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

[Beachcomber]

Originally Posted by x129

I have heard a lot of theories but hand size is a new one. Guys like Hakeem, Yao Ming, Dirk, Laimbeer and several other big man have been pretty good from the foul line so it is more than being big. I know Rick Barry has tried to convince every poor shooting big man to give grannie style a shot. None of them have the guts to do it in a game. His theory is that a lot of the talls guys get way to flat.The other reason the big guys don't shoot free throws is because they don't need to. Shaq was a dominate NBA player despite his FT woes.  Sort of like how Jack didn't spend time on his short game until the late 70s.

There are a lot of junior golfers that sort of fall into this trap. They dominate for a while because their long game (or short game/putting) is a lot better than their peers. They don't focus enough on their weaknesses and eventually their advantages are neutralized.

I will reiterate that I think the Dan plan is hitting the fun stage. Most of us I think will agree getting down to a single digit is in the realm of feasibility for most under 40 guys if they could practice for 3k hours.  The question is over the next 3k hours can you get a lot better.  I am voting for 4-5 shots next year and then 1-2 over the rest of the run.

He shot a 91 in a tournament.  The guy is far from where he should be... Regardless of his handicap, he needs to get more tournaments under his belt.

[Datsyuk]

He should be on the next Big Break, once he gets his new Rocketbladez of course.

[Williamevanl]

always thought that having a coach that can shoot 65 in 45 minutes with 5 clubs might be discouraging (Christopher Smith holds speed golf record) for someone that thinks that just a little more practice is going to get you to pro playing ability.

Think about it, Chris doesn't just have to tell Dan that what he is doing is stupid he can demonstrate why. Check this Dan, I'm going to run through this course in less than an hour and shoot mid 60's with 5 clubs. Could I make it on the pro tour? Not a chance in hell!

(This is obviously incompatible with Dan's aspirations)

[Stretch]

There's a middle-aged guy here in South Africa that (supposedly) took up golf for the very first time this year and played his first 18 hole round on June 13 -- shooting 126. He's currently a 4 handicap and on October 31, he carded a 69. That's 57 shots off his game in 140 days.

I'm keeping an eye on his scores via our version of GHIN, because the realist in me strongly smells fish. He's supposed to play in a 72-hole regional mid-am tournament later this month, on a course that hosts a current European Tour event, so we'll see.

[Beachcomber]

Originally Posted by Stretch

There's a middle-aged guy here in South Africa that (supposedly) took up golf for the very first time this year and played his first 18 hole round on June 13 -- shooting 126. He's currently a 4 handicap and on October 31, he carded a 69. That's 57 shots off his game in 140 days.

I'm keeping an eye on his scores via our version of GHIN, because the realist in me strongly smells fish. He's supposed to play in a 72-hole regional mid-am tournament later this month, on a course that hosts a current European Tour event, so we'll see.

Sounds like he has 'it'?

My cousin Joe played tennis in college on a scholarship, and was competitive... He never had the game to go pro, but received a lot of state accolades in Ohio as an amateur tennis player.  He got burnt out with the constant travel and training requirements... So he ended up quitting the game.

As an outlet, he took up golf, and within a year was a low single digit/near scratch player.  So I've seen first hand guys go low in their first year of the sport.  But typically they are athletes and have competed in some other facet of life and know how to handle adversity.  It will be interesting to see if your boy in South Africa can handle the tournament pressure.

[Stretch]

Originally Posted by Beachcomber

Sounds like he has 'it'?

Maybe. I just think it's too far too fast. He's either the outlier of all outliers, or the liar of all liars.

[x129]

Hey I shot a 59 in my first 3 months of playing. Of course it was an short executive style course ( a couple of 300 yard par 4s and the rest were par 3s). And only it was only 9 holes.

The scary part for Dan is that it took guys like Larry Nelson (shooting par in first year of playing) and Calvin Peete 5+ years to make the PGA tour. So even if your an outlier, it still takes more time than Dan is going to spend.

Originally Posted by Stretch

Maybe. I just think it's too far too fast. He's either the outlier of all outliers, or the liar of all liars.

[Datsyuk]

Originally Posted by Williamevanl

always thought that having a coach that can shoot 65 in 45 minutes with 5 clubs might be discouraging (Christopher Smith holds speed golf record) for someone that thinks that just a little more practice is going to get you to pro playing ability.

Think about it, Chris doesn't just have to tell Dan that what he is doing is stupid he can demonstrate why. Check this Dan, I'm going to run through this course in less than an hour and shoot mid 60's with 5 clubs. Could I make it on the pro tour? Not a chance in hell!

(This is obviously incompatible with Dan's aspirations)

Honing a style of play that thrives on playing a partial set and running between shots does seem exactly opposite to most tournament play and aspiring posers worldwide.

[hopefulhacker]

Originally Posted by Shorty

I am calling self managed handicaps DIY where the expectation is that one will shoot 10 shots above their handicap.

This guy is not a 5 handicap by any stretch of the imagination.

It's the equivalent of the American dress sizing system where a size 6 is perceived as medium, but would be  a16 in any other country.

I know I have I have said it to the point of irritating other members, but it's true.

It is all vanity and refusal to face reality.  A five marker should break 80 on decent courses half the time and be close to par a couple of times out of each 20 rounds.

The idea that he has ever broken 80 on a proper golf course off the proper tees is a joke.

Also, the notion that people can select tees so that they have a shot into every par four for 2 despite being short off the tee is ridiculous in terms of maintaining a handicap. It is a great idea for people who want to play golf, but silly in terms of maintaining a handicap.

Wow, I always new the US handicap system was more relaxed/easier to get a lower handicap than the one we use over here in Ireland but I didn't realize it was that relaxed.

Over here he'd be an 11 at best I'd say, possibly even as high as 15.

(Edit; If he's shooting 91 in a tournament then he's could be as high as 18)

Only competition scores count over here, more often than not, they're played off the back tees.

Not saying our system is better, it has it's faults, but this guy is nowhere near where he needs to be.

Just out of interest, at what stage/HC would someone in the US be considered good enough to turn pro? +4,5,6...?

Some with Dan's HC 5.8 over here would have to be shooting 74,75 before they got a further cut.

[onesome]

Tiger was a +9.7 at his club Isleworth in 2001, I would imagine +4 or +5 would be the starting point.As far as american handicaps are concerned though I play on tees that slope 135 to 139 and have 9 rounds of 79 or less and stick to the rules but I see the argument about tournament scores should only be considered. I think we have a tournament score section when posting and understand why this would be a more accurate way of determining a true handicap since it would probably eliminate most sandbagging.

[x129]

You can "sandbag" under any system. Ian Poultier was like a 4 when he went pro. I am willing to bet that in any handicapped tournament he played, he would have been DQed as a sandbagger. If Dan plays a dozen more tournaments and consistantly shoots in the high 80s we question how accurate his daily rounds are. Right now it is a bit friendlier to think he just had a bad day or two.

I like the recent post saying he just got a trackman donated for his us. If he actually posts those stats it will be fun. It is easy to fool yourself about distances on the course (between downhills, doglegs, wind, big bounces,...). It is a lot harder when the machine tells you that your swinging at 102 mph and your ballspeed is 1.35.

Originally Posted by onesome

Tiger was a +9.7 at his club Isleworth in 2001, I would imagine +4 or +5 would be the starting point.As far as american handicaps are concerned though I play on tees that slope 135 to 139 and have 9 rounds of 79 or less and stick to the rules but I see the argument about tournament scores should only be considered. I think we have a tournament score section when posting and understand why this would be a more accurate way of determining a true handicap since it would probably eliminate most sandbagging.

[Beachcomber]

Originally Posted by x129

I like the recent post saying he just got a trackman donated for his us. If he actually posts those stats it will be fun. It is easy to fool yourself about distances on the course (between downhills, doglegs, wind, big bounces,...). It is a lot harder when the machine tells you that your swinging at 102 mph and your ballspeed is 1.35.

Why do you have to call me out like that!

[x129]

I am sure it was just the range balls And the reason I hit 40 yard slices is because I like to work the ball.

From the start, I think Dan should have set some deal up with the K-Vest (or similar product) so they could promote how fast he learned using their system.  It may have also given him a prayer. You are not going to outwork people in golf. The amount of time q school guys have put in is nuts. You  might be able to work smarter. But that is a big MIGHT.   I am not convinced that all this tech stuff really helps learning that much at the end of  the day.

Originally Posted by Beachcomber

Why do you have to call me out like that!

[ApocG10]

Originally Posted by Stretch

Maybe. I just think it's too far too fast. He's either the outlier of all outliers, or the liar of all liars.

I got to where I am now (+0.5) in 3 1/2 years.

I admit I have a ton of athletic ability, played University hockey, and AAA midget baseball (first baseman), and it took a lot of time and money in coaching, but I would not say its been hard.

[x129]

I think there is a slight difference between 3.5 years and 5 months.

Bad news for Dan http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20121114-gladwells-10000-hour-rule-myth . The top music guys have put in 25k hours of training.

Originally Posted by ApocG10

I got to where I am now (+0.5) in 3 1/2 years.

I admit I have a ton of athletic ability, played University hockey, and AAA midget baseball (first baseman), and it took a lot of time and money in coaching, but I would not say its been hard.

[mchepp]

Bad news for Dan [URL=http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20121114-gladwells-10000-hour-rule-myth]http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20121114-gladwells-10000-hour-rule-myth[/URL] . The top music guys have put in 25k hours of training.

Well, instead of the 3 years he was planning he can just double down for 7-8 and get to the 25,000 hour mark.

[onesome]

I just can't help thinking that at the very start of this whole thing he wasted a lot of time on some really redundant practice like hitting 1' putts for the first 100 hours, I mean come on man I think 2 hours is gonna give you pretty close to the same amount of benifit, how good can someone really get on 1' putts? I would have had him hitting lag putts from 15'-20' to start with to develop feel and overall confidence and I certainly would not have him doing only that for 100 hours while neglecting everything else, chipping and pitching would be on the start of this wole endeavour as well because lets be honest you have to be an all out wizard around the greens to play with the big boys. I think when it's all over this is gonna be one of his reasons for not achieving the goal.

[mchepp]

I just can't help thinking that at the very start of this whole thing he wasted a lot of time on some really redundant practice like hitting 1' putts for the first 100 hours, I mean come on man I think 2 hours is gonna give you pretty close to the same amount of benifit, how good can someone really get on 1' putts? I would have had him hitting lag putts from 15'-20' to start with to develop feel and overall confidence and I certainly would not have him doing only that for 100 hours while neglecting everything else, chipping and pitching would be on the start of this wole endeavour as well because lets be honest you have to be an all out wizard around the greens to play with the big boys. I think when it's all over this is gonna be one of his reasons for not achieving the goal.

What is ironic about what you say is that he no longer works with that coach you suggested he start like that. FWIW, I think you are right. Putting is not where he needs to spend so much of the early part of the 10,000 hours.