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

[jamo]

Guys, you're completely wrong. I mean, LeBron James busted his ass at an elite level from day one. Clearly, he was not gifted with any natural, raw, freakish, once-in-a-generation talent/athleticism. I don't get what is so hard about seeing this... He just stands out because he worked harder than anyone else, duh.

Is this what the August 3rd tournament is going to be? Because I AM IN! :-P

[iacas]

Originally Posted by Meltdwhiskey

There is no substitute for natural talent.

Paging soon_tourpro. Soon_tourpro, aisle three.

[Golfingdad]

Originally Posted by bplewis24

Quote:

Originally Posted by johnclayton1982

Obviously this isn't right.  However, I think "natural talent" only appears "natural" because it is developed very early in life.  I think it is a true statement that any infant is capable of anything.  I do not believe some infants, absent deformities, "can't" make the tour.  I do believe that some 10 year olds, by that time, have not been exposed to enough hand-eye co-ordination experience to develop it well enough to make the tour, no matter what they do from age 10 to 40 to try to catch up.

I don't believe you are "born with it".  I believe it appears that way based on your enviornment and upbringing.  People think I'm naturally really good with numbers, but my parents made me take chess lessons when i was a very little kid for a while.  I do not think its a coincidence i ended up in a strategic planning finance vocation and people think i have natural talent for it..  If instead of chess lessons i had spent ages 3-8 with a musical instrument in my hands, i think my life would have been very different and people would think i was a "natural" at something else.

Its ridiculous to believe that Tiger Woods just happened to be both born to a parental couple that emphasized athletics, specifically golf from age 2, AND was born with a huge amount of natural talent.  We just think its "natural" because it is developed incredibly early in life.

GolfingDad, what the heck?  You gave this a thumbs up?!?

LOL ... a couple of things;

1.  That was a long time ago, I think, so I'm pretty sure the statute of limitations on complaining about my giving of skins has expired.

2.  I had recently read Outliers prior to the start of this thread, and am also a big fan of Bob Rotella books, and I'm a bit of a romantic, so it was easy for me to get fired up and fight the "anybody can do anything if they put their mind to it" fight.

Now, after all of that backtracking ;) ... I still think it's a valid point.  It's awfully coincidental and convenient that the kid who was born to be the greatest golfer ever also happened to be born to parents that apparently already knew that and thus started him down that path out of the womb.

[trackster]

Its all about the gene environment interactions.

[Spyder]

Originally Posted by jamo

Is this what the August 3rd tournament is going to be?

Because I AM IN!

You bet!

[Bogeysaurus]

Originally Posted by Golfingdad

It's awfully coincidental and convenient that the kid who was born to be the greatest golfer ever also happened to be born to parents that apparently already knew that and thus started him down that path out of the womb.

In my small hometown when I was growing up there were dozens of parents with gifted athletic kids that did the exact same thing with their kids in hopes they would be the next greatest, golf, tennis, basketball, football, baseball player.

Some from that small town I grew up with played in college, and 1 or 2 had small stints professionally.  This is one small town of tens of thousands of towns across the country.  We don't hear about the ones they didn't make it, "Hey did you hear about that guy that almost was a great ____________"...

There is nothing coincidental at all about Tiger Woods...  He just happens to be the one of ten thousand athletes of that time with parents that fostered his abilities that was just slightly more gifted and that is why we know his story.

[Slice of Life]

Originally Posted by Bogeysaurus

just slightly more gifted

just slightly more gifted

just slightly more gifted

just slightly more gifted

LOL

[Golfingdad]

Originally Posted by Bogeysaurus

In my small hometown when I was growing up there were dozens of parents with gifted athletic kids that did the exact same thing with their kids in hopes they would be the next greatest, golf, tennis, basketball, football, baseball player.

Some from that small town I grew up with played in college, and 1 or 2 had small stints professionally.  This is one small town of tens of thousands of towns across the country.  We don't hear about the ones they didn't make it, "Hey did you hear about that guy that almost was a great ____________"...

There is nothing coincidental at all about Tiger Woods...  He just happens to be the one of ten thousand athletes of that time with parents that fostered his abilities that was just slightly more gifted and that is why we know his story.

That's fair.  But its still a bit of a coincidence that Tiger parents happened to pick golf, isn't it?  Had they been tennis people would he be better than Roger Federer now?  Or what if Tigers parents were piano people?

And for all of the parents you mentioned, there is a flip side as well, right?  (This is a point I made earlier in regards to Dan ... prior to learning that he actually sucks ;))  There are lots of parents who don't push their kids into any activities at all.  So, theoretically, if Tiger was born with it, then there are a lot of people out there who have never even touched a golf club but were also born with it, right?  This was the point I made at the beginning in regards to Dan when people first poo-pood his idea because you can't just do what he's doing.  I said, well, he's not a bad golfer (like most of us on here) who is devoting all of his time into practicing to become good ... he's a NON golfer, as in "never touched a club before."  Big difference there.

Now all of that said, I'm mostly playing devils advocate here, because my real belief is that its a combination of both.  You definitely need "it" to become world class at anything, it's just kind of hard to define what "it" is.  And you also need to be in the perfect situation for fostering your "it."

Sort of random and dorky (but then again, so am I) but I think it's cool nonetheless ... in the kids movie Ratatouille one of the characters has a saying that "Anyone can cook," which infuriates the pompous, jerk antagonist.  By the end of the movie, said antagonist has come to realize that what the guy really meant wasn't that "Anyone can cook" but rather "A great cook can come from anywhere."   I like that. :)  Hey, I told you it was random and dorky ... you didn't have to read it. ;)

[bplewis24]

In theory, I believe it plausible that there is another Tiger Woods out there who may be in his mid 30s, and instead of playing golf, went into baseball or has a routine job.  Theoretically, if this person started playing golf at 2 years old, he could be on tour and be dominant to some degree (remember, Tiger would still be around).  That seems plausible.  So in that context, it is somewhat coincidental that the guy with the greatest ability (perhaps of all time) also started at a very young age in the sport that he had the most potential in.  There is some luck and good fortune in that.  And perhaps there were 1 or 2 other guys out of 100, 100,000 or 1,000,000 who had similar potential but weren't pushed by their parents.

However, that doesn't include the number of kids who did pick up the sport at a very young age and never even sniffed the mini tours.  Maybe they got a subsidized college education out of it, but not much more.  And make no mistake, since Tiger Woods, I'm certain that the number of parents who have started their kids in golf at a young age has spiked significantly.  Can't prove it, but it seems logical.  That probably has played a part in why the demographics and archetypes of golfers has changed somewhat.  Guys who may have been pushed into other sports 3 decades ago, now see golf as a decently cool, attractive and lucrative option.  But all that really means is that there are more child prodigy experiments being conducted, with zero results being turned in so far.  Nobody, so far, is at the Tiger Woods level of success that has succeeded him on tour.  So it illustrates that, still, he had/has ability that was genetically bestowed upon him that is superior to these others.

[Slice of Life]

I think Tiger would be just as dominant a baseball player if that was the avenue his parents took him down. He's just got an athletic gift.

[geauxforbroke]

Originally Posted by Slice of Life

I think Tiger would be just as dominant a baseball player if that was the avenue his parents took him down. He's just got an athletic gift.

Probably right.

[Golfingdad]

Originally Posted by bplewis24

In theory, I believe it plausible that there is another Tiger Woods out there who may be in his mid 30s, and instead of playing golf, went into baseball or has a routine job.  Theoretically, if this person started playing golf at 2 years old, he could be on tour and be dominant to some degree (remember, Tiger would still be around).  That seems plausible.  So in that context, it is somewhat coincidental that the guy with the greatest ability (perhaps of all time) also started at a very young age in the sport that he had the most potential in.  There is some luck and good fortune in that.  And perhaps there were 1 or 2 other guys out of 100, 100,000 or 1,000,000 who had similar potential but weren't pushed by their parents.

However, that doesn't include the number of kids who did pick up the sport at a very young age and never even sniffed the mini tours.  Maybe they got a subsidized college education out of it, but not much more.  And make no mistake, since Tiger Woods, I'm certain that the number of parents who have started their kids in golf at a young age has spiked significantly.  Can't prove it, but it seems logical.  That probably has played a part in why the demographics and archetypes of golfers has changed somewhat.  Guys who may have been pushed into other sports 3 decades ago, now see golf as a decently cool, attractive and lucrative option.  But all that really means is that there are more child prodigy experiments being conducted, with zero results being turned in so far.  Nobody, so far, is at the Tiger Woods level of success that has succeeded him on tour.  So it illustrates that, still, he had/has ability that was genetically bestowed upon him that is superior to these others.

Yes.  I also have read that nowadays its a heck of a lot more popular to focus on whatever sport you or your kid prefers.  When we were young we played soccer in the fall/winter and baseball in the spring/summer.  Now, if you think your kid prefers or is good at any sport, if you or they so desire, then they can play it all year long.

And because it's all relative - i.e. Tiger is only as good as he is because of how "not good," for lack of a better term, everybody else is - the quantity of child prodigy experiments increasing isn't going to change the quantity of successful results.  The overall quality of play at the highest levels should increase, because there are still only 125 exempt spots on tour.

Originally Posted by Slice of Life

I think Tiger would be just as dominant a baseball player if that was the avenue his parents took him down. He's just got an athletic gift.

It's an opinion so it's not wrong or worth debating ... but I'm verrrrrrrrrrrrrrrry skeptical of this statement.

Two names come to mind right off the bat ... Charles Barkley and Michael Phelps. ;)

[bplewis24]

Originally Posted by Slice of Life

I think Tiger would be just as dominant a baseball player if that was the avenue his parents took him down. He's just got an athletic gift.

My speculation is that he could very well be a professional ______ athlete.  Maybe even a top professional athlete in a given sport.  But the "luck" or "coincidence" factor lies in the fact that the one sport he could have been the all time greatest in, happens to be the sport his father had him play.

Of course, it's very possible that his father could have pushed him in basketball, noticed him hit a golf ball naturally great at the age of 10, and started pushing him then, and he still turns out to be the all time great he is.

[iacas]

Originally Posted by Slice of Life

I think Tiger would be just as dominant a baseball player if that was the avenue his parents took him down. He's just got an athletic gift.

I disagree. Would he be equally good at hockey, football, soccer, or any other sport? No. Different sports require different types of athleticism.

Plus golf tends to require a different mindset. Tiger might not even excel in team sports.

Originally Posted by bplewis24

My speculation is that he could very well be a professional ______ athlete.  Maybe even a top professional athlete in a given sport.  But the "luck" or "coincidence" factor lies in the fact that the one sport he could have been the all time greatest in, happens to be the sport his father had him play.

There could be some struggling AA baseball player out there who would have won 20 majors by the age of 35 if his parents had only introduced him to the sport. Or he could be a CPA somewhere or a plumber or something.

[Slice of Life]

Originally Posted by iacas

I disagree. Would he be equally good at hockey, football, soccer, or any other sport? No. Different sports require different types of athleticism.

Plus golf tends to require a different mindset. Tiger might not even excel in team sports.

I chose baseball for a reason. Requires a ton of raw athleticism, hand eye coordination, body control, patience, depth perception, and competitiveness. All of which Tiger has an abundance of. So, agree to disagree.

[bplewis24]

Originally Posted by iacas

There could be some struggling AA baseball player out there who would have won 20 majors by the age of 35 if his parents had only introduced him to the sport. Or he could be a CPA somewhere or a plumber or something.

Or he could be a third-world country farmer.

I detect sarcasm in your post.  I think it's possible.  It may be a 0.1% chance, but it's possible.

[Vacant]

Originally Posted by TJBam

After doing research this was a quick $11,820 ($1500 down minimum $430 a month not including member greens fees etc) 2-year commitment decision that he needed less than 12 hours to debate because he "got a good deal."

Ok that's the last of my hate for the Dan Plan I promise.

You seem filled to the gills with anger, envy and jealousy. Why you mad, little fella?

[David in FL]

I was just updating the hcp revisions for our happy little group down here, and thought I'd check in with Dan.

Update as of the 9-1 revision.  Nothing posted since mid-August and his last 6 differentials are all WELL into double digits.  Some of his better rounds are about to drop off too....

For someone with golf as his raison d'etre, he's either not playing very much, or isn't posting a lot of what he does play.

Name:

Dan McLaughlin

Club	Handicap Index	Effective Date	Low H.I.
Columbia Edgewater CC Oregon Golf Association	5.9	9/1/2013	5.4

Revision Scores Recent Scores H.I. History C.H. Calculator

Used	T	Date	Score	CR/Slope	Diff.
	AI	8/13	84	71.9/137	10.0
	AI	8/13	86	71.9/137	11.6
	AI	7/13	89	71.6/128	15.4
	AI	7/13	86	73.0/133	11.0
	TI	7/13	85	73.0/133	10.2
	TI	7/13	92	73.0/133	16.1
*	TI	7/13	84	73.0/133	9.3
*	AI	6/13	78	70.3/128	6.8
*	AI	6/13	77	72.0/128	4.4
	CI	6/13	87	72.2/136	12.3
*	A	6/13	78	71.9/137	5.0
*	AI	6/13	79	72.0/128	6.2
*	AI	6/13	81	71.9/137	7.5
	T	5/13	86	70.9/141	12.1
*	H	5/13	79	73.2/137	4.8
	H	5/13	84	71.1/135	10.8
*	H	5/13	79	73.2/137	4.8
	T	5/13	83	69.9/131	11.3
*	A	5/13	81	73.0/133	6.8
*	H	4/13	81	73.2/137	6.4