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

[nevets88]

 

You mean an appearance he is making to talk about his program?  

And I was merely pointing out that he has had activity since August...  

What he's doing is odd. He's not contributing to his blog, but letting comments post, He's not answering the comments or acknowledging anyone on social media but he's talking to the media. The activity that is out there requires very little effort, one way and just rehashing of old material.

[Pretzel]

https://worldgolfskills.com/the-dan-plan/

I'm pretty sure that's an old page. Dan's website lists him at over 4,000 hours into his plan, not 2,000 like the most recent video there.

[nevets88]

I'm pretty sure that's an old page. Dan's website lists him at over 4,000 hours into his plan, not 2,000 like the most recent video there.

 

https://instagram.com/p/8weh_0jW5c/

 

 

Edited October 13, 2015 by nevets88

[iacas]

I agree that's an old post. The year simply isn't listed, @nevets88.

The video (https://vimeo.com/30326812) is from four years ago.

[Nosevi]

 

What he's doing is odd. He's not contributing to his blog, but letting comments post, He's not answering the comments or acknowledging anyone on social media but he's talking to the media. The activity that is out there requires very little effort, one way and just rehashing of old material.

I think his communication has been aimed at the media rather than individual followers or those interested in the Plan for quite some time. His call but I think I'd do it the other way round - engage with followers on the blog etc first and foremost. We've spoken about it before, I think the media side is a distraction he could do without, he disagrees. 

[nevets88]

I agree that's an old post. The year simply isn't listed, @nevets88.

The video (https://vimeo.com/30326812) is from four years ago.

Maybe you're right. I'm confused. I'm following it not for the golf now, but just as a strange curiosity.

Edited October 13, 2015 by nevets88

[Nosevi]

I'm pretty sure that's an old page. Dan's website lists him at over 4,000 hours into his plan, not 2,000 like the most recent video there.

I think the clock ticks down - he's almost 6,000 hours in. At least I think so.....

 

(sorry for no multi quote, can't seem to go back and do it)

Edited October 13, 2015 by Nosevi

[pumaAttack]

Hate to contradict you there but it is actually - that's what talent means. You can't build talent, you can only realise the talent you have. In my previous life as an air traffic control officer we tested for aptitude (or talent) prior to people being selected. Your brain has to work in a particular way to be able to do the job and most people simply can't do it no matter how much training you put them through. It's a talent ie a natural ability given at birth. 

What's debateable is whether being able to strike a golf ball on a par with the pros is actually a talent. I think it takes a certain level of natural coordination so probably is to a degree.

Sorry, I should have said learned skill.   

[Nosevi]

 

Sorry, I should have said learned skill.   

No probs

I just think you hit the nail on the head - where does talent come into golf played at the highest level? Is it a skill that can be learned or is it a talent? At the end of the day that's what The Dan Plan is all about, isn't it? I mean everyone accepts that other sporting pursuits require talent - I could never be an Olympic sprinter no matter how hard I trained for example - but some feel golf can be mastered through hard work alone. My personal opinion is that there are too many aspects of golf that require talent for the game to be 'mastered' to an elite level without some measure of natural ability. If you possess below average strength, balance and coordination I think you will struggle. The flip side is if you are above average in these areas and 'train smart' I think you can probably go further than many people think.

[Lihu]

No probs

I just think you hit the nail on the head - where does talent come into golf played at the highest level? Is it a skill that can be learned or is it a talent? At the end of the day that's what The Dan Plan is all about, isn't it? I mean everyone accepts that other sporting pursuits require talent - I could never be an Olympic sprinter no matter how hard I trained for example - but some feel golf can be mastered through hard work alone. My personal opinion is that there are too many aspects of golf that require talent for the game to be 'mastered' to an elite level without some measure of natural ability. If you possess below average strength, balance and coordination I think you will struggle. The flip side is if you are above average in these areas and 'train smart' I think you can probably go further than many people think.

The same examples that you give for Olympic sprinters applies somewhat to golf. For example, there are plenty of people who can hit reasonably far, plenty of people who can hit their irons within 30 feet from 180 yards, plenty of people who can make 29 putts per round or better and plenty of people who can chip really well as well.

Put all those skills together into one person and you have a very rare individual. The reason people think golf is so much easier than running a 10 second 100m dash is because many people can do individual parts of what a pro can do. It's tempting to say, "If I only could putt?", or "Once I get my approach shots. . ."

Another thing is the pros are not casting the club to get 105-110 mph swing speeds, they are using a highly optimized and mechanically sound swing to get an average SS of 113mph. Some swing faster and very few swing that much slower.

The average scores for the PGA tour range from 69 to 72 on courses with ratings like 76/150 to 78/150. http://www.pgatour.com/stats/stat.120.html. Web.com averages 68 to 73 on slightly easier courses. http://www.pgatour.com/webcom/stats/stat.108.html.

This is approximately as little as 63 on a standard rated course 72/125 (average course is 72/113). My guess is that the course layouts are so much easier for the pros that they could score even lower on our courses and setups.

[tdiii]

I find it interesting to watch a snippet of that video posted above, apparently 2,000 hours into his journey.  At that point he still looks uncomfortable with his putting stance and stroke.  Having started with months of putting only, under the eye of a top pro, you'd think he'd look athletic and natural while putting.  The fact he doesn't just shows an innate lack of talent for golf. 

 

Edited October 13, 2015 by tdiii

[natureboy]

The average scores for the PGA tour range from 69 to 72 on courses with ratings like 76/150 to 78/150. http://www.pgatour.com/stats/stat.120.html. Web.com averages 68 to 73 on slightly easier courses. http://www.pgatour.com/webcom/stats/stat.108.html.

This is approximately as little as 63 on a standard rated course 72/125 (average course is 72/113). My guess is that the course layouts are so much easier for the pros that they could score even lower on our courses and setups.

I think the PGA course rating you quote could be overstated. I came up with an average of 75 / 140 - still extremely tough. I could see actual tournament setups (non-major) increasing the base course difficulty with an extra point on course rating and 5 on slope. Major setups are probably like 79-80 / 150-155.

The 'field' would probably average about 68 on a 'typical course' of about 6500 yards rated at 72 / 120. 113 Slope is used in the HCP calculation, but it's more of a mathematical construction and actually lower than the average / typical course slope.

This is slightly off topic, but. . .

Hidden Content

 

So without a clarification / confirmation of details on your part, I will say that it looks like you actually practiced more in your early golf than even Dan.

Not sure this is even possible with a full-time job and a family, but if so and you had no prior golf experience your HCP progression was actually a bit behind Dan at his 3,000 hours mark.

He's done better and been more serious than you think.

If you care to respond to my questions then I can show you how you compare.

Edited October 14, 2015 by natureboy

[Nosevi]

I think the PGA course rating you quote could be overstated. I came up with an average of 75 / 140 - still extremely tough. I could see actual tournament setups (non-major) increasing the base course difficulty with an extra point on course rating and 5 on slope. Major setups are probably like 79-80 / 150-155.

The 'field' would probably average about 68 on a 'typical course' of about 6500 yards rated at 72 / 120. 113 Slope is used in the HCP calculation, but it's more of a mathematical construction and actually lower than the average / typical course slope.

Interesting info. From our previous conversations I take it CR 75.0 as an average is calculated? 

Edited October 14, 2015 by Nosevi

[Lihu]

Interesting info. From our previous conversations I take it CR 75.0 as an average is calculated? 

Yes, it's based upon the course distances.

I kind of doubt that the average PGA course would only be 3 strokes over par for a scratch golfer, though? PGA average drive is about 290 yards, while a scratch is 250 yards. That's about a 600 yard difference?

[natureboy]

Interesting info. From our previous conversations I take it CR 75.0 as an average is calculated? 

 

Yes, it's based upon the course distances.

I kind of doubt that the average PGA course would only be 3 strokes over par for a scratch golfer, though? PGA average drive is about 290 yards, while a scratch is 250 yards. That's about a 600 yard difference? <I think that's one of the reasons they are able to 'go low'>

 

That average of 75 is from the Course ratings listed for the Champ tees for the courses on a single year's tour. My reasoning was that the official scorecard is fairly close to what the tour players see. And those numbers are actual as-is ratings by the ratings teams.

To go from a rating of 72.4 to 75.6, Chambers Bay Sand to Navy course adds about 600 yards of total distance. U.S. Open stats said the champ Teal course maxed out at 7,900 yards so that extra 700 yards would give it a rating of about 78.3-79,3 at the same ratio. I don't think they used the maximum distance on each hole each day. Though they did play around with the normal hole pars to effectively lengthen the course while making use of some forward teeing grounds.

I don't think 'average' PGA events alter the champ setups quite so drastically as the majors due to lack of room for many special / new tee boxes. So I think the non-majors are probably within a stroke or two of official championship tee CR and a few slope points. If I add 1.5 strokes to the official champ rating for the sample of courses I get 76 average. The major tracks are generally tougher to start and more 'tricked up' (~ 3 strokes on CR to bring winning score closer to par) with probably about 80 / 152 on average.

Edited October 15, 2015 by natureboy

[Lihu]

That average of 75 is from the Course ratings listed for the Champ tees for the courses on a single year's tour. My reasoning was that the official scorecard is fairly close to what the tour players see. And those numbers are actual as-is ratings by the ratings teams.

To go from a rating of 72.4 to 75.6, Chambers Bay Navy course adds about 600 yards of total distance. U.S. Open stats said the course maxed out at 7,900 yards so that extra 700 yards would give it a rating of about 79,33 at the same ratio. I don't think they used the maximum distance on each hole each day. Though they did play around with the normal hole pars to effectively lengthen the course while making use of some forward teeing grounds.

I don't think 'average' PGA events alter the champ setups quite so drastically as the majors due to lack of room for many special / new tee boxes. So I think the non-majors are probably within a stroke or two of official championship tee CR and a few slope points. If I add 1.5 strokes to the official champ rating for the sample of courses I get 76 average. The major tracks are generally tougher to start and more 'tricked up' (~ 3.5 strokes on CR to bring winning score closer to par) with probably about 80 / 150 on average.

 

According to some books I've read, the courses are harder than 75. I can't fathom a pro struggling to shoot 68 on my home course which is rated 74.8/134 from the gold tees? In fact, I can't imagine the course being that close to a PGA competition course. I've walked many holes at different 3 tournaments, and the courses all look much harder narrower and longer. A few of the holes at the Byron nelson had a 20 to 30 yard wide swaths where you end up in a lateral hazard if you don't hit first cut.

The wide open holes are really long. 528 yard par 4s are not uncommon. Our longest par 4 is 506 yards from the tips and if you fall off the tee box you end up falling into an asphalt pathway. No one actually plays from 506 yards it's more like 504 yards. http://brooksidegc.com/cw-koiner-course-1

[Lihu]

That average of 75 is from the Course ratings listed for the Champ tees for the courses on a single year's tour. My reasoning was that the official scorecard is fairly close to what the tour players see. And those numbers are actual as-is ratings by the ratings teams.

To go from a rating of 72.4 to 75.6, Chambers Bay Navy course adds about 600 yards of total distance. U.S. Open stats said the course maxed out at 7,900 yards so that extra 700 yards would give it a rating of about 79,33 at the same ratio. I don't think they used the maximum distance on each hole each day. Though they did play around with the normal hole pars to effectively lengthen the course while making use of some forward teeing grounds.

I don't think 'average' PGA events alter the champ setups quite so drastically as the majors due to lack of room for many special / new tee boxes. So I think the non-majors are probably within a stroke or two of official championship tee CR and a few slope points. If I add 1.5 strokes to the official champ rating for the sample of courses I get 76 average. The major tracks are generally tougher to start and more 'tricked up' (~ 3.5 strokes on CR to bring winning score closer to par) with probably about 80 / 150 on average.

 

According to some books I've read, the courses are harder than 75. I can't fathom a pro struggling to shoot 68 on my home course which is rated 74.8/134 from the gold tees? In fact, I can't imagine the course being that close to a PGA competition course. I've walked many holes at different 3 tournaments, and the courses all look much harder narrower and longer. A few of the holes at the Byron nelson had a 20 to 30 yard wide swaths where you end up in a lateral hazard if you don't hit first cut.

The wide open holes are really long. 528 yard par 4s are not uncommon. Our longest par 4 is 506 yards from the tips and if you fall off the tee box you end up falling into an asphalt pathway. No one actually plays from 506 yards it's more like 504 yards. http://brooksidegc.com/cw-koiner-course-1

[WillM]

 

According to some books I've read, the courses are harder than 75. I can't fathom a pro struggling to shoot 68 on my home course which is rated 74.8/134 from the gold tees? In fact, I can't imagine the course being that close to a PGA competition course. I've walked many holes at different 3 tournaments, and the courses all look much harder narrower and longer. A few of the holes at the Byron nelson had a 20 to 30 yard wide swaths where you end up in a lateral hazard if you don't hit first cut.

The wide open holes are really long. 528 yard par 4s are not uncommon. Our longest par 4 is 506 yards from the tips and if you fall off the tee box you end up falling into an asphalt pathway. No one actually plays from 506 yards it's more like 504 yards. http://brooksidegc.com/cw-koiner-course-1

I am attending and playing for Occidental College and have played the Koiner Course a few times... they actually held the LA Open there back in the 60s. I know it is a different era but I think the winning score was something like -12. So comparing that to the scores today I would say the course is middle of the pack in terms of difficulty. Also, keep in mind that for PGA events the course is beefed up for the tourney. A place like Colonial or Pebble Beach would not normally play as hard or narrow - as you say - with thin, wispy rough and greens that aren't rolling quite as fast.

I assume the 506 yard par 4 is #12 you are talking about? That hole is a MFer. I typically hit Driver-hybrid on that hole and am very happy with a par. I am actually close to tour average in distances so there would definitely be some holes that would be difficult for the average tour pro... just maybe not Rory or JDay. Yet somehow they don't win every week... odd