The Texas Democratic Party allocates presidential delegates based on each district's general election turnout. Though the system has been in place for decades, apparently it came as a bit of a surprise to the Clinton campaign. (Which apparently expected to have the nomination wrapped up a month ago.) Elsewhere, the campaign has complained that its poor results in caucus states (beginning with Iowa, the first speed bump for what was supposed to be a juggernaut) are because caucuses fail to reflect the will of the broader electorate. That may be true, but the quirks of the caucus system are hardly news.
Hmmm.... Plans that fail to consider important, readily available information. Plans that rely on overly optimistic assumptions, with no alternative when those assumptions fail. Do those sound like the plans of an experienced leader and/or leadership team to you?