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

[DrvFrShow]

<snip>

For me, he seems to fall into the category of guys whose low handicap is accounted for by slope. "Oh, I've never broken 80 but my handicap is 4. It's because of course ratings."  If that were true, the pros would be happy to be shooting mid 70s any time they encountered a tough course. Scratch golfers in your country are aiming par, not shooting 79 and walking off happy.

Slope is part of the handicap calculation. <snip>

I've said this before, Shorty. If I want my HC to go up there are these short low slope, low rated courses I can go to and shoot say a 92. Then I can go shoot that same 92 on a course rated three to four strokes higher and with a 15 point slope difference and my HC will go down. Am I playing better golf? No. It's the course ratings. Or I can play from one of  the longer tees and suffer the  same fate on the shorter course. While this looks good on paper, when I play in a tournament which always plays from the shorter tees where I'd get the higher HC, by playing the longer course it kills me going in because instead of playing with a 25 HC I'm playing with a 20 right now.

So Dan may be playing with a 4 on his course but doesn't break 80 very often because of the ratings. It's very possible. It's the way the system works here.

[boogielicious]

I stated long ago in this thread that stating a goal of hitting scratch golf would be a complete and utter waste. Like a why the heck quit your job, start a blog, all in effort to do something hundreds of thousands of people could do. 

This is all about marketing 101. Make the goal splashy. It has to be an attention grabber. He stated many times he wanted sponsors, why the heck would Titleist, TaylorMade or any golf company, heck even a guy who wanted to donate to the cause bother to give him anything if all he was going to do was be a scratch golfer. He needed to make everyone invested in a greater purpose. He was marketing. 

I don't blame him for that. I have worked at start ups and we made splashy headlines. It helped get our 20 person outfit in the New York Times. Marketing does work. He had to make the goal to be a PGA Tour golfer or no one would have paid attention. 

My opinion is that you guys thinks he cares if he fails. I disagree. He loses nothing if he fails. All he did was prove some bogus theory wrong. Maybe he wasted a few years, but it doesn't seem as though he is worried about his career. I sense he knows the day he wants to go back he can. He is a talented photographer, he can probably do weddings until he wants to retire. Really good wedding photographers do pretty well. And if he doesn't make it to the PGA Tour so what, he is just like hundreds of thousands of college golfers, college football players, college soccer players, that had ambitions of playing professionally but didn't make it. So what. If I were him I could easily spin the story that I didn't fail at anything. 

Great post Michael.

[nevets88]

Now this is something inspiring and I can get behind.

You have just won the U.S. Mid-Amateur title (with an albatross in the final, no less). You have earned an exemption into the 2016 Masters, which means you can play and practice at Augusta National as often as you like this winter. But you are also a working stiff in the healthcare industry with two young daughters, who also happens to live in a part of the country where winter practice often involves a snow shovel.

http://www.golfdigest.com/story/us-mid-am-champ-sammy-schmitz-looks-to-fund-his-masters-preparation-through-public-donations?mbid=social_reddit

 

Edited October 20, 2015 by nevets88

[newtogolf]

Now this is something inspiring and I can get behind.

http://www.golfdigest.com/story/us-mid-am-champ-sammy-schmitz-looks-to-fund-his-masters-preparation-through-public-donations?mbid=social_reddit

 

I'm not a big fan of these type of gofundme campaigns.  I wish him the best but if you want people to fund your golf career, create a prospectus and allow people to make an investment that yields them an ROI. 

Charity should be reserved for people who really need it imo. 

[Lihu]

Charity should be reserved for people who really need it imo. 

Like Jason Day when he was a kid? I completely agree.

[Pretzel]

 

So Dan may be playing with a 4 on his course but doesn't break 80 very often because of the ratings. It's very possible. It's the way the system works here.

Except Dan wasn't playing a difficult course. His home course has a rating of 73 from the tips. That means his best 10 rounds should average 77-78 to have a 4 handicap, meaning he would break 80 nearly 50% off the time.

 

It's just handicap manipulation that is bringing Dan's handicap down. Nothing more, nothing less. 

[Nosevi]

Except Dan wasn't playing a difficult course. His home course has a rating of 73 from the tips. That means his best 10 rounds should average 77-78 to have a 4 handicap, meaning he would break 80 nearly 50% off the time.

 

It's just handicap manipulation that is bringing Dan's handicap down. Nothing more, nothing less. 

Sorry for my ignorance of exactly how your system works re slope so not sure if this changes anything - he's not playing it from the tips according to his GHIN. Could that explain it?

 

[DrvFrShow]

Basically the course rating of 71.6 does one thing and the slope rating of 130 does another in the calculation of the handicap giving him a differential. It takes only the 10 best scores out of your past 20 rounds or something like that. So on a course like Dan's it is pretty easy to log a lower handicap because of the slope rating.

So he goes to Pebble Beach which has a higher par rating and slope rating and is thrilled to shoot an 83 because the course is a lot tougher than the one he usually plays.

In reality he's a 5 or 6 handicapper shooting 8 - 10 over par every round because of the slope rating.

[Lihu]

Sorry for my ignorance of exactly how your system works re slope so not sure if this changes anything - he's not playing it from the tips according to his GHIN. Could that explain it?

 

Admittedly, aside from the 74 those look only slightly better than my combined scores from 68.9/124 and 72.9/131 courses, but of course he's better than me by 5 strokes. . .So, you really need to look at the entire package and the handicap scores are normalized to the "standard" course rating.

Based upon the scores he's most likely a 5.4 handicap. Within the CONGU system maybe similar?

[Nosevi]

Admittedly, aside from the 74 those look only slightly better than my combined scores from 68.9/124 and 72.9/131 courses, but of course he's better than me by 5 strokes. . .So, you really need to look at the entire package and the handicap scores are normalized to the "standard" course rating.

Based upon the scores he's most likely a 5.4 handicap. Within the CONGU system maybe similar?

Under Congu we'd only use his tournament scores so if those are representative of his normal tournament scores he'd have a handicap of about 8 or 9 here I'm afraid. Think he may need to practice playing under pressure a little prior to QSchool  

[Lihu]

Under Congu we'd only use his tournament scores so if those are representative of his normal tournament scores he'd have a handicap of about 8 or 9 here I'm afraid. Think he may need to practice playing under pressure a little prior to QSchool  

Tournament or not, most people are pretty competitive even with themselves. As long as ROG are followed, I don't really see a difference. I doubt very much that there is a 3 to 4 stroke difference especially at that low a handicap between the two systems. The serious players with USGA handicaps are probably as good handicap to handicap as those under Congu.

As far as Dan is concerned, if he is only playing that one course with the ample number of doglegs then he might have trouble on the longer courses. The ample number of doglegs at least explain why his handicap is as low as it is for his driving distance? So, his handicap could be 8 or 9, which is kind of reflected in his tournament scores?

[Nosevi]

Tournament or not, most people are pretty competitive even with themselves. As long as ROG are followed, I don't really see a difference. I doubt very much that there is a 3 to 4 stroke difference especially at that low a handicap between the two systems. The serious players with USGA handicaps are probably as good handicap to handicap as those under Congu.

As far as Dan is concerned, if he is only playing that one course with the ample number of doglegs then he might have trouble on the longer courses. The ample number of doglegs at least explain why his handicap is as low as it is for his driving distance? So, his handicap could be 8 or 9, which is kind of reflected in his tournament scores?

Yep, absolutely. I wasn't saying all handicaps would be significantly higher under our system merely that his would be. Some people play better under pressure than others. If you don't score as well in tournaments as you do in social rounds your handicap would be higher over here. If you rise to the challenge and are not adversely affected by the fact you're in a tournament there would be little difference.

It wasn't a comment about the 2 systems, merely that one individual would have a higher handicap here. That's an unavoidable fact - he hasn't played well at the only times our system uses to determine handicap. 

[Lihu]

Yep, absolutely. I wasn't saying all handicaps would be significantly higher under our system merely that his would be. Some people play better under pressure than others. If you don't score as well in tournaments as you do in social rounds your handicap would be higher over here. If you rise to the challenge and are not adversely affected by the fact you're in a tournament there would be little difference.

It wasn't a comment about the 2 systems, merely that one individual would have a higher handicap here. That's an unavoidable fact - he hasn't played well at the only times our system uses to determine handicap. 

Yeah, I kind of thought that's what you meant, but wanted to clarify a bit.

Match play is actually much more pressure than tournaments. When you watch your opponent make a great shot to 5 feet of the pin starting from 20 yards behind you, that puts some pressure on your shot. I know someone that used to play $100 a hole, and just thought "wow". That's serious pressure on every single stroke including the putts. I like this format though, pressure helps me putt a lot better.

[Nosevi]

Yeah, I kind of thought that's what you meant, but wanted to clarify a bit.

Match play is actually much more pressure than tournaments. When you watch your opponent make a great shot to 5 feet of the pin starting from 20 yards behind you, that puts some pressure on your shot. I know someone that used to play $100 a hole, and just thought "wow". That's serious pressure on every single stroke including the putts. I like this format though, pressure helps me putt a lot better.

It's the format I played for my club in competitions against other clubs last summer for exactly that reason - to play under a bit of pressure. Downside is matchplay rounds also don't count under our system (due to 'gimmee's etc) so my handicap didn't change regardless of scores shot. Maybe something Dan could look at in the spring to help him up his performance under pressure.

It's also by far and away my favourite format. My understanding is it's actually how the game was originally played long before the advent of the concept of 'par'.

[Lihu]

It's the format I played for my club in competitions against other clubs last summer for exactly that reason - to play under a bit of pressure. Downside is matchplay rounds also don't count under our system (due to 'gimmee's etc) so my handicap didn't change regardless of scores shot.

Maybe something Dan could look at in the spring to help him up his performance under pressure.

It's also by far and away my favourite format. My understanding is it's actually how the game was originally played long before the advent of the concept of 'par'.

I agree, they're more fun to play. Interesting tidbit of information regarding the original game format.

Dan just needs to get a more confident swing to help him perform under pressure.

[natureboy]

 

I've said this before, Shorty. If I want my HC to go up there are these short low slope, low rated courses I can go to and shoot say a 92. Then I can go shoot that same 92 on a course rated three to four strokes higher and with a 15 point slope difference and my HC will go down. Am I playing better golf? No. It's the course ratings.

I'm not sure I agree with this interpretation. The course rating (in agreement with the strokes gained approach) is largely based on total distance from the tees you play. So your 92 on the longer course (higher course rating) was a superior round vs. the shorter course, because you hit equally good shots from cumulatively further away from the pin.

 

@Nosevi, I agree leverage can be overcome by poor technique, but it's a very significant foundation for putting the ball out there with less impact-precision reducing muscular effort. If you had Rory's technique, I would bet you'd be outdriving him.

 

Edited October 20, 2015 by natureboy

[Lihu]

I'm not sure I agree with this interpretation. The course rating (in agreement with the strokes gained approach) is largely based on total distance from the tees you play. So your 92 on the longer course (higher course rating) was a superior round vs. the shorter course, because you hit equally good shots from cumulatively further away from the pin.

@Nosevi, I agree leverage can be overcome by poor technique, but it's a very significant foundation for putting the ball out there with less impact-precision reducing muscular effort. If you had Rory's technique, I would bet you'd be outdriving him.

Yes, but just as there are very few 6' gymnasts, it would be difficult to get that kind of speed and coordination in a larger frame.

[Pretzel]

Yes, but just as there are very few 6' gymnasts, it would be difficult to get that kind of speed and coordination in a larger frame.

Dustin Johnson says hi! 

Though I would say that larger golfers with great accuracy seem to be less common. A lot of Zach Johnson and Rory McIlroy's out there, in the under 6' camp. Even Tiger is only 6'1" according to Google, though I know Google can exaggerate heights at times.