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

[tdiii]

You know how when you see some women or kids take a backswing, you can sense them fighting to stop the club momentum and get it redirected into the downswing?  It's like the club move them around.  I see a bit of that in Dan.  He's so small and weak, that he does not have control of the club.  [Of course, there is the problem of a poor swing which may only exacerbate this phenomenon.]

I don't observe this at all in Zach Johnson, who may be of similar size.  He has the innate power or strength to not get thrown around or off balance by the club. ZJ controls the club.  He doesn't, like Dan, react to it.

[nevets88]

[QUOTE name="Nosevi" url="/t/45853/the-dan-plan-10-000-hours-to-become-a-pro-golfer-dan-mclaughlin/3310_10#post_1174308"] I don't think we're that far apart in our thinking @nevets88 , personally I think talent is a prerequisite to success in this endevour. Yes you need to work hard and yes you need to put all the other things in place like good coaching etc but if you don't have the potential to succeed you won't do. It's no different than other fields. In Air Traffic we have aptitude tests to see if someone has the potential to become a controller. At the end of the day if they can't resolve a 2D picture on a radar screen into a 3D reality, or have the mental dexterity to calculate height differences based on pressure differentials or learn books worth of rules and regs or stay totally chilled when under pressure, they will never become a controller - they simply don't have the natural atributes to fo it. Golf is a little different in that it's physical rather than mental but I still think you need certain natural abilities in order to succeed. Hard work is only part of the equasion IMO.[/QUOTE] Yes, @nosevi, looks like we're on the same page - talent and hard work it is. Just because you can't see it or measure it. Doesn't mean it's not there (in reference to Dan Plan saying he didn't see what differentiated a PGA player from the average person.)

[Lihu]

I'm wondering if there's something we're missing in gauging talent? It probably takes a lot of talent to be able to judge other's potential ability? I doubt anyone can really do it by just watching someone either, only the person hitting the ball can tell if he feels like he's maximizing his potential. Assuming he has the talent to tell.

[DrvFrShow]

I'll speak from an area where I'm an expert: music, particularly classical piano. There are people like me who are very good. We can learn a very complex piece of music that is well beyond the ability of the average person even if they were to put in the 10,000 hours. Why? Because I know people who have put in the 10,000 hours and they still can't play worth a damn because they simply lack the manual dexterity to perform the task.

Then beyond my level are two more tiers: the journeyman performer who has a greater degree of manual dexterity than I do and the ability to grasp more complex works. Beyond this are the freaks. I don't mean this in a negative sense. They have a freakish amount of talent. These are the true masters of the instrument - they have names like Vladmir Horowitz, Martha Argerich, Maurizio Pollini, etc.

Think about this with golf in mind.

[nevets88]

Talent is in the words of Justice Potter Stewart, a I know it when I see it thing. The more you're around it, the better you are at identifying it. Those in the industry were pretty sure about Woods and McIlroy and they were correct though there are many flameouts due to injuries, head cases, what have you.

[tdiii]

I'll speak from an area where I'm an expert: music, particularly classical piano. There are people like me who are very good. We can learn a very complex piece of music that is well beyond the ability of the average person even if they were to put in the 10,000 hours. Why? Because I know people who have put in the 10,000 hours and they still can't play worth a damn because they simply lack the manual dexterity to perform the task.

Then beyond my level are two more tiers: the journeyman performer who has a greater degree of manual dexterity than I do and the ability to grasp more complex works. Beyond this are the freaks. I don't mean this in a negative sense. They have a freakish amount of talent. These are the true masters of the instrument - they have names like Vladmir Horowitz, Martha Argerich, Maurizio Pollini, etc.

Think about this with golf in mind.

And only people with your level of expertise can readily distinguish between the expert, the journeman and the freak.

[DrvFrShow]

The basketball player who was a standout in high school and college. He makes it to the NBA dev league and that's it. Never makes it to the show.

The guitar player who is really good, but not good or lucky enough to play in a touring and ends up having to take a day job and is now lucky to get a band together and get a weekend gig playing "Mustang Sally" at the local bar. - we musicians joke about this crap all the time. We hate that song. Someone always requests it.

Dan McLaughlin never stood a chance. He stood a very good chance of getting to a 5 handicap with an occasional dip below that and an occasional peak above that. He had the deck stacked against him: age; talent; and the fact he never good at any kind of swing move when he was young. Now he has a back injury.

[nevets88]

Gotta slap the wrist or more, of the publishing industry for hyperbole w/respect to talent/practice/10K rule books. And Gladwell, he's a great read, but after reading any of his books, you're like, wow, but then when you stop to really think about his ideas, you're like, wait a minute ...

Of course I realize writing you can be better at doing stuff w/better practice techniques, but you're never going to be the next superstar ain't gonna sell, but that's basically it in a nutshell.

[Lihu]

Age is not as much a factor as talent, but of course, it factors in.

[natureboy]

I agree with most of your points @ChrisWev, but I didn't provide some of the context of my thinking that might bear out why I wrote what I wrote as I'm thinking of Dan Plan's more realistic end goal is getting to scratch which is my fault. I think @iacas said somewhere in TST that 240 yards total is the minimum you need to get to scratch w/other parts above average.

If you enlarge the photos in the tweet, you'll get a good idea of Johnson's build. This is not a personal issue for me. I'm not trying to overcompensate for my size as I'm not short and scrawny. It irks me to see Dan Plan's size being mentioned as a limitation as ya'll have probably noticed a little. :-) And the official PGA site lists ZJ's SS @ 108.

http://www.pgatour.com/players/player.24024.zach-johnson.html/statistics

So we just had a 39 yo of slight frame win over young 6 foot+ 350 yard driving brutes. Yay for the average (in physicality) guy!

I'll speak from an area where I'm an expert: music, particularly classical piano. There are people like me who are very good. We can learn a very complex piece of music that is well beyond the ability of the average person even if they were to put in the 10,000 hours. Why? Because I know people who have put in the 10,000 hours and they still can't play worth a damn because they simply lack the manual dexterity to perform the task.

Then beyond my level are two more tiers: the journeyman performer who has a greater degree of manual dexterity than I do and the ability to grasp more complex works. Beyond this are the freaks. I don't mean this in a negative sense. They have a freakish amount of talent. These are the true masters of the instrument - they have names like Vladmir Horowitz, Martha Argerich, Maurizio Pollini, etc.

Think about this with golf in mind.

Talent is in the words of Justice Potter Stewart, a I know it when I see it thing. The more you're around it, the better you are at identifying it. Those in the industry were pretty sure about Woods and McIlroy and they were correct though there are many flameouts due to injuries, head cases, what have you.

Zac Johnson's story is really interesting in the context of this thread and these posts in terms of the bigger questions of talent v effort. Was he enough of a a standout athlete in HS to get heavily recruited. Did he rank well on his college team. Would someone have dismissed him as below average talent early on vs. Wood and Mcilroy. Likely Zac will never accumulate a similar career record than either, but at the early stage 'talent' assessment would any golf insider have tabbed him to have a potential HOF career?

He almost seems like the classic example of what they are calling the 'growth mindset' / grit character in education circles...students who succeed because they believe they can get better and enjoy the process of improving so work to maximize, hone, and compensate for their innate skills. They often academically outperform (over time) those who believe that 'you are either smart or not'. I am sure that his faith and his passion for the game and competition helped him immensely in that stead progress toward the top of the (current) world's best.

I think (like many dialectics) that an either / or viewpoint of talent / effort is myopic. Both are obviously important. If you have freakish innate talent and don't work to develop it and then diligently build on it, you may not succeed to your potential. If you have a talent for hard work or perhaps cumulative learning talent like Zac Johnson you can surpass those with more exceptional initial / innate physical talents. At the same time there may be hard physical or mental ceilings for your particular talent level in an important skill that may or may not be possible to work around. Good and bad breaks have an impact too. If you have freakish talent and work feverishly hard at your craft you could be a genius or a burnout. There are many potential paths.

Exceptional talent, plus hard work, plus passion for the field / craft is probably the sweet spot to statistically likely high level success.

[nevets88]

I posted a video from abman in the instruction forum. I was expecting to see something like this from someone doing a deliberate practice plan, someone w/a lot of time to devote, thinking it through. I can't speak for the correctness of everything abman is saying, but he sure is making a concerted effort to figure things out, w/o the benefit of an instructor. You don't need expensive equipment (not even using a tripod, but a basket as a stand) to make a video like this, just some technical know how. And he's not afraid to show his bad swings and he's documenting his thoughts in the video.

[Nosevi]

I'm wondering if there's something we're missing in gauging talent?

It probably takes a lot of talent to be able to judge other's potential ability? I doubt anyone can really do it by just watching someone either, only the person hitting the ball can tell if he feels like he's maximizing his potential. Assuming he has the talent to tell.

You get talent scouts in most sports, in fact I know one for golf, he lives 3 doors down from me and used to work with Nick Faldo running the Faldo Series. Sometimes they get it right and sometimes they get it wrong, it doesn't seem to be an exact science.

A young lad called Ashley Chesters gets some of his coaching where I do and I've hit balls next to him and chatted golf etc. He has real talent, you may have seen him do pretty well in The Open Championship (British Open). What sets him aside from some of the other guys I've seen who at least appear to have similar talent is how hard he works though. He'll be the one still out there when most of the other young national squad players are having a break. Interestingly my coach said he's also the one who pushes himself hardest when practising short game - always gives himself the hardest shots to play where some of the other lads practice shots they are more comfortable with. Similarly one day I was in the range and it was absolutely hammering it down with rain. Looked over and there was a girl practising on the short game area. An hour and a half later she was still out there in the torrential rain. She's called India Clyburn and is now playing for England, probably shortly to follow her sister Holly onto the Ladies European Tour.

I think you need talent but you also need a strong work ethic. You may find examples of super talented guys who didn't work as hard as some but I've yet to see an example of a PGA Tour pro without any talent.

I posted a video from abman in the instruction forum. I was expecting to see something like this from someone doing a deliberate practice plan, someone w/a lot of time to devote, thinking it through. I can't speak for the correctness of everything abman is saying, but he sure is making a concerted effort to figure things out, w/o the benefit of an instructor. You don't need expensive equipment (not even using a tripod, but a basket as a stand) to make a video like this, just some technical know how. And he's not afraid to show his bad swings and he's documenting his thoughts in the video.

Like his thinking and I use slow motion drills a lot in my training, they work for me. In fact I spent 4 hours in the swing studio this afternoon working on one particular aspect of my swing using slow motion drills.

Like you I expected at least some of this sort of thing in The Dan Plan, if not video then at least documented. I can't see any of the 'how' posted in the Dan Plan. Like I said earlier, I have no clue if Dan does any deliberate practice, certainly none is documented these days. I always scratch my head when I read or see an interview about The Dan Plan when the interviewer says words to the effect of "........ and the whole project is fully documented in his blog!" Where? Quite clearly they haven't read it and are just going on the brief they've just been handed.

In fact here's a challenge - I challenge anyone to find anything in The Dan Plan posted in say the last 2 years that tells you anything at all about how to get better at golf or how Dan has gone about doing so. Practice routine, technique, drill, practice programme, fitness regime, any ball flight data....... anything at all. Could be wrong but I think you'll come up short.

[nevets88]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lihu

I'm wondering if there's something we're missing in gauging talent?

It probably takes a lot of talent to be able to judge other's potential ability? I doubt anyone can really do it by just watching someone either, only the person hitting the ball can tell if he feels like he's maximizing his potential. Assuming he has the talent to tell.

You get talent scouts in most sports, in fact I know one for golf, he lives 3 doors down from me and used to work with Nick Faldo running the Faldo Series. Sometimes they get it right and sometimes they get it wrong, it doesn't seem to be an exact science.

A young lad called Ashley Chesters gets some of his coaching where I do and I've hit balls next to him and chatted golf etc. He has real talent, you may have seen him do pretty well in The Open Championship (British Open). What sets him aside from some of the other guys I've seen who at least appear to have similar talent is how hard he works though. He'll be the one still out there when most of the other young national squad players are having a break. Interestingly my coach said he's also the one who pushes himself hardest when practising short game - always gives himself the hardest shots to play where some of the other lads practice shots they are more comfortable with. Similarly one day I was in the range and it was absolutely hammering it down with rain. Looked over and there was a girl practising on the short game area. An hour and a half later she was still out there in the torrential rain. She's called India Clyburn and is now playing for England, probably shortly to follow her sister Holly onto the Ladies European Tour.

I think you need talent but you also need a strong work ethic. You may find examples of super talented guys who didn't work as hard as some but I've yet to see an example of a PGA Tour pro without any talent.

Quote:

Originally Posted by nevets88

I posted a video from abman in the instruction forum. I was expecting to see something like this from someone doing a deliberate practice plan, someone w/a lot of time to devote, thinking it through. I can't speak for the correctness of everything abman is saying, but he sure is making a concerted effort to figure things out, w/o the benefit of an instructor. You don't need expensive equipment (not even using a tripod, but a basket as a stand) to make a video like this, just some technical know how. And he's not afraid to show his bad swings and he's documenting his thoughts in the video.

Like his thinking and I use slow motion drills a lot in my training, they work for me. In fact I spent 4 hours in the swing studio this afternoon working on one particular aspect of my swing using slow motion drills.

Like you I expected at least some of this sort of thing in The Dan Plan, if not video then at least documented. I can't see any of the 'how' posted in the Dan Plan. Like I said earlier, I have no clue if Dan does any deliberate practice, certainly none is documented these days. I always scratch my head when I read or see an interview about The Dan Plan when the interviewer says words to the effect of "........ and the whole project is fully documented in his blog!" Where? Quite clearly they haven't read it and are just going on the brief they've just been handed.

In fact here's a challenge - I challenge anyone to find anything in The Dan Plan posted in say the last 2 years that tells you anything at all about how to get better at golf or how Dan has gone about doing so. Practice routine, technique, drill, practice programme, fitness regime, any ball flight data....... anything at all. Could be wrong but I think you'll come up short.

The media folks who are writing most of the articles don't know golf, let alone deliberate practice, which is a term that can be interpreted so many ways.

[Nosevi]

The media folks who are writing most of the articles don't know golf, let alone deliberate practice, which is a term that can be interpreted so many ways.

Very true. Question is though, you're thinking of doing your own 'Dan Plan' - learn to be a pro golfer from zero experience........ in fact a pro anything from zero experience. You read the blog. What have you leaned?

[nevets88]

Quote:

Originally Posted by nevets88

The media folks who are writing most of the articles don't know golf, let alone deliberate practice, which is a term that can be interpreted so many ways.

Very true. Question is though, you're thinking of doing your own 'Dan Plan' - learn to be a pro golfer from zero experience........ in fact a pro anything from zero experience. You read the blog. What have you leaned?

Don't even think of starting, but that's just me.

[Nosevi]

[QUOTE name="Nosevi" url="/t/45853/the-dan-plan-10-000-hours-to-become-a-pro-golfer-dan-mclaughlin/3330_10#post_1175768"]   [QUOTE name="nevets88" url="/t/45853/the-dan-plan-10-000-hours-to-become-a-pro-golfer-dan-mclaughlin/3312#post_1175743"] The media folks who are writing most of the articles don't know golf, let alone deliberate practice, which is a term that can be interpreted so many ways.  [/QUOTE] Very true. Question is though, you're thinking of doing your own 'Dan Plan' - learn to be a pro golfer from zero experience........ in fact a pro anything from zero experience. You read the blog. What have you leaned? [/QUOTE] Don't even think of starting, but that's just me. :-P

Lol But where's the fun in that? I've actually learned a lot from The Dan Plan. Not necessarily how to go about it but I've learned about a few of the potential pit falls. Pretty much all of them actually .........

[RandallT]

In fact here's a challenge - I challenge anyone to find anything in The Dan Plan posted in say the last 2 years that tells you anything at all about how to get better at golf or how Dan has gone about doing so. Practice routine, technique, drill, practice programme, fitness regime, any ball flight data....... anything at all. Could be wrong but I think you'll come up short.

Oooh, a challenge. 2 years, huh? I'll be right back....

Well, I took a look and got distracted by a new post. My synopsis:

He's went down to SoCal. He couldn't "clear his hips and drop the club into the slot for his draw swing," but he was able to do his "armsie fade swing."  Although I'm still not clear if that's something professionals teach- two different swings for draw and fade.  He learned a lot about his golfing buddy, because golf allows us to do that when we play together. He finished 14 holes before his back started hurting again. No score reported, but he did report that courses are different in SoCal than in Portland (fewer trees, more undulation). He's home now, and feeling better because his back is allowing more golf than just a few weeks ago.

Ok, you're right. I came up short with that recent blog post, but I'm sure I'll sure I'll have better luck next time.

[Nosevi]

[QUOTE name="Nosevi" url="/t/45853/the-dan-plan-10-000-hours-to-become-a-pro-golfer-dan-mclaughlin/3300_30#post_1175735"]   [CONTENTEMBED=/t/45853/the-dan-plan-10-000-hours-to-become-a-pro-golfer-dan-mclaughlin/3312#post_1174401 layout=inline] [/CONTENTEMBED] In fact here's a challenge - I challenge anyone to find anything in The Dan Plan posted in say the last 2 years that tells you anything at all about how to get better at golf or how Dan has gone about doing so. Practice routine, technique, drill, practice programme, fitness regime, any ball flight data....... anything at all. Could be wrong but I think you'll come up short. [/QUOTE] Oooh, a challenge. 2 years, huh? I'll be right back.... Well, I took a look and got distracted by a new post. My synopsis: He's went down to SoCal. He couldn't "clear his hips and drop the club into the slot for his draw swing," but he was able to do his "armsie fade swing."  Although I'm still not clear if that's something professionals teach- two different swings for draw and fade.  He learned a lot about his golfing buddy, because golf allows us to do that when we play together. He finished 14 holes before his back started hurting again. No score reported, but he did report that courses are different in SoCal than in Portland (fewer trees, more undulation). He's home now, and feeling better because his back is allowing more golf than just a few weeks ago. Ok, you're right. I came up short with that recent blog post, but I'm sure I'll sure I'll have better luck next time. :-P

:) I'm kind of thinking you won't, there's nothing material in there, just a guy playing golf (or not playing golf right now as the case may be). Could be someone is going to dig up a gem that'll help my chipping technique or perhaps enlighten me on a way to better focus my practice but I'm still betting they don't.