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

[MS256]

Ooooh, now that you put it *that* way I totally get it!

You're right, he's light-years away from looking like a tour pro.

But then I can't think of anyone I've seen at the range I'd label as having a wimpy swing. Maybe uncoordinated. But wimpy? No.

Yeah that word really doesn't flash into me mind when thinking about a golf swing anyway. I reserve that word for football players that hide behind other players on the sidelines to make sure the coach doesn't see them and put them in the game.

[nevets88]

It's hard the judge a swing by video I would think. You need to see his ball flight, dispersion, etc. Some guys have not so aesthetically pleasing swings and they're tour pros, on the minor league tours, etc although instruction using video is changing that. There are some wonky looking swings out there and they can shoot lights out. Bottom line is he is scoring mid to high 80s in sanctioned tournaments in a state that is sorry Oregon, not as competitive as Florida or California, deep field wise, after 4 years of full time dedication. Four years. 1400+ days. With all the modern tech at ones disposal.

[golf-noob-bruce]

It's hard the judge a swing by video I would think. You need to see his ball flight, dispersion, etc.

Yeah, really wish he would update the stats on his blog. This is the most recent stuff I can find: http://thedanplan.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/Combine-Test-for-Dan-Plan-2013-11-07.pdf

[Lihu]

Yeah that word really doesn't flash into me mind when thinking about a golf swing anyway. I reserve that word for football players that hide behind other players on the sidelines to make sure the coach doesn't see them and put them in the game.

Football is just one of those sports that requires a burly build.

[Lihu]

Yeah, really wish he would update the stats on his blog. This is the most recent stuff I can find: http://thedanplan.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/Combine-Test-for-Dan-Plan-2013-11-07.pdf

I have a hard time believing that Dan scores around that of a good scratch player (73.8). If he were this good, there would be no way he would shoot high 80s at any tournament.

Even if we can believe the results, he's at least 2 levels below tour caliber.

I copied this from: trackman university.com/media/5df25dca-3bc5-41b5-bca8.../5.pdf

Here's a table by handicap:

Hcp          Average Score
+5 – 0              74.4
1 – 4                69.6
5 – 9                63.4
10 – 12            57.9
13 – 16            54.2
17 – 20            49.7
20+                 45.1

[DwightC]

Well, I just read the last six weeks of his blog.  I haven't read all 85+ pages of this thread.  As I write this, Dan is a bit over half way through his 10,000 hours.  And he's playing to a single digit handicap.  And he's not made much progress recently.  He appears to have reached the limit of his potential, as they used to say in an era when passing judgment and discriminating between the talented and the earnest wasn't considered offensive elitism.

It's been an interesting experiment.  Probably not a necessary one.

Before World War Two one of the leading teachers of the era--I think it was Percy Boomer--wrote that he could take an absolute beginner and within a season have the turned the beginner into an adequate companion on the golf course, breaking a hundred.  Given more time, lessons and application, that companion could become a golfer carrying a handicap, and shooting in the 80s playing by the rules.  And, with more effort, that golfer could progress to playing in the single digits.  But, Boomer claimed, the trip from single digits to scratch was every bit as long as the entire progression from newcomer to the game to playing in the single digits and it revealed every flaw and weakness that up to that point had been tolerable.

I think that's where we find Dan and that's as far as he goes.

[hallryu]

Bookmarked his home page for later review. Wish I had that much time to dedicate to golf mind.

[Pretzel]

I would agree with the wimpy swing myself. It looks like a fairly sound swing from a mechanics viewpoint, but I would be surprised if he drove it further than 240 on an average day. Some of the kids in high school tournaments can bomb the ball and their swings catch your eye with the athleticism of it. This swing would be easy to pass over on the range.

[RandallT]

Nature vs nature has been argued over since forever and this is just a variant of the argument, born or made. While I liked the format of the show and learned a little, the one hour bit has been done before. I'm repeating myself but what was lost in this whole argument was how to practice better. Instead of focusing on how any schlub can practice his way to genius top 0.01% level, lost is the opportunity to talk about how better practice techniques can make the average better. Wouldn't raising the tide of an ocean an inkling be more helpful than the super complicated nuance of figuring out genius?

Did you see this in his last blog post after trip to Australia? He's actually going to look into the best ideas for how to practice. I'm curious what he's been doing for 5000 hours of "deliberate" practice. Now he's going to figure out how to do it right? [quote]I have a call with the Vision 54 ladies scheduled for Monday where we are going to talk about developing a brand new 2 hour block of practice. I’m super excited about this and will spend the weekend hitting balls while contemplating what practice could and should look like moving forward. The trip was fun and I have a ton of memories and new friends from it, but it’s time to get back to work.[/quote]

[Shorty]

Well, I just read the last six weeks of his blog.  I haven't read all 85+ pages of this thread.  As I write this, Dan is a bit over half way through his 10,000 hours.  And he's playing to a single digit handicap.  And he's not made much progress recently.  He appears to have reached the limit of his potential, as they used to say in an era when passing judgment and discriminating between the talented and the earnest wasn't considered offensive elitism.

It's been an interesting experiment.  Probably not a necessary one.

Is he? It would seem that he isn't.

I don't think so. Most interesting experiments are ones where the outcome confirms a hypothesis or surprises. This has done neither.

[nevets88]

Did you see this in his last blog post after trip to Australia? He's actually going to look into the best ideas for how to practice. I'm curious what he's been doing for 5000 hours of "deliberate" practice. Now he's going to figure out how to do it right?

Quote:

I have a call with the Vision 54 ladies scheduled for Monday where we are going to talk about developing a brand new 2 hour block of practice. I’m super excited about this and will spend the weekend hitting balls while contemplating what practice could and should look like moving forward. The trip was fun and I have a ton of memories and new friends from it, but it’s time to get back to work.

Vision 54 practice - is that more of a mental thing though? Rather than deliberate practice, practice at the edge of your ability, Daniel Coyle type practice? I assumed that's what he's been trying to do? I dunno - I don't read enough of his blog to know, but I know this. I see little or video of him practicing, like some of the vids @mvmac or @iacas demonstrate. If I were doing a Dan Plan where deliberate practice is part and parcel of the mission statement, you're damn well sure I'd be documenting practice. No matter how bad I looked. It's for science , baby!

Here's a newspaper piece I found from one of the comments in his blog:

DAN McLaughlin doesn’t believe in talent or natural ability.

Champions are made not born, he says, and not just in sport either.

For McLaughlin, reaching an elite level is about hard work. It’s about putting in the hours — 10,000 of them, to be precise.

“The idea of talent is an excuse others use not to pursue something,” McLaughlin told news.com.au.

...

He spends about 30 hours on his game every week, but only 4-6 actually hitting golf balls. The rest is taken up by physical and mental conditioning.

McLaughlin plans to make his PGA Tour debut at the Heritage event in 2018, after the Masters.

“It’s basically going to be April 2018. I’ll be about 38. I’ll be a little younger than Tiger is now and it will coincide almost exactly with my 10,000 hours.”

To help with his mental game, he works with a sports psychologist. He also employs a swing coach, which begs the question: how can he afford all this?

McLaughlin was a single man with no children when he chucked it all in to become a golfer.

Now he has a girlfriend, who has two children.

“It’s all funded through just personal savings, and I have absolutely no clue how it’s worked out so far,” he said.

“I might be lucky enough to get a sponsor at some point or I might need to do some public speaking. There will be a way to keep it going.”

For more on Dan McLaughlin and the 10,000-hour rule, watch Insight on SBS at 8.30pm Tuesday night.

[Shorty]

Here's a newspaper piece I found from one of the comments in his blog:

Unbelieveable.

You can add "arrogant" and "prick" into the descriptions.

You'd almost think it was a joke if it you'd never heard of him.

[Lihu]

I bet there are thousands of real prospective tour level golfers scratching their head wondering what they did wrong in marketing their skills. I'll reiterate, "unbelievable". Talk about con artists.

[whatwoodtigerdo]

This title should be changed to "The haters thread".

[Shorty]

This title should be changed to "The haters thread".

Why?

Seriously. For what reason?

[nevets88]

This title should be changed to "The haters thread".

Hate is a strong word. I wish the guy best of luck in his endeavor but some of us on this thread is calling out what we see as it is and not sugar coating things. By saying he just needs 10K hours of deliberate practice to get on tour trivializes those who sacrificed much more and have more talent who never made it or are continuing to try and those already on it. By making deliberate practice as part of his mission statement and not carrying it out that well is disappointing. By going along with the press agreeing that he's a 4 handicap while he's shooting mid to high 80s in his most recent tournaments is disingenuous. And he's going to go on speech circuit to talk about a plan that was flawed to begin with, that others here are way more qualified to do so. It's good to try and do something to inspire people but he's doing it on false pretenses. No, it's not the first time someone has done it but this is a knowledgeable group who has a better perspective to evaluate TDP than the unknowing masses.

[DwightC]

so, since this guy is an Oregon story, are you a Duck (green) or a Beaver (orange)?  You've used both colors to highlight.

I lean towards Eugene, myself.

Look, this is a deep Oregon story.  The guy is playing out of a country club, not the golf club next door, which is a player's club like Champions in Houston.  That, really, tells you all you need to know.

And, yessir, he does have a handicap.  I suspect he enters it himself in the computer.  when he has a good round.  And so what if it's a vanity handicap?  That's what the Donald plays to, or, maybe, that's what he talks to.  If you want to believe me, I can't break a hundred.  Really.  Cash on the barrelhead.

Now, about whether the experiment is interesting, I have to disagree a little bit.  A well designed experiment that yields the expected result but with data  that is disconcerting can be more interesting that one that's either a success or a failure.   I find the reaction to the Dan Plan way more interesting than the effort itself (which is pretty lunchmeat).  I mean, a 86 page thread about this--he's striking a nerve.  I mean, the Aussie generally are pretty good with money, and paid to fly him across the Pacific to blather on about his effort.  Those are interesting reactions.  It probably says more about us than it does about Dan.

[mchepp]

Dan said the 10,000 hour theory wasn't the initial test? He comes across as more of a dreamer than someone testing a theory and having a real plan, it has been brought up before and the fact he didn't do any real documentation of correlation of practice/results it takes on the appearance of shooting in the dark versus a thought out process.

His approach is more from an artistic point of view rather than an engineering/scientific one. This is the most disappoint aspect of the plan for me. The whole project is lost because he has taken such a dreamers attack. I could argue the 10,000 theory and what he is doing are not even related.