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

[trackster]

It pains me but I am going to have to eat my words from earlier in this thread.  I was a huge fan of "The Dan Plan" and I strongly believed that he was going to get at least a scratch handicap out of this ordeal, but now I am highly doubting this.  He is definitely vanity capping (by at least 7-10 strokes).

I will say that at the start of the plan, his methods were much better.  He had daily video logs, club fittings, and a credible coach.  You could actually see the progress and his handicap seemed to fit with his video swings and golf scores.  However, soon into the program he stopped with the video logs (I'm not sure if he lost the financial capability to do this or he lost interest) and since then I feel like the plan has taken a turn for the worst.  He keeps a periodic blog but it is the words of a defeated man, always trying to see the "bright side" and trying to justify failure.

I strongly believe that no matter how his golf game is at the end, his handicap will read 0.0.  He won't be playing to a 0.0 but I feel like Dan has become a bit of a compulsive liar and the vanity capping is his way of justifying this journey to himself as well as keeping the uninformed interested.

It's a shame that the plan is in this shape over half way through.  Most people who followed him from the beginning could see that he was making incredible strides.  His swing was not that bad.  There is still a long ways to go, but I can't really believe anything he posts anymore due to the blatant vanity capping.

[flopster]

Dan will get better, problem right now is we don't even know where he's at ability wise, he's posting casual rounds that put him at 2.6 but when he plays in an event that will measure himself against other golfers in the same index range he performs very poorly, He put himself in this embarrassing predicament by not playing tournament golf nearly enough for someone who aspires to play tournament golf on the biggest stage, this is a big mistake he has made.

[nevets88]

At the beginning I was piqued and while I was dubious, I gave Dan the benefit of a doubt and thought, ok, the twist on this is that he's kind of melding this deliberate practice 10K hypothesis together with the old some guy dropping out of work and doing golf full time schtick and it's not some plain old just let people follow me vicariously bit so I was positive on the plan. PGA tour, no, but scratch, maybe. But he really didn't post much in terms of the deliberate practice angle on his website. I don't see even one high frame rate video of his swing. Nothing that I haven't seen before on long, short game, putting with regards to learning. He added nothing new to how we learn. All I see is a stopwatch counting down the hours.

Let's say he gets to legitimate scratch or better. We really didn't learn much about how he got there. In an age where it's so easy to record and post data, he took little advantage of this with respect to the learning angle. He has yet to write anything reconciling his recent putting performance and the two months he dedicated to just putting. I see a person who working folks desk and cubicle bound are living vicariously through, who don't care or aren't aware of improving the way we learn, it's just a superficial distraction - can he do it?

[garybbq]

Hey guys, sorry if this is a stupid question but when I search for Dan McLaughlin on GHIN I get 3 results, 2.6,10.4,2.6 and it looks like each has rounds played in May of 2014.

Why is there 3 index's?

Thanks,

[Big C]

Dan will get better, problem right now is we don't even know where he's at ability wise, he's posting casual rounds that put him at 2.6 but when he plays in an event that will measure himself against other golfers in the same index range he performs very poorly, He put himself in this embarrassing predicament by not playing tournament golf nearly enough for someone who aspires to play tournament golf on the biggest stage, this is a big mistake he has made.

I agree with your comment about not playing enough tournament golf. The ability to play your best under pressure filled conditions is the "secret sauce" that separates a PGA pro from the thousands of others who have beautiful swings, but can never break through.

I will take it one step further and say that from this point on, any casual round Dan plays should be deemed a "practice" round. Only tournament rounds should contribute towards his handicap. Sure, his index would likely shoot up by 7-8 strokes immediately, but at least the progress would be real. Right now, claiming a 2.6 makes him basically a laughingstock, which is the worst position somebody in his situation (I imagine he is still looking for support to keep the project going) can be in.

[Lihu]

Nah, in fact I would take the opposite position. You have to be amazingly un-athletic/un-coordinated to do what Dan is doing and NOT become scratch or better.

Agreed, but this is not the opposite position but a shifted one. The issue is that he is not improving that much given the number of hours he spent.

I don't know about that, I don't necessarily think that everyone has the ability to become a scratch or better player even if they dedicated their entire lives to that pursuit. It doesn't necessarily have to do with athletic ability or coordination either. To golf at that level requires a consistency that not even all pro athletes can achieve.

Sure, there are many examples of this. In fact, many of us are that way. (Although, I am new to this sport.)

It pains me but I am going to have to eat my words from earlier in this thread.  I was a huge fan of "The Dan Plan" and I strongly believed that he was going to get at least a scratch handicap out of this ordeal, but now I am highly doubting this.  He is definitely vanity capping (by at least 7-10 strokes).

I will say that at the start of the plan, his methods were much better.  He had daily video logs, club fittings, and a credible coach.  You could actually see the progress and his handicap seemed to fit with his video swings and golf scores.  However, soon into the program he stopped with the video logs (I'm not sure if he lost the financial capability to do this or he lost interest) and since then I feel like the plan has taken a turn for the worst.  He keeps a periodic blog but it is the words of a defeated man, always trying to see the "bright side" and trying to justify failure.

I strongly believe that no matter how his golf game is at the end, his handicap will read 0.0.  He won't be playing to a 0.0 but I feel like Dan has become a bit of a compulsive liar and the vanity capping is his way of justifying this journey to himself as well as keeping the uninformed interested.

It's a shame that the plan is in this shape over half way through.  Most people who followed him from the beginning could see that he was making incredible strides.  His swing was not that bad.  There is still a long ways to go, but I can't really believe anything he posts anymore due to the blatant vanity capping.

Wow, I haven't heard from you for some time, now. Welcome back!.

I agree with everything you are saying, I am going to add that he is probably under some pressure to do these things.

Hey guys, sorry if this is a stupid question but when I search for Dan McLaughlin on GHIN I get 3 results, 2.6,10.4,2.6 and it looks like each has rounds played in May of 2014.

Why is there 3 index's?

Thanks,

I tend to believe the 10.4 handicap index.

[flopster]

Good point about posting only tournament rounds but I think that probably will not happen, Dan will use lack of funds as the reason that is not possible. He will probably go back to playing courses he can score well on and avoid places with challenging greens and fool some of his supporters in believing he's a legitimate 2.4 when in reality he's much closer to 10

[acerimusdux]

It pains me but I am going to have to eat my words from earlier in this thread.  I was a huge fan of "The Dan Plan" and I strongly believed that he was going to get at least a scratch handicap out of this ordeal, but now I am highly doubting this.  He is definitely vanity capping (by at least 7-10 strokes).

I wonder how much of the "vanity capping" is deliberate.  Some of it is just the flaws in the handicap system. We knew from his posted scores and his high anti-cap, that his average score was more like +7. And that's without considering the effects of dealing with tournament pressure, or the possibility that there are inconsistencies in course ratings (maybe some of these courses with a 73 rating set up for tournaments may be more than 5 strokes more difficult for him than the local muni with a 68 rating, for example?).

If he really didn't know how far off he was though, then he should be learning from the experience, and he ought to then be honest about it and post about it.

As for what he can ultimately achieve, I never thought there was a chance he was going to make the PGA tour, and I honestly haven't really seen many posts from many people who did.  I don't know about scratch either. I guess I would have thought he had a shot, and maybe he's not looking like he'll make that either.

But if his goal is simply to become  "a professional golfer", that's still achievable, if he only wants to have a career as a teaching pro. Even there, I think it will take him a couple more years to be good enough to pass the playing ability test (where you have to score within +15 of the course rating over 36 holes). Basically if he could get to where he could shoot 80 in these tournaments, he might have a chance.  The rest is mostly hard work and experience.

[RandallT]

Quote:

Originally Posted by garybbq

Hey guys, sorry if this is a stupid question but when I search for Dan McLaughlin on GHIN I get 3 results, 2.6,10.4,2.6 and it looks like each has rounds played in May of 2014.

Why is there 3 index's?

Thanks,

One is his old GHIN account with Columbia Edgewater. Not sure why it still shows the same scores. One is some other guy with same name, I think. The correct one is the one showing Riverside.

Quote:

Originally Posted by nevets88

At the beginning I was piqued and while I was dubious, I gave Dan the benefit of a doubt and thought, ok, the twist on this is that he's kind of melding this deliberate practice 10K hypothesis together with the old some guy dropping out of work and doing golf full time schtick and it's not some plain old just let people follow me vicariously bit so I was positive on the plan. PGA tour, no, but scratch, maybe. But he really didn't post much in terms of the deliberate practice angle on his website. I don't see even one high frame rate video of his swing. Nothing that I haven't seen before on long, short game, putting with regards to learning. He added nothing new to how we learn. All I see is a stopwatch counting down the hours.

Let's say he gets to legitimate scratch or better. We really didn't learn much about how he got there. In an age where it's so easy to record and post data, he took little advantage of this with respect to the learning angle. He has yet to write anything reconciling his recent putting performance and the two months he dedicated to just putting. I see a person who working folks desk and cubicle bound are living vicariously through, who don't care or aren't aware of improving the way we learn, it's just a superficial distraction - can he do it?

I think this is exactly right. Like many others (and some above), I was intrigued and initially fairly interested in the project. In fact, a google search of TheDanPlan led me here and I started posting on TST. Someone even accused me of being Dan's "PR Man" or something after my first post where I saw that Dan achieved some milestone, as I recall. (our first posts on a new site are always suspect!)

As I've seen how he explains the purpose of his experiment in more depth, it all loses steam. Go to the 7:45 mark of the video below and watch to 9:00ish. He has the chance to talk about how he is learning and what he is learning. But he just says cliches like "human potential is untapped" and "we haven't hit an apex in human society." At least he says that his experiment will not prove or disprove anything, it will simply tell him about his own potential. At 11:00, he says the we don't really know anything about human potential yet and that studies are really only starting in the field, so he feels he should encourage others to try their best to be what they want to be. Seemed like a paradoxical statement. What specifically about the project validates that we should apply ourselves with deliberate practice? What have you really learned and how did you learn it? It goes unanswered and seems like generalized happy talk. At some point you must connect the inspirational talk with real results and real learning techniques.

Like @Shorty says, if he never gets specific about what he's really learned and how he learned it, the general take for those who don't know the details may actually be some vague notion that deliberate practice is wonderful - and that Dan bravely paved the way for us all by demonstrating how diligent practice can help you be who you want to be. Nevermind that the experiment was in truth unsuccessful at its goal, and the practice methods were never revealed (and therefore minimal value in how to go about the idea).

By the way, a reminder of his goal from the web site:

Quote:

During this time, Dan plans to develop his skills through deliberate practice, eventually winning amateur events and obtaining his PGA Tour card through a successful appearance in the PGA Tour’s Qualifying School, or “Q-School”.

Q-School doesn't exist, of course, but I just don't see any avenue to obtaining a PGA card, let alone winning amateur events and competing in any PGA event. I just don't see how he can get to a place where he declares success with his deliberate practice, and it will be harder to talk about "untapped human potential" so optimistically and with a sunny conviction.

[Lihu]

I wonder how much of the "vanity capping" is deliberate.  Some of it is just the flaws in the handicap system. We knew from his posted scores and his high anti-cap, that his average score was more like +7. And that's without considering the effects of dealing with tournament pressure, or the possibility that there are inconsistencies in course ratings (maybe some of these courses with a 73 rating set up for tournaments may be more than 5 strokes more difficult for him than the local muni with a 68 rating, for example?).

If he really didn't know how far off he was though, then he should be learning from the experience, and he ought to then be honest about it and post about it.

As for what he can ultimately achieve, I never thought there was a chance he was going to make the PGA tour, and I honestly haven't really seen many posts from many people who did.  I don't know about scratch either. I guess I would have thought he had a shot, and maybe he's not looking like he'll make that either.

But if his goal is simply to become  "a professional golfer", that's still achievable, if he only wants to have a career as a teaching pro. Even there, I think it will take him a couple more years to be good enough to pass the playing ability test (where you have to score within +15 of the course rating over 36 holes). Basically if he could get to where he could shoot 80 in these tournaments, he might have a chance.  The rest is mostly hard work and experience.

I still don't doubt that he shot 70 on one phenomenal round, but he might selectively find days that he feels good to keep his handicap low. It is always possible that he could shoot 4 holes then decide to post the score. This is a vanity cap. If he didn't even post the proper scores then he's a cheater. The key difference is that the vanity cap "could shoot" the score he is posting, but just not enough times to lower his handicap as much as if he posted them properly.

Part of this is a justification that you "could have shot it", so this must be your potential. For instance, if I put two scores together the wrong way and picked out all the good parts of my rounds my index would be closer to 13, but that's clearly a vanity cap.

The fact is golf has so many variables, that no matter how good your swing and chipping/putting skills anything can happen. Unless you have the ability to put it all together you will not shoot low. This is why low handicappers are significantly different than bogeys. Forgive me, Bill, but @billchao is a clear example of someone with a very decent swing and short game skills, but fails to shoot low. Why? Who knows? When he figures it out he should be able to shoot in the low single digits.

Vanity capping is wrong because it has the wrong mindset, you shoot what you shoot. Nothing else matters.

[billchao]

No problem, @Lihu ! I completely understand that I suck for reasons I absolutely don't understand.

[Lihu]

No problem, @Lihu! I completely understand that I suck for reasons I absolutely don't understand.

I'm sure you'll figure it out, soon. . .

[billchao]

I'm sure you'll figure it out, soon. . .

Thanks for the vote of confidence. I tell myself this all the time ;-)

[nevets88]

Like @Shorty says, if he never gets specific about what he's really learned and how he learned it, the general take for those who don't know the details may actually be some vague notion that deliberate practice is wonderful - and that Dan bravely paved the way for us all by demonstrating how diligent practice can help you be who you want to be. Nevermind that the experiment was in truth unsuccessful at its goal, and the practice methods were never revealed (and therefore minimal value in how to go about the idea).

Now if he did a lot of work with deliberate practice, figured out new ways to change the picture, that sort of thing. That ebook/book, I'd buy. He could post general ideas and techniques - Tweets and YouTube and then expand on those in a book.

I discovered some things on my own or at least things no one told me that I found helpful - like mirror practicing but with two mirrors at the same time - face on and down the line - the different perspective that offers. Videoing extreme moves without a ball and associating and those moves with what I saw on the camera, the importance of taking notes when using a camera, even tips on saving time using a camera. I'd pay for that. Enlighten the masses and earn a living at the same time.

What his book would read right now is, I tried this and this and this and so far it hasn't worked that well yet but I'm hopeful. Heck, I can see that walking along any range on a weekend morning. Free.

[iacas]

Q-School doesn't exist, of course, but I just don't see any avenue to obtaining a PGA card, let alone winning amateur events and competing in any PGA event. I just don't see how he can get to a place where he declares success with his deliberate practice, and it will be harder to talk about "untapped human potential" so optimistically and with a sunny conviction.

http://www.pgatour.com/webcom/tournaments/web-com-tour-qualifying-tournament.html ?

[Lihu]

http://www.pgatour.com/webcom/tournaments/web-com-tour-qualifying-tournament.html ?

Take a look at the leader board, all these guys are scoring in the mid/high 60s up to the T26th place. This is only the Web.com qualifying school, I think only the top ones get the play the PGA tour Q-School and compete against the 125 to 176 place PGA tour players.

I wonder if Dan really thinks he can shave 20+ strokes per round off his current scores just to get on the web.com tour Q-school leader board?

[acerimusdux]

Q-School doesn't exist, of course, but I just don't see any avenue to obtaining a PGA card, let alone winning amateur events and competing in any PGA event. I just don't see how he can get to a place where he declares success with his deliberate practice, and it will be harder to talk about "untapped human potential" so optimistically and with a sunny conviction.

Yeah, but I don't really think it's that important for him to reach his stated goal. Having lofty goals maybe was a motivator, but did anyone really expect him to achieve that?  I thought that part of what made the whole thing interesting in the first place was that it was virtually impossible for him to actually achieve that goal. So I don't think that really matters so much, anymore than it matters that Rocky lost to Apollo Creed.

If he does want to be able to say something about untapped human potential though, I think he needs to be a little more honest with himself about his current level of play, and what he realistically has to do to move forward from there and continue to progress.

[Pretzel]

As to the vanity capping, I would say that he is only partially to blame. My handicap reads 2.6 (I think, haven't looked at it in a bit) but I can guarantee you that it's lower than it should be. I probably should be at around a 4 or so, since I score poorly on courses other than my hole course (haven't played any other courses recently though). It's the one thing I wish I could do better more than anything else, is put together rounds that are just as good anywhere as at my home courses.