Jump to content
IGNORED

Is it possible to play off scratch from 30 in 18 months?


Mjrowe1
Note: This thread is 3019 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

Is it possible to go from a 30 to a scratch in 18 months?   

53 members have voted

  1. 1. Is it possible to go from a 30 to a scratch in 18 months?

    • Yes
      12
    • No
      41


Recommended Posts

56 minutes ago, natureboy said:

I'm saying the making a 13 in the time he indicated as being significant progress, yes. He still has to sustain a good rate of diminishing progress (break through plateaus) to realize that possibly high potential.

The kid's initial progress not playing or practicing other than doing tournaments, but I don't know how they rate tee distances for 7 year olds, or did he play from the tips? However, the added 20,000 hours to get to scratch to date would indicate to me that he will not progress much further without some sort of exceptional breakthrough or a further 5,000-10,000 hours of dedicated work. 20,000 hours is a lot for a kid. I hope he hasn't given up a life for golf. Are you sure you're not exaggerating? That level of effort for results would put him behind Dan McLaughlin in physical 'talent' potential as Dan could possibly hit 0 HCP around 15,000 hours on his current track.

He won the tournaments by a margin as if he was a male 13 handicap playing against 7 year old kids. When he played on the male standard tees he could out play more than half the men with handicaps. The kid is now 16 and around +0.5 or something like that. Drives farther than the OP and from what I understand is considered pretty exceptional. I don't really know as I'm not a stats tracker.

All I am trying to state is that getting to a 13 handicap is not really that significant, unless you're 7 years old or something like that. Furthermore, I am stating that this same naturally talented kid needed another 9 years to get to scratch.

BTW, the 20,000 hours the kid put into the game was told to me by his father who is not exactly known to exaggerate. Other parents of strong playing kids told me more or less the same thing 10,000 to 20,000 hours of playing and practicing. So, IDK for sure. So, the reason I asked other parents is to attempt to convince my own kids to practice more. . .my son is about a 6HC (3-4 when he is playing for the team and practicing daily) and has probably practiced/played less than 600 hours since taking up the game 5-6 years ago. My daughter is a 12 HC (female rating) with even less practice.

 

:ping:  :tmade:  :callaway:   :gamegolf:  :titleist:

TM White Smoke Big Fontana; Pro-V1
TM Rac 60 TT WS, MD2 56
Ping i20 irons U-4, CFS300
Callaway XR16 9 degree Fujikura Speeder 565 S
Callaway XR16 3W 15 degree Fujikura Speeder 565 S, X2Hot Pro 20 degrees S

"I'm hitting the woods just great, but I'm having a terrible time getting out of them." ~Harry Toscano

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

I think the answer to the OP's question (and many other similar posts) can be summed up in 4 words - "possible, but not probable."   

  • Upvote 1

RiCK

(Play it again, Sam)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

3 minutes ago, rkim291968 said:

I think the answer to the OP's question (and many other similar posts) can be summed up in 4 words - "possible, but not probable."   

Certainly not in 10 months, anyway. . .

:ping:  :tmade:  :callaway:   :gamegolf:  :titleist:

TM White Smoke Big Fontana; Pro-V1
TM Rac 60 TT WS, MD2 56
Ping i20 irons U-4, CFS300
Callaway XR16 9 degree Fujikura Speeder 565 S
Callaway XR16 3W 15 degree Fujikura Speeder 565 S, X2Hot Pro 20 degrees S

"I'm hitting the woods just great, but I'm having a terrible time getting out of them." ~Harry Toscano

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

19 minutes ago, Lihu said:

He won the tournaments by a margin as if he was a male 13 handicap playing against 7 year old kids. When he played on the male standard tees he could out play more than half the men with handicaps. The kid is not 16 and around +0.5 or something like that. Drives farther than the OP and from what I understand is considered pretty exceptional. I don't really know as I'm not a stats tracker.

All I am trying to state is that getting to a 13 handicap is not really that significant, unless you're 7 years old or something like that. Furthermore, I am stating that this same naturally talented kid needed another 9 years to get to scratch.

BTW, the 20,000 hours the kid put into the game was told to me by his father who is not exactly known to exaggerate. Other parents of strong playing kids told me more or less the same thing 10,000 to 20,000 hours of playing and practicing. So, IDK for sure.

That sounds more like competitive parent bragging (my kid works harder than yours) than reality to me, but maybe not. Like I said though 20,000 hrs to get down to scratch is about on par or worse with Dan Plan progress. If the kid's genuinely exceptional in long-term potential then the hours are an exaggeration, I think.

I personally think one thing the 10,000 hours thing is roughly right about is that realization of long-term potential in a complex task is largely established by around that point give or take a few thou. If I had to bet assuming the hours estimate is roughly accurate, I would expect the kid to make it to college competition and then get passed by less currently accomplished, but higher 'talent quotient' kids who started later. If the kid's made significant recent HCP gains since his growth spurt, or is still waiting to 'fill out', it might change my outlook.

Edited by natureboy

Kevin

Link to comment
Share on other sites


23 minutes ago, natureboy said:

That sounds more like competitive parent bragging (my kid works harder than yours) than reality to me, but maybe not. Like I said though 20,000 hrs to get down to scratch is about on par or worse with Dan Plan progress. If the kid's genuinely exceptional in long-term potential then the hours are an exaggeration, I think. I personally think one thing the 10,000 hours thing is roughly right about is that realization of long-term potential in a complex task is largely established by around that point give or take a few thou. If I had to bet, I would expect the kid to make it to college competition and then get passed by less accomplished, but higher 'talent' quotient kids who started later. If the kid's made significant recent HCP gains since his growth spurt, it might change my outlook.

Neither of the parents are known to brag, in fact, they stated that out of concern that he is not well rounded like other kids (like mine, I guess). However, it did certainly make me feel like my own kids didn't put forth enough effort into the game. :-P

The time the kid spent averages to roughly 5 hours a day, but quite honestly, I think there's a cause and effect issue here that you seem to be ignoring. He probably simply enjoyed playing and practicing the game that much because he is naturally talented at the game? It might have just been for the fun of competing with his friends. Some kids are driven, some aren't. This kid was driven.

Your allusion to Dan is a bit strange. This kid could out score Dan by 13 strokes (or more now) on the same course (Pebble Beach), and we know he can make scratch because he already did so. Dan has not even proven that he can get less than a 5. Dan drives short and wild by comparison, so why even bring him up?

EDIT: Thinking back on it. I think his improvements from 6HC down to scratch happened roughly in the last 2-3 years in high school? So, 6 down to + (fraction thereof) in 3 years during his growth spurt? I can verify with him next time I see him?

What I was originally trying to exemplify is that the effort to get to a 13 is insignificant as compared to getting down to scratch. In fact it was a 10:1 difference in the case of this naturally talented kid I happen to know. . .

:ping:  :tmade:  :callaway:   :gamegolf:  :titleist:

TM White Smoke Big Fontana; Pro-V1
TM Rac 60 TT WS, MD2 56
Ping i20 irons U-4, CFS300
Callaway XR16 9 degree Fujikura Speeder 565 S
Callaway XR16 3W 15 degree Fujikura Speeder 565 S, X2Hot Pro 20 degrees S

"I'm hitting the woods just great, but I'm having a terrible time getting out of them." ~Harry Toscano

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Conversation has taken a strange turn. Only thing I will add that hasn't been said already is IMO golf gets harder the better you get not easier, not talking about improving but actually playing golf. For sure expectations change. It's not that tough to play just better than bogey golf. Happenstance is in your favor and when your most common score is bogey or worse lot's of opportunity to get there.

When you are standing on the 1st tee and you know that you need to make 9 pars or better to have a typical day it's a little different. What you previously thought was acceptable, stuff like just hitting two middling shots towards the green that didn't totally embarrass you are no longer good enough because it means scrambling. And when you do have to scramble it's not the same kind of scrambling you do playing bogey golf, you want to be very close to the green not whacking a third shot from 45 yards out on a par 4.

I imagine that if I trend down next year what gets me by now will be crap golf. Heck it's crap golf now.  

Dave :-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

17 minutes ago, Lihu said:

Neither of the parents are known to brag, in fact, they stated that out of concern that he is not well rounded like other kids (like mine, I guess). However, it did certainly make me feel like my own kids didn't put forth enough effort into the game. :-P

The time the kid spent averages to roughly 5 hours a day, but quite honestly, I think there's a cause and effect issue here that you seem to be ignoring. He probably simply enjoyed playing and practicing the game that much because he is naturally talented at the game? It might have just been for the fun of competing with his friends. Some kids are driven, some aren't.

Your allusion to Dan is a bit strange. This kid could our score Dan by 13 strokes (or more now) on the same course (Pebble Beach), and we know he can make scratch because he already did so. Dan has not even proven that he can get less than a 5. Dan drives short and wild by comparison, so why even bring him up?

What I was originally trying to exemplify is that the effort to get to a 13 is insignificant as compared to getting down to scratch. In fact it was a 10:1 difference in the case of this kid I happen to know. . .

Your POV is a little biased, I think. Probably because you consider Dan's progress to be completely stopped. I don't. I think he is actually on an overall progression track that is steeper than your friend's kid. If the hours are correct (5hrs / day for a kid seems high - but hopefully he just loves the game) that kid has nearly 3x as much accumulated experience / skill building / physical development as Dan. I bring him up because some of your posts seem to indicate that you think Dan has almost not golf ability. I think he has very much average ability.

You are emphasizing the attainment of the HCP goal in your friend's son. I think that is important, but at least equally so (and IMO more so) is how long it took to get there. Rembember the case of Greg Norman. Sure he took longer to get from scratch to pro and then to be a number 1, but he did both very rapidly compared to most - almost singularly fast. But he was a teen and had physically matured. Think of Larry Nelson's timetable. Time to the benchmarks is a significant indicator of innate talent so someone who gets to a benchmark quicker has a potential to grind their way deeper and further than someone who gets there slower. That's my POV anyway.

While I do think the rate is much slower than initial progress and decaying all the time, I don't think the drop from 13 to scratch takes 20,000 hrs if you have much innate talent potential beyond that level. I think the kiddie HCP was probably inflated as only a rough estimate of his potential in the game. I would take more stock in HCP benchmarks from real rated tees or recent HCP benchmarks with the correlated play & practice hours. I might be more optimistic if he is not really physically mature yet.

Edited by natureboy

Kevin

Link to comment
Share on other sites


11 minutes ago, Dave2512 said:

Conversation has taken a strange turn. Only thing I will add that hasn't been said already is IMO golf gets harder the better you get not easier. For sure expectations change. It's not that tough to play just better than bogey golf. Happenstance is in your favor and when your most common score is bogey or worse lot's of opportunity to get there.

When you are standing on the 1st tee and you know that you need to make 9 pars or better to have a typical day it's a little different. What you previously thought was acceptable, stuff like just hitting two middling shots towards the green that didn't totally embarrass you are no longer good enough because it means scrambling. And when you do have to scramble it's not the same kind of scrambling you do playing bogey golf, you want to be very close to the green not whacking a third shot from 45 yards out on a par 4.

I imagine that if I trend down next year what gets me by now will be crap golf. Heck it's crap golf now.  

Agree, only I would say a lot different.

9 minutes ago, natureboy said:

Your POV is a little biased, I think.

The kid shot 4 under at one tournament. I'm not biased. I don't have explicit permission to post his name, otherwise I would.

:ping:  :tmade:  :callaway:   :gamegolf:  :titleist:

TM White Smoke Big Fontana; Pro-V1
TM Rac 60 TT WS, MD2 56
Ping i20 irons U-4, CFS300
Callaway XR16 9 degree Fujikura Speeder 565 S
Callaway XR16 3W 15 degree Fujikura Speeder 565 S, X2Hot Pro 20 degrees S

"I'm hitting the woods just great, but I'm having a terrible time getting out of them." ~Harry Toscano

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

16 minutes ago, Lihu said:

Agree, only I would say a lot different.

The kid shot 4 under at one tournament. I'm not biased. I don't have permission to post his name, otherwise I would.

That's fantastic. Like I said that's his current accomplishment level (which does take both talent and work to achieve). But that could be normal score variability around his HCP. I don't think his established HCP is a big indication of 'exceptional' innate talent if it took him so much accumulated work and practice to get there. It might be different for little kids than for adults like Norman, Nelson, and Dan because they haven't grown much yet. I want to be open minded so I suggest, giving me like 4 tournament scores and tee ratings (or just official amateur handicaps from the past 2 years along with an estimate of accumulated hours for each date and I will tell you if I think his future progress is likely to be very flat (only slightly downward in several years) or much further downward.

I think you are a bit biased in your POV about Dan Plan, but we shouldn't go OT on that and keep it to OP question about HCP progress.

Edited by natureboy

Kevin

Link to comment
Share on other sites


17 minutes ago, natureboy said:

That's fantastic. But like I said that's his current accomplishment level - that could be normal score variability around his HCP. I don't think his established HCP is a big indication of innate talent if it took him so much accumulated work and practice to get there. I want to be open minded so I suggest, giving me like 4 tournament scores and tee ratings (or just official amateur handicaps from the past 2 years along with an estimate of accumulated hours for each date and I will tell you if I think his future progress is likely to be very flat (only slightly downward in several years) or much further downward.

I think you are a bit biased in your POV about Dan M, but we shouldn't go OT on that and keep it to OP question about progress rates.

Enjoyed this interaction, but your experiences and mine are very different.

In my limited experience, golf is really hard and it gets much harder as you get better. It's very much non-linear to me. This is why I responded to the OP in the manner in which I did, and explains my possibly jaded opinions of Dan M.

BTW, I was wrong in a statement I made. In a youtube interview with the kid I referenced, he stated that he started tournaments 5 years ago. Guessing he doesn't count the kiddie tournaments as well? Also, he is currently 2.3 according to the GHIN lookup best was +0.2 and not 0.5.

:ping:  :tmade:  :callaway:   :gamegolf:  :titleist:

TM White Smoke Big Fontana; Pro-V1
TM Rac 60 TT WS, MD2 56
Ping i20 irons U-4, CFS300
Callaway XR16 9 degree Fujikura Speeder 565 S
Callaway XR16 3W 15 degree Fujikura Speeder 565 S, X2Hot Pro 20 degrees S

"I'm hitting the woods just great, but I'm having a terrible time getting out of them." ~Harry Toscano

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

4 minutes ago, Lihu said:

In my limited experience, golf is really hard and it gets much harder as you get better. It's very much non-linear to me.

 

True that for just about every sport.   People can make a quick improvement to certain point in linear fashion and then it gets harder to make the same kind of improvement in the next lag.   We don't know where the OP is in that graph.   Hopefully, he keeps us informed of his progress.   I suggest he opens a blog thread if he does not mind.

RiCK

(Play it again, Sam)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

26 minutes ago, Lihu said:

Enjoyed this interaction, but your experiences and mine are very different.

In my limited experience, golf is really hard and it gets much harder as you get better. It's very much non-linear to me. This is why I responded to the OP in the manner in which I did, and explains my possibly jaded opinions of Dan M.

I know it gets harder the better you get, and progress gets slower. Not arguing against that. Golf is clearly a logarithmic domain activity (http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/17/opinion/david-brooks-learning-is-no-easy-task.html?_r=0) versus academics that is exponential.

My point is that it's less hard for those with more innate talent. Not everyone is on the same curve. Those with more innate or at least 'early learning' talent will tend to progress faster and reach milestones quicker so their upper limit / max potential will tend to be lower. Because their declining improvement curve declines less rapidly over time than someone with less innate talent, they can pass them by improving at a faster rate than that slower improver who had a head start on them. Similarly, I think there are 'plodders' who don't have a super fast improvement rate, but maintain it longer and pass someone who progresses fast but hits a limit. But everyone can hit walls or have physical or motivational setbacks - it all depends. Just saying on average. And it may be very different for kids who can still grow physically and have potential to improve their distance like a sudden skill 'breakthrough'.

Edited by natureboy

Kevin

Link to comment
Share on other sites


I said no not because it's literally impossible, just that I'd say that the only people who can do that are those who have freakish natural talent or for one reason or another naturally start out with a fundamentally really excellent swing, in terms of 5SK fundamentals, regardless of personal swing quirks that don't affect the key fundamentals.  And I'd say the fact that you started out near HC 30 and are "only" down to 13.7 in 8 months means you're not quite that freakishly good.

But, as others have said, that's excellent progress, and if you're putting in enough time to play and practice well, and probably getting lessons from a really good teacher, then it's not impossible you could continue to improve quickly and get down to something like low-mid single digits in another year.

Matt

Mid-Weight Heavy Putter
Cleveland Tour Action 60˚
Cleveland CG15 54˚
Nike Vapor Pro Combo, 4i-GW
Titleist 585h 19˚
Tour Edge Exotics XCG 15˚ 3 Wood
Taylormade R7 Quad 9.5˚

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Honestly as much as talent you need to have the time and means. Golf is not only hard it's expensive, requires expensive equipment and its a lengthy process to improve. 

When I was trending down rapidly I not only spent a lot of time at the course I was crackhead addicted to practice. I had a basement with high ceilings that allowed a full swing with short clubs. I had a net, quality mat and a Birdie Ball 18x8 putting green down there. I spent and hour every morning for a year or more practicing. I had a range pass at a course with two practice greens, one in an area big enough to hit 50 yard pitches and had two bunkers.

I played 9 after work every day weather allowed. Weekends were often full days at the course, range, play then more range. I took lessons, on-line and in person. If I was sitting around watching TV I would go to the basement and putt with that TV on. I was golf poor that year I spent so much time with it. Not sure I could do it again.

Dave :-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

1 minute ago, mdl said:

I said no not because it's literally impossible, just that I'd say that the only people who can do that are those who have freakish natural talent or for one reason or another naturally start out with a fundamentally really excellent swing, in terms of 5SK fundamentals, regardless of personal swing quirks that don't affect the key fundamentals.  And I'd say the fact that you started out near HC 30 and are "only" down to 13.7 in 8 months means you're not quite that freakishly good.

But, as others have said, that's excellent progress, and if you're putting in enough time to play and practice well, and probably getting lessons from a really good teacher, then it's not impossible you could continue to improve quickly and get down to something like low-mid single digits in another year.

Exactly, I was just writing a long post just to cover this and deleted it because this covers it all.

:ping:  :tmade:  :callaway:   :gamegolf:  :titleist:

TM White Smoke Big Fontana; Pro-V1
TM Rac 60 TT WS, MD2 56
Ping i20 irons U-4, CFS300
Callaway XR16 9 degree Fujikura Speeder 565 S
Callaway XR16 3W 15 degree Fujikura Speeder 565 S, X2Hot Pro 20 degrees S

"I'm hitting the woods just great, but I'm having a terrible time getting out of them." ~Harry Toscano

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

27 minutes ago, rkim291968 said:

 

True that for just about every sport.   People can make a quick improvement to certain point in linear fashion and then it gets harder to make the same kind of improvement in the next lag.   We don't know where the OP is in that graph.   Hopefully, he keeps us informed of his progress.   I suggest he opens a blog thread if he does not mind.

We don't have exact numbers, but rough ones. Similar experience to many other posters and players here. Fast nearly linear progress followed by declining returns on HCP improvement with accumulated experience / practice. What shape of graph does that suggest to you in plotting HCP versus time?

Edited by natureboy

Kevin

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Moderator

 

5 minutes ago, Dave2512 said:

Honestly as much as talent you need to have the time and means. Golf is not only hard it's expensive, requires expensive equipment and its a lengthy process to improve. 

When I was trending down rapidly I not only spent a lot of time at the course I was crackhead addicted to practice. I had a basement with high ceilings that allowed a full swing with short clubs. I had a net, quality mat and a Birdie Ball 18x8 putting green down there. I spent and hour every morning for a year or more practicing. I had a range pass at a course with two practice greens, one in an area big enough to hit 50 yard pitches and had two bunkers.

I played 9 after work every day weather allowed. Weekends were often full days at the course, range, play then more range. I took lessons, on-line and in person. If I was sitting around watching TV I would go to the basement and putt with that TV on. I was golf poor that year I spent so much time with it. Not sure I could do it again.

Equipment is expensive, but if you're going to express accelerate your way to scratch, imho, I think tuition/instructor fees is going to make up the bulk of the costs. If you're some freak of nature who can get there without guidance, you're still spending a lot more on green fees, range balls and transportation costs. But the most of expensive of all you mentioned already - time.

  • Upvote 1

Steve

Kill slow play. Allow walking. Reduce ineffective golf instruction. Use environmentally friendly course maintenance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

22 minutes ago, nevets88 said:

 

Equipment is expensive, but if you're going to express accelerate your way to scratch, imho, I think tuition/instructor fees is going to make up the bulk of the costs. If you're some freak of nature who can get there without guidance, you're still spending a lot more on green fees, range balls and transportation costs. But the most of expensive of all you mentioned already - time.

Absolutely. My instructor was $120 an hour. I did bi-weekly one on one at $120/hr and weekly group sessions with access to FlightScope at $35/hr that got me about 10 minutes of face time with my instructor. I used an indoor range with video stalls that was $25/hr several times a week. I did Evolvr etc. It was a chunk of cash for sure. Around $200-400 a week at one point with green fees, it was nuts.

Dave :-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Note: This thread is 3019 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • TST Partners

    TourStriker PlaneMate
    Golfer's Journal
    ShotScope
    The Stack System
    FlightScope Mevo
    Direct: Mevo, Mevo+, and Pro Package.

    Coupon Codes (save 10-15%): "IACAS" for Mevo/Stack, "IACASPLUS" for Mevo+/Pro Package, and "THESANDTRAP" for ShotScope.
  • Posts

    • I did not realize that, I was thinking a more traditional golf club.  
    • Thanks for the feedback. @StuM, we are a "club without real estate" so no facilities or pro. We have a membership of around 185 players and we only play together as a group at our tournaments, which are held at public access courses. A group of us setup the tournaments, collect the money and dole out the prizes.
    • In general, granting free relief anywhere on the course isn't recommended.  Similarly, when marking GUR, the VSGA and MAPGA generally don't mark areas that are well away from the intended playing lines, no matter how poor the conditions.  If you hit it far enough offline, you don't necessarily deserve free relief.  And you don't have to damage clubs, take unplayable relief, take the stroke, and drop the ball in a better spot.
    • If it's not broken don't fix it. If you want to add grooves to it just because of looks that's your choice of course. Grooves are cut into putter faces to reduce skid, the roll faced putter is designed to do the same thing. I'm no expert but it seems counter productive to add grooves to the roll face. Maybe you can have it sand-blasted or something to clean up the face. Take a look at Tigers putter, its beat to hell but he still uses it.     
    • I get trying to limit relief to the fairway, but how many roots do you typically find in the fairway? Our local rule allows for relief from roots & rocks anywhere on the course (that is in play). My home course has quite a few 100 year old oaks that separate the fairways. Lift and move the ball no closer to the hole. None of us want to damage clubs.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Welcome to TST! Signing up is free, and you'll see fewer ads and can talk with fellow golf enthusiasts! By using TST, you agree to our Terms of Use, our Privacy Policy, and our Guidelines.

The popup will be closed in 10 seconds...