	81	86.2
3/30/12	85	86.5
4/12/12	86	86.8
4/13/12	87	86.5
4/14/12	90	86.6
4/15/12	85	85.2
4/17/12	91	85.4
4/18/12	82	85.4
4/21/12	86	85.8
4/22/12	84	85.7
4/23/12	81	85.7
4/25/12	82	85.4
4/26/12	84	85.2
5/6/12	92	85.7		8.7
5/8/12	85	85.2	83
5/9/12	80	84.7
5/10/12	83	83.9
5/23/12	83	84.0		8.7
5/26/12	86	84.0
5/27/12	86	84.2
5/28/12	86	84.7
5/29/12	83	84.8
6/1/12	86	85.0		8.8
6/2/12	80	83.8
6/3/12	92	84.5
6/4/12	84	84.9
6/5/12	81	84.7
6/7/12	80	84.4
6/8/12	78	83.6
6/9/12	80	83.0
6/12/12	82	82.6
6/13/12	81	82.4
6/14/12	84	82.2		7.4
6/16/12	80	82.2
6/19/12	76	80.6
6/20/12	84	80.6
6/21/12	85	81.0
6/22/12	81	81.1
6/23/12	80	81.3
6/24/12	80	81.3
6/25/12	80	81.1
6/26/12	85	81.5	82
6/27/12	77	80.8
6/28/12	76	80.4		6.1
7/3/12	85	81.3
7/4/12	82	81.1
7/6/12	84	81.0
7/11/12	81	81.0
7/12/12	79	80.9
7/13/12	79	80.8
7/14/12	87	81.5		5.9
7/20/12	83	81.3
7/21/12	79	81.5
7/25/12	92	83.1
7/26/12	88	83.4
7/30/12	83	83.5
7/31/12	83	83.4
8/2/12	84	83.7		5.9
8/4/12	81	83.9
8/5/12	88	84.8
8/6/12	80	84.1
8/10/12	79	83.7
8/15/12	78	83.6		6.5
8/16/12	82	82.6	81
8/20/12	84	82.2
8/21/12	82	82.1
8/22/12	78	81.6
8/23/12	82	81.4
8/25/12	82	81.5
8/26/12	82	80.9
9/4/12	80	80.9		5.7
9/6/12	81	81.1
9/7/12	85	81.8
9/8/12	84	82.0
9/14/12	79	81.5		6.3
9/17/12	80	81.3
9/18/12	78	81.3
9/19/12	81	81.2
9/20/12	84	81.4
9/25/12	85	81.7
9/26/12	82	81.9
9/28/12	83	82.1
9/30/12	85	82.1		6.9
10/3/12	83	82.0
10/16/12	82	82.3	80	6.5
10/17/12	77	82.0
10/19/12	75	81.7
10/23/12	80	81.6
10/24/12	81	81.3
10/25/12	79	80.7		5.8
11/7/12	89	81.4
11/16/12	80	81.1		6.0
11/17/12	80	80.6
11/18/12	82	80.5
11/25/12	86	80.9
11/27/12	81	81.3
11/28/12	76	81.4
11/29/12	83	81.7		6.3
12/5/12	81	81.7	79
12/6/12	87	82.5
12/7/12	75	81.1
12/8/12	74	80.5
12/9/12	79	80.4
12/12/12	77	79.9		5.9
12/28/12	82	79.5
1/3/13	85	79.9		5.9
1/4/13	79	80.2
1/8/13	79	79.8
1/10/13	76	79.3
1/12/13	73	77.9
1/16/13	85	78.9		5.9
1/19/13	82	79.7
1/26/13	75	79.3
2/3/13	85	80.1		5.9
2/4/13	81	80.0	78
2/9/13	86	80.1
2/14/13	77	79.9		5.7
2/22/13	87	80.7
2/23/13	87	81.8
2/24/13	87	83.2
2/25/13	79	82.6
3/1/13	83	82.7		5.7
3/2/13	86	83.8
3/3/13	89	84.2
3/5/13	91	85.2
3/8/13	81	84.7
3/10/13	84	85.4
3/12/13	84	85.1
3/15/13	83	84.7		6.9
3/17/13	85	84.5
3/23/13	81	84.7
3/24/13	81	84.5
3/31/13	82	84.1
4/1/13	77	82.9		7.3
4/2/13	79	81.7
4/3/13	82	81.8	77
4/5/13	80	81.4
4/7/13	80	81.0
4/8/13	78	80.5
4/11/13	82	80.2
4/13/13	80	80.1		6.6
4/18/13	81	80.1
4/19/13	78	79.7
4/20/13	81	80.1
4/22/13	80	80.2
4/29/13	81	80.1
5/3/13	81	80.2		6.2
5/4/13	79	80.1
5/6/13	85	80.8
5/7/13	80	80.6
5/9/13	80	80.6
5/21/13	79	80.4		6.1
5/24/13	84	81.0
5/28/13	79	80.8
6/1/13	85	81.3		5.5
6/4/13	81	81.3
6/8/13	78	81.0
6/17/13	79	81.0		5.8
6/19/13	78	80.3
6/25/13	77	80.0
6/26/13	77	79.7
6/30/13	82	80.0
7/5/13	82	79.8		5.4
7/7/13	78	79.7
7/10/13	80	79.2	76
7/12/13	87	79.8
7/13/13	98	81.8
7/14/13	87	82.6
7/15/13	76	82.4		5.4
7/17/13	80	82.7
7/29/13	88	83.8
7/30/13	90	84.6		5.6
8/7/13	83	84.7
8/8/13	86	85.5
8/9/13	84	85.9		5.9
9/2/13	84	85.6		5.9
9/18/13	83	84.1		6.2
9/23/13	77	83.1
9/30/13	76	83.1
10/1/13	79	83.0		5.7
10/5/13	76	81.8
10/6/13	83	81.1
10/17/13	81	80.9		5.4
10/18/13	83	80.6
10/19/13	82	80.4
10/20/13	79	79.9
10/23/13	79	79.5
10/26/13	79	79.7
10/27/13	76	79.7
11/1/13	77	79.5		5.2
11/2/13	78	79.7
11/5/13	78	79.2
11/15/13	78	78.9		4.3
11/19/13	79	78.5	75
12/3/13	77	78.0		4.1
12/14/13	83	78.4
12/15/13	82	78.7		4.1
12/21/13	77	78.5
12/22/13	80	78.9
12/26/13	84	79.6
12/29/13	83	80.1
1/5/14	89	81.2
1/19/14	79	81.3		4.1
1/26/14	83	81.7
1/28/14	78	81.8
1/29/14	82	81.7
1/30/14	82	81.7
2/3/14	80	82.0		4.1
2/12/14	80	82.0
2/13/14	84	82.0
2/14/14	79	81.6
2/16/14	81	80.8		4.1
2/17/14	78	80.7
2/21/14	84	80.8
2/22/14	80	81.0
2/24/14	75	80.3
3/3/14	77	79.8		4.1
3/7/14	78	79.6
3/10/14	75	79.1
3/12/14	74	78.1
3/13/14	77	77.9
3/14/14	82	78.0		3.8
3/20/14	80	78.2
3/21/14	86	78.4
3/22/14	76	78.0
3/27/14	78	78.3
3/31/14	78	78.4
4/4/14	74	78.0		4.2
4/5/14	78	78.3
4/6/14	77	78.6
4/7/14	77	78.6
4/11/14	75	77.9	74
4/12/14	78	77.7
4/13/14	80	77.1		4.1
4/19/14	77	77.2
4/20/14	70	76.4
5/5/14	77	76.3		3.3
5/12/14	77	76.6
5/14/14	77	76.5
5/15/14	79	76.7		2.8
5/19/14	78	76.8
5/22/14	76	76.9
5/25/14	77	76.8
5/25/14	84	77.2
5/29/14	79	77.4
6/3/14	86	79.0		2.6
6/4/14	79	79.2
6/5/14	77	79.2
6/6/14	88	80.3
6/7/14	87	81.1
6/8/14	88	82.1
6/12/14	80	82.5
6/13/14	81	82.9
6/18/14	78	82.3		4.1
6/19/14	81	82.5
6/20/14	78	81.7
7/4/14	76	81.4		4.1
7/5/14	88	82.5
7/6/14	82	81.9		4.1
7/27/14	78	81.0
7/30/14	80	80.2
8/6/14	74	79.6		4.1
8/7/14	83	79.8
8/12/14	78	79.8
8/12/14	80	79.7
8/13/14	79	79.8
8/14/14	80	80.2
8/16/14	83	79.7		4.3
8/17/14	80	79.5
8/18/14	73	79.0
8/23/14	87	79.7
8/24/14	80	80.3
8/25/14	79	79.9
8/26/14	78	79.9		5.3
9/12/14	76	79.5
9/19/14	75	79.1		5.3
9/20/14	81	79.2
9/21/14	73	78.2
9/22/14	84	78.6
9/25/14	73	78.6
10/1/14	81	78.0		3.6
10/3/14	80	78.0
10/4/14	85	78.6
10/6/14	74	78.2
10/9/14	83	78.9
10/10/14	79	79.3
10/16/14	80	79.2		3.1
10/18/14	82	80.1
10/19/14	83	80.0
10/23/14	84	81.1
10/27/14	83	81.3
11/7/14	79	81.2		3.1
11/15/14	80	80.7
11/16/14	80	81.3
11/18/14	77	80.7
12/5/14	74	80.2
12/6/14	85	80.7		3.4
12/8/14	80	80.5
12/31/14	80	80.2
1/1/15	80	79.8
1/2/15	80	79.5	73
1/8/15	85	80.1
1/9/15	75	79.6
1/10/15	87	80.3
1/14/15	78	80.4		3.4
1/26/15	82	81.2
1/29/15	82	80.9
1/31/15	76	80.5
2/4/15	80	80.5		3.6
2/5/15	85	81.0
2/7/15	80	81.0
2/9/15	79	80.4
2/16/15	83	81.2
2/19/15	86	81.1
2/20/15	83	81.6
2/22/15	78	81.2
2/23/15	90	82.0
2/24/15	83	82.7
2/26/15	79	82.6
3/2/15	83	82.4
3/3/15	79	82.3
3/4/15	78	82.2
3/7/15	83	82.2
3/8/15	79	81.5
3/9/15	79	81.1		3.9
3/28/15	84	81.7
3/29/15	81	80.8
3/30/15	83	80.8
4/1/15	83	81.2
4/3/15	77	80.6
4/8/15	74	80.1
4/9/15	79	80.2
4/10/15	77	79.6	72	5.4