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

[Slice of Life]

Yeah, you don't need to spend lots of $ on a health club. A simple setup, a bench, some bars and free weights will do. Even half a Rory would help.

My basement. All you need to get in great shape.

[nevets88]

[QUOTE name="nevets88" url="/t/45853/the-dan-plan-10-000-hours-to-become-a-pro-golfer/1854#post_1067804"] Yeah, you don't need to spend lots of $ on a health club. A simple setup, a bench, some bars and free weights will do. Even half a Rory would help.[/QUOTE] [URL=http://thesandtrap.com/content/type/61/id/108023/] [/URL] My basement. All you need to get in great shape.

You could get a lot done without free weights even. Look at the guys and gals at West Point and such. They have to do a certain amount of push-ups, pull ups, sit-ups , run 2/3 miles like 8 min minimum pace or something like that. Or they're out.

[natureboy]

 

 

It's simply ball speed/clubhead speed.

 

The less delivered loft (and the more centered the hit), the more smash factor you can get. Thin the crap out of a 9-iron and you can get 1.53 sometimes.

 

PGA Tour players have higher smash factors than most AND higher spin rates than most because… they swing the club faster than most.

 

 

It's 65/20/15. :)

 

 

I don't give that a lot of weight. Most people learn putting by experience. It only really keeps growing.

 

Most people in their 30s don't improve their ball striking because they have families and jobs and are spending less time playing golf.

 

I support the idea of teaching juniors to smash the ball first. What good is it to have a great short game if you're trying to chip in for seven?

Which velocity / speed does Trackman measure for its smash factor calculation? The strictly horizontal velocity, or the velocity of the ball along the projected line of the launch angle?

Wouldn't a a strictly horizontal velocity measurement / calculation give a lower effective velocity measure for higher lofted clubs and therefore underrate the efficiency of the the tranfer of momentum? If so it could also explain why pros have much higher smash factors, because with a more de-lofted club there would be more linear transfer of energy & higher horizontal velocity for a given club & swing speed.

[Lihu]

I may be wrong but he looks the same physically compared to when he started. He should have more muscle mass.

I have less fat mass.

He doesn't take it seriously. If I were in his shoes, I'd look like Rory right now.

Or bigger like Jason Zuback?

Yeah, you don't need to spend lots of $ on a health club. A simple setup, a bench, some bars and free weights will do. Even half a Rory would help.

I think if I were the public eye, that would be more than enough incentive for me not to look bad.

You don't need any $$$ to do isometrics and pilates core strength exercises. You can build a lot of mass just doing pullups and pushups. No idea if they will do any good for golf, though.

[MS256]

I have less fat mass.

Or bigger like Jason Zuback?

You don't need any $$$ to do isometrics and pilates core strength exercises. You can build a lot of mass just doing pullups and pushups. No idea if they will do any good for golf, though.

Nothing wrong with fitness but I think you guys are putting waaaaaaay to much stock in it. There are plenty of guys on the PGA Tour that don't have much muscle at all and absolutely smoke the crap out of the ball.

Hell Bubba Watson probably doesn't have 16" biceps.

If muscle was what it takes I would be a golfer.

(And I'm most certainly not).

[Pretzel]

My last post came out a bit harsher than intended I realize now, but it still holds true.

If a majority of successful professional golfers (including the last 3 world #1 golfers, one of which holds the record for the longest time in that spot) are lifting weights and doing flexibility training why doesn't Dan do that?

I think the best thing for Dan to do is privately (no blog post, no publicity about it, just talking realistically to himself) have a conversation with himself and ask the questions, "What more could I be doing to actually achieve this goal? What do I need to be able to do to meet this goal? What steps can I take to be able to do those things? Why am I currently not doing them?". He doesn't have to share any of this, but if he really took that to heart and made changes in order to make a good effort and give it his all it would be noticeable in his blog.

For example, he could do his next blog post on what his new weight and flexibility regimen will be. He appears to be a member at a Country Club as it is, and most Country Clubs have exercise rooms he could probably use, so he could film it there and use that for his daily workout. Then he could do a blog post detailing his statistics over the last month compared to those of a PGA Tour player, and point out exactly what needs work instead of saying, "I think I need to work on 'x' because I was bad at it today". Looking at overall trends with statistics would be a colossal leap forwards, instead of relying on what he felt that particular day. Then his next blog could be a list of the specific things he is doing to help him achieve a certain goal (getting closer to PGA Tour GIR, or Scrambling, or whatever his weakest stat ended up being). This would be something I feel could help him improve much faster than what he is doing currently.

Nothing wrong with fitness but I think you guys are putting waaaaaaay to much stock in it. There are plenty of guys on the PGA Tour that don't have much muscle at all and absolutely smoke the crap out of the ball.

Hell Bubba Watson probably doesn't have 16" biceps.

If muscle was what it takes I would be a golfer.

(And I'm most certainly not).

Bubba Watson doesn't have 16" biceps, but he does have a daily regimen that he sticks to that helps him hit the ball longer than everyone else. It's not just strength that golfers need, but flexibility as well.

I'm just trying to point out that fitness routines are something a lot of PGA Tour Pros have (barring exceptions like Miguel Angel Jimenez and John Daly). If you saw many people at the top of a profession you wanted to be in doing something, wouldn't you at least try it to see what benefits it could have for you? I mean it's not like having at least a light workout routine would hurt Dan in any way provided he didn't just try to become a bodybuilder.

[nevets88]

I don't read his blog enough to know how much but I think he does do some kind of fitness work but the bottom line is while he make look/be aerobically fit, doesn't look like he put on any muscle mass. Now you have your Fowler, Weir, Howell who probably are around 150 lbs, but the Dan Plan needs every advantage he can get.

[newtogolf]

Nothing wrong with fitness but I think you guys are putting waaaaaaay to much stock in it. There are plenty of guys on the PGA Tour that don't have much muscle at all and absolutely smoke the crap out of the ball.

Hell Bubba Watson probably doesn't have 16" biceps.

If muscle was what it takes I would be a golfer.

(And I'm most certainly not).

It doesn't take 16" biceps but good conditioning is important.  Strength training and cardio have come to play a big role in golf thanks to Tiger.  While I'm sure part of it is for appearance (and confidence) the real benefit is that the conditioning is typically focused on making them better golfers.  Jimenez and Daly are outliers who must be very gifted genetically or in much better condition than they appear.

My last post came out a bit harsher than intended I realize now, but it still holds true.

If a majority of successful professional golfers (including the last 3 world #1 golfers, one of which holds the record for the longest time in that spot) are lifting weights and doing flexibility training why doesn't Dan do that?

I think the best thing for Dan to do is privately (no blog post, no publicity about it, just talking realistically to himself) have a conversation with himself and ask the questions, "What more could I be doing to actually achieve this goal? What do I need to be able to do to meet this goal? What steps can I take to be able to do those things? Why am I currently not doing them?". He doesn't have to share any of this, but if he really took that to heart and made changes in order to make a good effort and give it his all it would be noticeable in his blog.

For example, he could do his next blog post on what his new weight and flexibility regimen will be. He appears to be a member at a Country Club as it is, and most Country Clubs have exercise rooms he could probably use, so he could film it there and use that for his daily workout. Then he could do a blog post detailing his statistics over the last month compared to those of a PGA Tour player, and point out exactly what needs work instead of saying, "I think I need to work on 'x' because I was bad at it today". Looking at overall trends with statistics would be a colossal leap forwards, instead of relying on what he felt that particular day. Then his next blog could be a list of the specific things he is doing to help him achieve a certain goal (getting closer to PGA Tour GIR, or Scrambling, or whatever his weakest stat ended up being). This would be something I feel could help him improve much faster than what he is doing currently.

That's the question, what is Dan doing with the rest of his day?  I understand not wanting to burn out, but it appear from the books that have been written on Tiger, Jack and even Hogan that these guys spent a lot of time working on their golf game.  I don't know what Dan's daily routine is, but based on his blogs, he has a lot of free time that he could be using more constructively.

[MS256]

It doesn't take 16" biceps but good conditioning is important.  Strength training and cardio have come to play a big role in golf thanks to Tiger.  While I'm sure part of it is for appearance (and confidence) the real benefit is that the conditioning is typically focused on making them better golfers.  Jimenez and Daly are outliers who must be very gifted genetically or in much better condition than they appear.

I've been around weight rooms and tracks enough to see the difference between people that are just going through the motions and people that are actually working out.

You don't look like this if you are working out seriously.

Luckily for most golfers, until they start making them run or jump or allow tackling it doesn't make much difference in their ability to play golf.

[Lihu]

I've been around weight rooms and tracks enough to see the difference between people that are just going through the motions and people that are actually working out.

You don't look like this if you are working out seriously.

Luckily for most golfers, until they start making them run or jump or allow tackling it doesn't make much difference in their ability to play golf.

Core muscles, they've got strong/flexible core muscles.

That's why even though Daly and Jimenez look way out of shape, but have the speed and flexibility from strong flexible core muscles.

BTW, I agree with your biceps comment. Those are pretty useless for golf.

[Slice of Life]

Nothing wrong with fitness but I think you guys are putting waaaaaaay to much stock in it. There are plenty of guys on the PGA Tour that don't have much muscle at all and absolutely smoke the crap out of the ball.

Hell Bubba Watson probably doesn't have 16" biceps.

If muscle was what it takes I would be a golfer.

(And I'm most certainly not).

Sure, Bubba Watson isn't ripped. But he's also 6'3" and extremely flexible.

Name the two best golfers in the world over the past 20 years...now tell me what kind of shape they were in.

[newtogolf]

You have to be able to achieve at least 105+ mph driver swing speeds which means you have to have good - great flexibility and core strength.   My understanding is that most pro's typically swing at 85% of their max to improve control which means they get close to or exceed 120mph club head speed.  I'm pretty sure that won't happen from sitting on the couch eating bon bons all days.

[nevets88]

Still no response to @Pretzel 's post on his FS numbers. Guy is traveling so should have plenty of time to write up a response. Feeling like he's dodging the question.

[iacas]

Interesting, I thought the upper limit on smash factor was 1.5.

Nope. It's just a ratio. You can catch a driver just toward the toe and get to 1.51 too sometimes (since they measure clubhead speed at the center of the "blob" of the clubhead). Mis-hit an iron and you can get above 1.5.

Can't someone with a lower swing speed have a higher smash factor than someone who swing much faster, but with poorer contact?

Of course. Again, it's just a ratio.

As it relates to this thread it's highly unlikely Dan swung faster than PGA Tour average OR had a higher smash factor. They're not mis-hitting it. He might have been, but it's unlikely he was counting those as good results and getting that much higher a smash factor than PGA Tour pros.

My thought on smash factor / 'strike efficiency' was that if you have perfect centered contact with identical clubs and swing speeds at impact then the ball hit with more spin has to have less of the club's momentum transferred into ball speed.

With identical swing speeds… that wasn't there before IIRC.

If you swing 100 with a 4-iron it's gonna generate more spin than if you swing 90 with a 4-iron given the same contact, etc. The smash factors will be awfully close to the same.

If the spin lofts (same club, same AoA, centeredness of contact, etc. too) are the same, the higher clubhead speed = more ball speed and more spin. Same smash factor.

Which velocity / speed does Trackman measure for its smash factor calculation? The strictly horizontal velocity, or the velocity of the ball along the projected line of the launch angle?

The velocity of the clubhead in three dimensions. The instantaneous linear velocity. Ball and club. Same for FlightScope.

Wouldn't a a strictly horizontal velocity measurement / calculation give a lower effective velocity measure for higher lofted clubs and therefore underrate the efficiency of the the tranfer of momentum?

Irrelevant. It's not measured horizontally.

[Lihu]

You have to be able to achieve at least 112+ mph driver swing speeds which means you have to have good - great flexibility and core strength.   My understanding is that most pro's typically swing at 85% of their max to improve control which means they get close to or exceed 120mph club head speed.  I'm pretty sure that won't happen from sitting on the couch eating bon bons all days.

Corrected this for you.

[newtogolf]

Corrected this for you.

Guys like David Toms, Tim Clark, Ben Crane, Justin Leonard, Brian Gay and Mike Weir are on the Tour and have average club head speeds from 103mph - 106mph, that's why I used 105 mph.

[Lihu]

Guys like David Toms, Tim Clark, Ben Crane, Justin Leonard, Brian Gay and Mike Weir are on the Tour and have average club head speeds from 103mph - 106mph, that's why I used 105 mph.

I corrected the number to reflect the "average" pga pro, rather than the "bottom end". I have my doubts that Dan has the same talent as these guys in other areas to make up for these "slower" swing speeds.

It would be interesting to see why they swing 7mph slower than the average tour player.

[nevets88]

Anyone know what's the median ss on the PGA Tour? I'm guessing it's less than the average/mean. Ok, a very quick calc, could be wrong. Median is 300 yards. -ish. That's around 108? I think 112 as a min is a little high. But what the hell do I know? 105-ish, a little more, on a controlled swing should be fine if you asked me.