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

[RandallT]

I began to doubt whether or not Dan was "generally happy" about the round at PB, as I had written to start this diversion. Just found this tweet, and one doesn't hashtag #happy unless you're generally pleased with your performance, right?  With that, I'll stand by that assessment.

If you want to read his later blog entry after time to digest the experience:

http://thedanplan.com/the-most-amazing-week-continued-and-finalized/

He's less rosy then, but he doesn't say it was a bad round or anything. It's mainly matter of fact and plays up the difficult aspects of PB- implying that he did his best against a tough layout.

[Lihu]

Aimpoint was what I got out of the post. . .

[MrFlipper]

To Mr. Flipper, Dan shot 2 strokes better than you. Could't that potentially make the difference between a good day and a horrible one? Plus, you might just hate yourself in general? Dan's obviously the half full glass type.

1) Nope, not nearly, especially back then. Anything in the 80's would have been a huge disappointment. 85 that much worse. Happiness back then? 78 or better at Pebble.

2) Haha yes, especially after 85 at Pebble. But consider that I feel pressure when I play a famous course to do well. After all, I may never get back. My last trip to Pebble/Spyglass/Spanish Bay was 30 years ago. I got to go twice. I will probably not be going back ever. Part of golf, to me, is how you shoot when its important to score well. To have wasted a round at Pebble by shooting 85 irks me to this day.

Not necessarily. This is a Pacific NW frame of mind. You have to remember that unlike in other parts of the nation, we don't get too excited about things up here. We're a pretty optimistic bunch despite the Grunge movement. One must also factor in that he never played Pebble Beach before, and it's a very tough course.

But he wants to be pro level. And the first time I played Pebble, it looked very familiar and I knew where I was going. I'd watched it on TV forever. Yeah it's tough, but you still hit the same shots there that you do anywhere else. Playing a tough course you haven't seen before isn't that big a deal to a decent player, although I've haven't been a decent player for a long, long time

From what I understand, Pebble beach is a pretty difficult course for reasons other than just length which is why it's got a 74.7/143 CR. If you shot a 79 the first time you played there, I'm pretty sure you wouldn't be beating yourself up. The US Open yardage is only 200 yards longer than the blues. Betting the greens were running 12+, so putting and sticking greens is probably pretty hard. . .

Maybe, but I doubt it. Worse, my best golf buddy growing up shot 77 there as a teenager his only time and I didn't come close to that. I didn't find the greens that fast (at least from below the hole), just there is a lot of slope and a lot of grain. Greens are small but if you hit good shots you will do okay. Hit bad shots, you will do much worse. I had no excuse for scoring that poorly there. Just crappy golf at a bad time.

Sticking greens not so much, at least for me, since I have enough height and spin on my shots that I can hold firm and fast greens without issue. Putting only if you aren't used to playing on greens of that speed, then it takes a bit of adjustment. I personally putt better when the greens are faster, and my putts per round start to go up when the stimp measurement drops below 10 or 11, so I don't see that as something that would affect me too much.

I will concede that the course is likely difficult in other ways, but I would still be peeved if I shot above a 75 or 76. That would be me shooting the course rating plus my handicap at the course. The unfamiliar course thing doesn't phase me simply because I'm used to playing 12 different courses in two months in tournaments, so I've gotten good at mapping out strategies to follow at unfamiliar courses that allow me to play to my strengths and avoid exposing my weaknesses. I could be different than most in this regard.

I still contend that an 83 is on the high end of what a 5 handicap player should expect to shoot. Dan, on March 1 before the round at Pebble Beach, was listed as a handicap of 3.6. This would give him a course handicap, based on the slope, of 5. That means an expected score for Dan would be 79.7 strokes, or about an 80. This is reasonable, but you don't "play well" then shoot 3 strokes above what you would be expected to shoot 50% of the time on the course.

I guess my main problem here is that he had far too much optimism for playing what was admittedly a sub-standard round. If he truly played well in that round, with a differential of ~8.3, I don't see how that could lead to him coming close to a 3.6 handicap. It aligns with my theory that he was an 8-10 handicap player since he said he played well shooting in the low 80's, which is how I felt when I was about a 10 handicap.

Concur with your posts in this thread. Yes its a tough course, but you still expect to shoot your number. And it sounds like you haven't played there yet. You are still young. You gotta go to Monterey sometime, Scotland too. It's a pilgrimage you gotta make while you still are playing well. Maybe when you get out of college?!

[newtogolf]

Sticking greens not so much, at least for me, since I have enough height and spin on my shots that I can hold firm and fast greens without issue. Putting only if you aren't used to playing on greens of that speed, then it takes a bit of adjustment. I personally putt better when the greens are faster, and my putts per round start to go up when the stimp measurement drops below 10 or 11, so I don't see that as something that would affect me too much.

I will concede that the course is likely difficult in other ways, but I would still be peeved if I shot above a 75 or 76. That would be me shooting the course rating plus my handicap at the course. The unfamiliar course thing doesn't phase me simply because I'm used to playing 12 different courses in two months in tournaments, so I've gotten good at mapping out strategies to follow at unfamiliar courses that allow me to play to my strengths and avoid exposing my weaknesses. I could be different than most in this regard.

I still contend that an 83 is on the high end of what a 5 handicap player should expect to shoot. Dan, on March 1 before the round at Pebble Beach, was listed as a handicap of 3.6. This would give him a course handicap, based on the slope, of 5. That means an expected score for Dan would be 79.7 strokes, or about an 80. This is reasonable, but you don't "play well" then shoot 3 strokes above what you would be expected to shoot 50% of the time on the course.

I guess my main problem here is that he had far too much optimism for playing what was admittedly a sub-standard round. If he truly played well in that round, with a differential of ~8.3, I don't see how that could lead to him coming close to a 3.6 handicap. It aligns with my theory that he was an 8-10 handicap player since he said he played well shooting in the low 80's, which is how I felt when I was about a 10 handicap.

Since he played well you can expect that the differential of 8.3 will be a little lower, or equal to, the average of the best 10 differentials in his last 20. This would give him a handicap of 8.5-8.6 if you assume his average of the best 10 was a differential of 9. This is a 5 stroke difference from his then reported handicap of 3.6. This leaves us with two likely truths:

1) Dan sucks at playing anywhere but his home course and lacks planning skills required to play varying courses well.

2) Dan is lying about his handicap in order to make it better fit his plan.

Dan is under financial pressure to say that his plan is succeeding, since nobody will contribute to what appears to be a lost cause, so I would tend to say that the latter is a more likely outcome. You can't lie about your scores when you're on television, but it's remarkably easy to do when you're alone entering the score from your round you played as a single - especially when your financial success potentially depends on it.

I agree, a 5 handicapper who has aspirations of turning pro should not be content with an 83.

I also agree his reported handicap was/is not an actual reflection of his scoring potential.  I won't call him a vanity capper but I will say his handicap might be higher if he didn't predominantly play his home course in establishing it, which did help him to show the progress he needed to stay near to plan.

[MrFlipper]

I agree, a 5 handicapper who has aspirations of turning pro should not be content with an 83.

I also agree his reported handicap was/is not an actual reflection of his scoring potential.  I won't call him a vanity capper but I will say his handicap might be higher if he didn't predominantly play his home course in establishing it, which did help him to show the progress he needed to stay near to plan.

That's okay, I'll say it. He's a vanity handicapper, big time

[Lihu]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lihu

To Mr. Flipper, Dan shot 2 strokes better than you. Could't that potentially make the difference between a good day and a horrible one? Plus, you might just hate yourself in general? Dan's obviously the half full glass type.

1) Nope, not nearly, especially back then. Anything in the 80's would have been a huge disappointment. 85 that much worse. Happiness back then? 78 or better at Pebble.

2) Haha yes, especially after 85 at Pebble. But consider that I feel pressure when I play a famous course to do well. After all, I may never get back. My last trip to Pebble/Spyglass/Spanish Bay was 30 years ago. I got to go twice. I will probably not be going back ever. Part of golf, to me, is how you shoot when its important to score well. To have wasted a round at Pebble by shooting 85 irks me to this day.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lihu

From what I understand, Pebble beach is a pretty difficult course for reasons other than just length which is why it's got a 74.7/143 CR. If you shot a 79 the first time you played there, I'm pretty sure you wouldn't be beating yourself up. The US Open yardage is only 200 yards longer than the blues. Betting the greens were running 12+, so putting and sticking greens is probably pretty hard. . .

Maybe, but I doubt it. Worse, my best golf buddy growing up shot 77 there as a teenager his only time and I didn't come close to that. I didn't find the greens that fast (at least from below the hole), just there is a lot of slope and a lot of grain. Greens are small but if you hit good shots you will do okay. Hit bad shots, you will do much worse. I had no excuse for scoring that poorly there. Just crappy golf at a bad time.

Isn't shooting 78 at Pebble only 3.6 above the CR? That would give you a pretty solid 3.3 differential?

According to one handicap calculator shooting an 82 74.7/146 is a 5 handicap level of play. So, it looks like he shot to a 6 that day. Not a big time vanity cap according to that calculator anyway. . .

[MrFlipper]

Isn't shooting 78 at Pebble only 3.6 above the CR? That would give you a pretty solid 3.3 differential?

According to one handicap calculator shooting an 82 74.7/146 is a 5 handicap level of play. So, it looks like he shot to a 6 that day. Not a big time vanity cap according to that calculator anyway. . .

1) Yeah. I expected to play well.  I usually had a few differentials that low or lower in my handicap back then. One over for every three holes has always been a quick and dirty benchmark for me, regardless of course toughness. And nobody goes to Pebble expecting to suck.

2) As to the vanity handicap comment, I submit that fits pretty well with what he shot away from home and in tournaments vs. his published handicap. When I was a 4 handicapper I would have paid his cab fare to come play me even up (haha old old golf joke).

[Lihu]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lihu

Isn't shooting 78 at Pebble only 3.6 above the CR? That would give you a pretty solid 3.3 differential?

According to one handicap calculator shooting an 82 74.7/146 is a 5 handicap level of play. So, it looks like he shot to a 6 that day. Not a big time vanity cap according to that calculator anyway. . .

1) Yeah. I expected to play well.  I usually had a few differentials that low or lower in my handicap back then. One over for every three holes has always been a quick and dirty benchmark for me, regardless of course toughness. And nobody goes to Pebble expecting to suck.

2) As to the vanity handicap comment, I submit that fits pretty well with what he shot away from home and in tournaments vs. his published handicap. When I was a 4 handicapper I would have paid his cab fare to come play me even up (haha old old golf joke).

According to the calculations you would have taken 2 strokes from him, and according to your expectations you expected to shoot to a 2 or 3 handicap level which would make him a 4 or 5 handicap. . .just saying. . .

[MrFlipper]

Fair point, a decent percentage of golfers are vanity cappers and sand baggers.  In Dan's case I won't question his integrity as much as I do his overall ability to play golf at a 4-5 handicap level given his performance in tournaments and other away courses.

I have some very good golfers in my club, they regularly shoot in the 70's and low 80's at our course but they've been members there for 15 years.  They take caddies with them every round who help find their balls and read their putts.  When they play at away courses without caddies their scores are typically much higher.  The know the nuances of our home course, where it's safe to hit, where it's not.  How the greens roll, etc.

To be a top amateur you have to be able to play any course near par under tournament conditions.  I don't see Dan being able to do either based on his posted scores when he's not playing his home course;

4/2015 - 77

4/2015 - 82

3/2015 - 83

3/2015 - 83

1/2015 - 87

1/2015 - 84

Dan's away scores per Mr Newtogolf.

According to the calculations you would have taken 2 strokes from him, and according to your expectations you expected to shoot to a 2 or 3 handicap level which would make him a 4 or 5 handicap. . .just saying. . .

Those are not the scores of a 3.6 index. Sorry. Those are pretty bad. The memory is a bit hazy, but I doubt I had more than one score over 80 in any last 20 back then. 72 ish course rating, 131 ish slope home course, but we played all over. I'd have taken my chances all day

[Lihu]

Quote:

Originally Posted by newtogolf

Fair point, a decent percentage of golfers are vanity cappers and sand baggers.  In Dan's case I won't question his integrity as much as I do his overall ability to play golf at a 4-5 handicap level given his performance in tournaments and other away courses.

I have some very good golfers in my club, they regularly shoot in the 70's and low 80's at our course but they've been members there for 15 years.  They take caddies with them every round who help find their balls and read their putts.  When they play at away courses without caddies their scores are typically much higher.  The know the nuances of our home course, where it's safe to hit, where it's not.  How the greens roll, etc.

To be a top amateur you have to be able to play any course near par under tournament conditions.  I don't see Dan being able to do either based on his posted scores when he's not playing his home course;

4/2015 - 77

4/2015 - 82

3/2015 - 83

3/2015 - 83

1/2015 - 87

1/2015 - 84

Dan's away scores per Mr Newtogolf.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lihu

According to the calculations you would have taken 2 strokes from him, and according to your expectations you expected to shoot to a 2 or 3 handicap level which would make him a 4 or 5 handicap. . .just saying. . .

Those are not the scores of a 3.6 index. Sorry. Those are pretty bad. The memory is a bit hazy, but I doubt I had more than one score over 80 in any last 20 back then. 72 ish course rating, 131 ish slope home course, but we played all over. I'd have taken my chances all day

It might have been 3.6, but it was on it's way up to his current 5.4. I thought that he mentioned in his blogs that he was getting injuries prior to PB, and that he went because it was a great opportunity for him.

BTW, I am not defending him in any way. Just trying to clarify what he stated as his handicap was not too far off. I'm not a fan of Dan, so I probably shouldn't even be going to this much effort to defend him, but I think he was accurate regarding his handicap.

[tdiii]

I began to doubt whether or not Dan was "generally happy" about the round at PB, as I had written to start this diversion. Just found this tweet, and one doesn't hashtag #happy unless you're generally pleased with your performance, right?  With that, I'll stand by that assessment.

If you want to read his later blog entry after time to digest the experience:

http://thedanplan.com/the-most-amazing-week-continued-and-finalized/

He's less rosy then, but he doesn't say it was a bad round or anything. It's mainly matter of fact and plays up the difficult aspects of PB- implying that he did his best against a tough layout.

It is kind of funny to read the blog post with a critical eye.  In a way, I wonder if this was the turning point for him -- the realization that "Oh crap, I have no prayer" from seeing real pros from inside the ropes.

For example, his description of 6, which gets stretched to about 520 in tournament conditions: "The 6th is a par five where you tee shot is sent about 80 feet downhill and then the approach shot is the same distance above your head and completely blind to where you need to hit it.  The tee shot is easy enough being pretty wide open as most holes are out there, just don’t send it in the ocean and you are gold.  Tim and I both hit down the left side thinking the bunkers were out of play due to hitting into the wind, but mine landed about 3 feet short of the bunkers and his bounced in.  From there I tried to hit a 5-iron up the huge hill not really knowing what to aim for but it didn’t climb enough to get up and ended up in the deep rough 90 percent to the top.  I hit a 9-iron from there, but again didn’t know what my target line was and ended up pulling it into the green side bunkers.  I hit the stick on my bunker shot and it landed just a couple feet from the pin, made the putt and walked off with par."

It is 270 yards from the back tees to the front edge of the first bunker on the left, which Dan was short of on a 80' downhill par 5.  Pebble plays very fast for tour events, so he would have had a lot of run out.

At that point, he has 250 yards, uphill and into the wind.  He hits his 5 iron "90 percent" there to the top of the hill -- I'd call 10% a huge miss short but maybe that was literary license.  In any event he hits a 5 iron and a 9 iron.  Assuming it really is blowing hard and is significantly uphill, a 160 yard 5 iron is feasible, but not for any pro I've ever heard of.  That then means he hit 9 iron 90 yards?

His descriptionof 18 similarly shows a complete lack of game:  "And then there was the iconic 18th.  I was so happy that we didn’t start on this hole as I wanted to be warmed up and in it by the time we hit the 18th.  Such an amazing golf hole.  Being a lefty with a tendency to draw the ball on this box with nothing but water out to the left was a bit intimidating, but it also forced one to make a good swing.  I cut the ball along the fairway with the ultimate goal of hitting to the tree that’s 280 yards from the box.  Ended up nicely just through the fairway in the first cut of rough. . .I don’t have a 3-wood with me right now and the thought of going for it with a hybrid didn’t sound too tempting so I laid up with an 8-iron to a good number: 120 yards.  I had a good club in my hand and a great number in front of me. I wanted to stick it close, but honestly was looking around too much and in the moment just didn’t focus well and pushed the shot to the left side rough about 2 feet off the green.  It was disappointing as I REALLY wanted to birdie this hole, but it was what it was.  I chipped up to about 4 feet and thought I hit a great putt but it broke the exact opposite way which it seemed like it would and lipped out.  Had to settle with a bogey."

He doesn't give out his yardage, but we can read between the lines that he did not reach the tree that is 280 yards out -- a tree that every tour player can reach.  And then he says that he laid up to a "good number" with his 8 iron, 120 yards.  I've not heard of any really good player who picks 120 as the lay up number (they may end up with it but they would not choose that as their number).  So, either he's ignorant or he's trying to polish a turd.

And it goes on and on like that.

My theory is that he's going underground for a few months to see if he can make any real progress.

[nevets88]

Next plan needs an auditor.

My theory is that he's going underground for a few months to see if he can make any real progress.

If that's true, talk about being cagey.

[Lihu]

[QUOTE name="RandallT" url="/t/45853/the-dan-plan-10-000-hours-to-become-a-pro-golfer-dan-mclaughlin/3600#post_1205390"]   [URL=http://thesandtrap.com/content/type/61/id/132722/] [/URL] I began to doubt whether or not Dan was "generally happy" about the round at PB, as I had written to start this diversion. Just found this tweet, and one doesn't hashtag #happy unless you're generally pleased with your performance, right?  With that, I'll stand by that assessment. If you want to read his later blog entry after time to digest the experience: [URL=http://thedanplan.com/the-most-amazing-week-continued-and-finalized/]http://thedanplan.com/the-most-amazing-week-continued-and-finalized/[/URL] He's less rosy then, but he doesn't say it was a bad round or anything. It's mainly matter of fact and plays up the difficult aspects of PB- implying that he did his best against a tough layout.  [/QUOTE] It is kind of funny to read the blog post with a critical eye.  In a way, I wonder if this was the turning point for him -- the realization that "Oh crap, I have no prayer" from seeing real pros from inside the ropes. For example, his description of 6, which gets stretched to about 520 in tournament conditions: "The 6th is a par five where you tee shot is sent about 80 feet downhill and then the approach shot is the same distance above your head and completely blind to where you need to hit it.  The tee shot is easy enough being pretty wide open as most holes are out there, just don’t send it in the ocean and you are gold.  Tim and I both hit down the left side thinking the bunkers were out of play due to hitting into the wind, but mine landed about 3 feet short of the bunkers and his bounced in.  From there I tried to hit a 5-iron up the huge hill not really knowing what to aim for but it didn’t climb enough to get up and ended up in the deep rough 90 percent to the top.  I hit a 9-iron from there, but again didn’t know what my target line was and ended up pulling it into the green side bunkers.  I hit the stick on my bunker shot and it landed just a couple feet from the pin, made the putt and walked off with par." It is 270 yards from the back tees to the front edge of the first bunker on the left, which Dan was short of on a 80' downhill par 5.  Pebble plays very fast for tour events, so he would have had a lot of run out.  At that point, he has 250 yards, uphill and into the wind.  He hits his 5 iron "90 percent" there to the top of the hill -- I'd call 10% a huge miss short but maybe that was literary license.  In any event he hits a 5 iron and a 9 iron.  Assuming it really is blowing hard and is significantly uphill, a 160 yard 5 iron is feasible, but not for any pro I've ever heard of.  That then means he hit 9 iron 90 yards?  His descriptionof 18 similarly shows a complete lack of game:  "And then there was the iconic 18th.  I was so happy that we didn’t start on this hole as I wanted to be warmed up and in it by the time we hit the 18th.  Such an amazing golf hole.  Being a lefty with a tendency to draw the ball on this box with nothing but water out to the left was a bit intimidating, but it also forced one to make a good swing.  I cut the ball along the fairway with the ultimate goal of hitting to the tree that’s 280 yards from the box.  Ended up nicely just through the fairway in the first cut of rough. . .I don’t have a 3-wood with me right now and the thought of going for it with a hybrid didn’t sound too tempting so I laid up with an 8-iron to a good number: 120 yards.  I had a good club in my hand and a great number in front of me. I wanted to stick it close, but honestly was looking around too much and in the moment just didn’t focus well and pushed the shot to the left side rough about 2 feet off the green.  It was disappointing as I REALLY wanted to birdie this hole, but it was what it was.  I chipped up to about 4 feet and thought I hit a great putt but it broke the exact opposite way which it seemed like it would and lipped out.  Had to settle with a bogey." He doesn't give out his yardage, but we can read between the lines that he did not reach the tree that is 280 yards out -- a tree that every tour player can reach.  And then he says that he laid up to a "good number" with his 8 iron, 120 yards.  I've not heard of any really good player who picks 120 as the lay up number (they may end up with it but they would not choose that as their number).  So, either he's ignorant or he's trying to polish a turd. And it goes on and on like that.  My theory is that he's going underground for a few months to see if he can make any real progress.

Good call on the Par 5 shots. I had a similar length and setup hole on a semi-private course recently and hit driver, shanked a 6i 100-ish yards, hit a 7i onto the front fringe and made my par. I'm an 11, and I would expect a 5HC to be able to hit a hybrid or 3W to the green from my tee shot. 520 yards is reachable in 2 or a pitch/chip 3rd by most 5 handicaps. I agree with your theory that he's going "underground" to see if he can get more distance without injury.

[Pretzel]

Good call on the Par 5 shots. I had a similar length and setup hole on a semi-private course recently and hit driver, shanked a 6i 100-ish yards, hit a 7i onto the front fringe and made my par. I'm an 11, and I would expect a 5HC to be able to hit a hybrid or 3W to the green from my tee shot. 520 yards is reachable in 2 or a pitch/chip 3rd by most 5 handicaps. I agree with your theory that he's going "underground" to see if he can get more distance without injury.

It would set up nicely for his "triumphant" return from injury if he came back playing better than ever, abs I would agree that his injury seems fishy (who doesn't go to a medical practitioner for something supposedly that serious?). If he can't do anything without being in the spotlight for a while, it also makes for a convenient escape plan.

[Nosevi]

Next plan needs an auditor

Good idea. Someone on here who guys know would be a good idea. Someone who can decide how success should be measured and set or agree targets and assessment criterior etc.

[nevets88]

I have no idea what he's doing and won't speculate, but leaving your blog followers w/no updates, in a lurch, what do you call this, socially disappearing? It's not nice to your followers.

[tdiii]

I have no idea what he's doing and won't speculate, but leaving your blog followers w/no updates, in a lurch, what do you call this, socially disappearing? It's not nice to your followers.

Particularly those who donated to the cause.  FYI, I did not.

[Nosevi]

I have no idea what he's doing and won't speculate, but leaving your blog followers w/no updates, in a lurch, what do you call this, socially disappearing? It's not nice to your followers.

Some have said as much on his blog. I think he hurt his back pretty badly and can't play. I think that because that's what he says happened and unless I have reason not to believe someone I generally give them the benefit of the doubt. The reason why could be to do with his swing and/or lack of conditioning or could just be bad luck. Injuries happen in sport all the time. I played Rugby for 30 years, not sure I recall a season without some form of injury. In fact I'm not sure I recall a match without some form of injury, you just get used to ignoring them and getting on with it. Obviously Rugby's a different sport and adrenalin can mask the odd 'niggle' but in golf your performance will be effected far more easily. I think the likelihood is he's hurt his back. People that know him and are at his club must read the blog now and then. If they were reading that he couldn't play then seeing him out each day on the course eventually someone would call him out for it.