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

[David in FL]

My anti-hcp is 9.2. For a 3.3 to have an anti of 11.1 is borderline unbelievable. As handicap drops, the dispersion between high and low scores tends to tighten up. For everyone except Dan..... Time for him to start playing some tournaments where the scores are a matter of record.

[Golfingdad]

My anti-hcp is 9.2. For a 3.3 to have an anti of 11.1 is borderline unbelievable.

As handicap drops, the dispersion between high and low scores tends to tighten up. For everyone except Dan.....

Time for him to start playing some tournaments where the scores are a matter of record.

I went an calculated mine again ... 12.2 right now, to go along with a 7.9 regular cap.  And I would consider myself an "up and down" type of player, so I'd guess the 4.3 difference to be on the higher-than-average side of things.  His is nearly double that, and to top it off, he's now a 3.3?

I would agree ... borderline unbelievable.

[cipher]

My anti-hcp is 9.2. For a 3.3 to have an anti of 11.1 is borderline unbelievable.

As handicap drops, the dispersion between high and low scores tends to tighten up. For everyone except Dan.....

Time for him to start playing some tournaments where the scores are a matter of record.

Yeah mine is 8.3 which I feel is high for a 3.8 index, but as I am right now, I spend each spring trying to find my game again after roughly 5 months off.  Dan at 11.1 and 3.3 is pretty...unbelievable.

[Abu3baid]

Are you guys discussing his HC of 20 games vs. his HC of the best 10 games and the deviation between them?

[nevets88]

I just posted about Mardy Fish. Granted he's a professional tennis player, but I think he and Dan have been playing about the same amount of time. Fish shot a 73 on a US Open local qualifying course. If Dan did that, I think that would be more "on track" to his goal. I want to see how Dan would do in the US Open qualifying.

[David in FL]

Are you guys discussing his HC of 20 games vs. his HC of the best 10 games and the deviation between them?

Neither.  His index as calculated from his best 10 vs his "anti-index" as calculated off his worst 10.

The better the player, the more consistent they tend to be.  Comparing the 10 best scores to the 10 worst is a good way to gauge that consistency.  A difference of almost 8 strokes for a 3.3 hcp is a huge variance.

[Abu3baid]

Neither.  His index as calculated from his best 10 vs his "anti-index" as calculated off his worst 10.

The better the player, the more consistent they tend to be.  Comparing the 10 best scores to the 10 worst is a good way to gauge that consistency.  A difference of almost 8 strokes for a 3.3 hcp is a huge variance.

What is an acceptable variance in your opinion.. unless there is a widely accepted number.. i.e. 3-5 strokes for example?

[David in FL]

What is an acceptable variance in your opinion.. unless there is a widely accepted number.. i.e. 3-5 strokes for example?

No "widely accepted" number, but most single digit players are going to be somewhere in that 3-5 stroke range.  It'll vary a little, just as your index does, but again, better players tend to be more consistent in their scoring than mid-high hcp players.

Here's a good article on it from Dean Knuth.....

http://www.popeofslope.com/guidelines/anti.html

Edited to add that Dean says that in order for someone to be considered "steady", their anti-hcp should be under 5......

[Lihu]

No "widely accepted" number, but most single digit players are going to be somewhere in that 3-5 stroke range.  It'll vary a little, just as your index does, but again, better players tend to be more consistent in their scoring than mid-high hcp players. Here's a good article on it from Dean Knuth..... [URL=http://www.popeofslope.com/guidelines/anti.html]http://www.popeofslope.com/guidelines/anti.html[/URL] Edited to add that Dean says that in order for someone to be considered "steady", their anti-hcp should be under 5......

Very interesting article. My son is a 12 and I am a "17", but I beat him half the time. His anti-handicap is much higher than mine. The kid nearly breaks 40s a couple weeks, then barely scrapes out 48s the next couple weeks. He depends too much upon birdies to score low, while birdies are really rare for me. Some of that might be the ability to contain emotions as well. I had been pretty decent at competitive archery because of my ability to take pressure, and it took 3 years to translate that to golf. This is the main reason why I think golf takes so long to get mediocre and longer to get good.

[GolfLug]

Not sure this would apply but eg. Phil Mickleson shot 75, 63 resp. two consecutive days last week same course. I realize HC variance comes from a larger statistical data group. But still this a top professional. HC/anti-HC difference of 8-9 for an amateur not so huge IMHO.

[Maddog10]

This made me curious so I calculated my ant-hdcp. I'm a 2.6 and my anti is 6.6. I feel that I am fairly consistent but I know of some great golfers that would have less than stellar anti-hdcps just because their bad days are bad. For a 3.3 to have an anti of over 11 seems pretty high though.

[Jeremie Boop]

I haven't looked at the stats on this guy, but if he's claiming that HC and has that anti-hc it would seem he only does well on courses he really knows well and struggles a lot on other courses. To me, this isn't the mark of a good golfer, just one that plays his "home" courses a lot.

[MacDutch]

In my country, hcp's below 4.5 can only play qualifying rounds on official competitions and tournaments. Is this different inthe US?

[Golfingdad]

This made me curious so I calculated my ant-hdcp. I'm a 2.6 and my anti is 6.6. I feel that I am fairly consistent but I know of some great golfers that would have less than stellar anti-hdcps just because their bad days are bad. For a 3.3 to have an anti of over 11 seems pretty high though.

I mentioned up above that mine is 12.2 for a difference of 4.3, and just for kicks, I also calculated I few others.

A guy I know that is a 0.4 cap has an anti-cap of 3.8.

My brother, who is a 17.8 has an anti-cap of 23.9 ... a high handicapper who is as up-and-down as anybody I know, and the difference is still 1.7 less than Dan's.

The F-I-L actually manages to have a higher differential than Dans (26.6 to 36.6), but that is the level of player where that kind of discrepancy is a little more believable.

[dzclarkcpa]

Fascinating discussion on the anti-cap....and probably very off-topic, but I consider myself to be the worst 9.4 in the world as I am all over the place with my scores. I am also one that scores much better on courses I know, so I was shocked to find that my anti-cap was only 14.7, so maybe I am not the most inconsistent golfer alive with a difference of 5.3.

[Lihu]

I mentioned up above that mine is 12.2 for a difference of 4.3, and just for kicks, I also calculated I few others.

A guy I know that is a 0.4 cap has an anti-cap of 3.8.

My brother, who is a 17.8 has an anti-cap of 23.9 ... a high handicapper who is as up-and-down as anybody I know, and the difference is still 1.7 less than Dan's.

The F-I-L actually manages to have a higher differential than Dans (26.6 to 36.6), but that is the level of player where that kind of discrepancy is a little more believable.

I agree, your brother's anti-handicap is high for a "17", and still almost 2 strokes below Dan. Is your point about Dan might be that he is not a real 3.3 and might be actually a lot higher? If so, to what value would we be able to estimate it?

Fascinating discussion on the anti-cap....and probably very off-topic, but I consider myself to be the worst 9.4 in the world as I am all over the place with my scores. I am also one that scores much better on courses I know, so I was shocked to find that my anti-cap was only 14.7, so maybe I am not the most inconsistent golfer alive with a difference of 5.3.

5 seems normal.

I tried to find a chart that generalizes handicap with anti-handicap, but only found some more generalized ones. Like this one: http://home.roadrunner.com/~donbender/golf2/golfstatistics2.html

If you look carefully at the distributions of Figure 5 the approximately 1 sigma cutoff is right about 2.5 for a "consistent 15" handicap or about 5 strokes from -1 sigma to +1 sigma.

The distribution also grows with higher handicaps.

I wish there was a specific chart detailing it with other statistics as well like GIR variation, FIR variation, etc.

What absolutely amazes me is that everyone I try to fit into these golf statistics does fit, pretty well!

[Maddog10]

I mentioned up above that mine is 12.2 for a difference of 4.3, and just for kicks, I also calculated I few others.

A guy I know that is a 0.4 cap has an anti-cap of 3.8.

My brother, who is a 17.8 has an anti-cap of 23.9 ... a high handicapper who is as up-and-down as anybody I know, and the difference is still 1.7 less than Dan's.

The F-I-L actually manages to have a higher differential than Dans (26.6 to 36.6), but that is the level of player where that kind of discrepancy is a little more believable.

I agree. I'm sure this isn't always the case, but I would expect that it's reasonable to say the lower the handicap, the lower the differential to their anti-hdcp, generally speaking of course. Just as you pointed out, your friend that is a 0.4 only has a relatively small differential whereas your FIL has a large differential. For a 3.3 to have that big of a differential makes me think that he has a few very good days that are really bringing his cap down, but that he doesn't play to that level often. Either that or he doesn't have 20 eligible rounds posted and his handicap is calculated off of less than 10 rounds so that each score carries a greater weighted percentage.

[Shorty]

I mentioned up above that mine is 12.2 for a difference of 4.3, and just for kicks, I also calculated I few others.

A guy I know that is a 0.4 cap has an anti-cap of 3.8.

My brother, who is a 17.8 has an anti-cap of 23.9 ... a high handicapper who is as up-and-down as anybody I know, and the difference is still 1.7 less than Dan's.

The F-I-L actually manages to have a higher differential than Dans (26.6 to 36.6), but that is the level of player where that kind of discrepancy is a little more believable.

I think the thing is that a decent player who frequently scores 85 will certainly have 95 fairly often,but would probably be 90 or 91 a lot of the time.

A 3 marker will NOT have 85 very often. Dan is not a genuine 3.

I  know a lot of plyers with handicaps less than 5 and they may be have a few rounds in the low 80s, but guys off 3 are not shooting in the 80s except in horrendous conditions or on tough courses on a bad day.

And they post every score. Dan just posts the odd one that suits his vanity project.