A quick review of my personal game showed up at least 10 different glaring leaks. Maybe that's why I was stuck at nl100 and never reached nl200. My stubbornness to learn has crippled my advancement. I'll now do a review every 2 weeks and focus on improving on my leaks and hire coaches in the form of a staking deal.
Notifications
Clear all
I was already wondering where are you? No updates for like 2 weeks ♦
Playing nl100 for now?
Originally posted by gAsheks
I was already wondering where are you? No updates for like 2 weeks ♦Playing nl100 for now?
In in Bangkok! Haha still at nl50 for now, ain't going as great as I hope, I think there are a lot of leaks in my game in trying to fix, I guess coaching is going to be the best option, if I can see the problems myself I would already have fixed it.
Originally posted by cutegoldfish
Originally posted by gAsheks
I was already wondering where are you? No updates for like 2 weeks ♦Playing nl100 for now?
In in Bangkok! Haha still at nl50 for now, ain't going as great as I hope, I think there are a lot of leaks in my game in trying to fix, I guess coaching is going to be the best option, if I can see the problems myself I would already have fixed it.
Well, i don't see you at the tables. ♦ Yea, i would like to have coaching too, but i have problems with my internet upload speed. If i share my screen its complete lag fest 
I guess you are talking about some small leaks or they are quite big ones?
When we are going to see some hand review videos? 
Hi,
I would think they are big leaks? Seems pretty obvious to me yet somehow I keep repeating them.
Oh you want some hand reviews? Why don't you send me a short 15mins clip and I'll review your hands instead.
Add me on Skype?
Good luck on tables 
I want some coachings but thats ok, if they are already booked: )
Your friend live in Singapore?? or BKK
Spoiler
Cant remember you from Nl50, strange ..
Originally posted by mysteryman21
Good luck on tables
I want some coachings but thats ok, if they are already booked: )Your friend live in Singapore?? or BKK
Spoiler
Cant remember you from Nl50, strange ..
Add me on Skype? Xavierfok
My friend lives in Singapore haha.
I used to play nl100 last year. Didn't play this year until like may?
just did a few coachings for players playing lower limits, and took a quick 15mins "trail coaching" from a 2p2 player.
coachings for newer players - i did this for free, because i realised it helps me to understand my own game better. i quickly spotted many leaks in their game and could answer many questions, mainly pre flop opening, 3betting and 4betting ranges. i answered so quickly and confidently because this was an issue i faced around 2012 and have already understood, HOWEVER i continued making the same errors recurringly.
this has shown to me that the recurrence is not a result of a lack of understanding of the strategy, but something else more mental? maybe i was afraid to 3bet when i was supposed to? shown through my lower than usual 3bet and 4bet stats and high fold to 3bets.
when i had to fix their leaks, i realised these problems has not been sufficently addressed by myself, and then went ahead to pay more attention to it and now my stats have improved greatly towards what i wanted it to become.
received coaching from 2p2 coach
dan sort of ran through my stats to give some feedback and he pointed out i had a few leaks such as BU opening being 68% which is too high, and i have brought that down to 50% already. i watched gordon gekko videos around 2 years ago and he suggested opening the button wide, which was ok at that time because blinds were generally playing too tight, but in the games nowadays blinds are defending more which means button opening ranges have to tighten up.
also another thing was that i was folding to 3bets a little too much at around 70%. the optimum number for this is around 61% IP. possibly i am too scared to defend, or maybe because my opening ranges are too wide ending up i have to fold alot of hands i opened with.
ill be joining a group discussion channel where i get to discuss and listen to hands from mid stakes players palying on the ipoker network, i think that kind of environment will keep me motivated to study the game and play more.
Glad to hear good news.
I'm super unmotivated at the moment. Almost haven't played at all this week. After crushing for 2 weeks im burned out again. It has happened already couple times, when i spend a loooot of hours playing, studying, analyzing, watching vids etc, etc. Dunno what to do to get back in the mood. Playing dota2 a lot ♦
Originally posted by gAsheks
Glad to hear good news.I'm super unmotivated at the moment. Almost haven't played at all this week. After crushing for 2 weeks im burned out again. It has happened already couple times, when i spend a loooot of hours playing, studying, analyzing, watching vids etc, etc. Dunno what to do to get back in the mood. Playing dota2 a lot ♦
i dont know whether this is good or bad news, but i happen to have the same problem, and have been having it since 2-3 years ago, and now made alot of improvements, which i will share in the next post. ♠_biggrin: ♠_biggrin:
this will be an update of what i learnt within the past 30 days.
1. building a balanced mental armour
i read up on a book by felix dennis, the founder of dennis publishing, and he mentioned that to be successful in business we need a mental armour to block out the negativity surrounding us, which refers to the discouragement from family and friends to do business/play poker. they mean good for us, and they hope we are better off in a job, however that does not help us become rich.
at the same time this mental armour CANNOT be too thick, it needs to be thin enough for us to be able to humble ourselves and learn from those who are better than us and constantly question ourselves where we can improve.
my issue - while usually people have a mental armour thats too thin, mine happens to be one of the rare cases where it is too thick. i was too egoistic and refused to take mentors and learn new things, thinking i was the best and can find out for myself. apparently this learning attitude sucks and only brings failure.
the problem is though, that i got the feedback very late. i built this mental armour sometime back in 2006. i was a student in middle/high school, known as secondary school in singapore, and my results were extremely good. this learning attitude has caused me to deteriorate since then, but the problem was that the deterioration was not obvious to me, because i dropped from extremely good to very good, and then to good, and then to above average, and then finally to average and then fail. it was only when i reached FAIL then i realised that all along i have been deteriorating.
if not for the insurance job i took up in march 2014, i would never have noticed this problem. i happen to see another person with the same problem. he acheived success early in life, and then become very egoistic and refused to learn and then his results went down. and also its not obvious because his results are still very good, it is just not extremely good as last time, and now it has deteriorated to good. a quick look at the results sheet might not tell you much, but if you look at the history you notice he is steadily deteriorating.
but that is not exactly strong enough for me to change. this problem has caused some of my friends to leave me, in particular my fiance, when we were together for 7 years and buying a house together. that was a major turning point for me to relook at my attitude and examine where i went wrong and could have done better.
now i focus on my goal, block out negative comments from family and friends, while keeping in mind they mean good for me. and at the same time i remind myself the fastest way to learning is to learn from those better than me.
-------------------------
2. mentor
those that are successful usually speak of having a mentor, i recall the statistics are something like 30% of them have a mentor, and 90% of that 30% say that their success is very much because of their mentor. and for that remaining 70% who do not have a mentor, they read up alot of books, so in a sense the book is their mentor, which is also written by someone better than them.
my issue - i have refused mentors for many years, thinking that it shows that i am weak. now i constantly seek people better than me and learn from them. and from previous experience, i am now better at choosing the relevant and correct mentor.
i am now taking coaching from better poker players and investing in courses etc.
i am also reading books on business (from the correct mentors who actually own businesses i want to own), to learn more of their mindset instead of watching time wasting youtube videos or playing games.
------------------------------------------------------------
3. 1% improvement
i recently read this post on how a coach trained his British team to do very well in the Tour De France cycling event - http://jamesclear.com/marginal-gains
what he did is relatively simple, everyday he finds one small thing to improve on, which may or may not be cycling related.
the usual strategy that everyone hears of would be to come for training and just keep grinding the basics, paddle more, longer distances but we already know that.
this 1% focuses on easy to do things, like for example SLIGHTLY better tyres, slightly ergonomic seats, and non cycling related stuff like having a more comfortable pillow during sleep, and how to wash hands correctly so you dont get an infection.
my issue - i used to focus on significant big improvements, im not sure why i landed up in this belief. so i ignored every small situation that could call for an improvement. and this shows very obviously in my red line, it just drops like ****. and i tend to fail at every big change because they are just too big an adjustment for my body and mind to handle, for example sudden change in diet from 4 meals a day of meat to 1 meal of vegetables, or sudden 2 hour exercises after sitting at the desk for years.
so i started this 1% improvement thing around 10-15 days ago, with the focus on SMALL SUSTAIANBLE CHANGES. i ate one less fried chicken wing, instead of 5, i ordered 4. i added one extra leaf of lettuce to my diet. and now im eating way less chicken wings and i eat one whole lettuce every 2 days. and i actually enjoy eating it instead of having to force it down my throat.
i added in small sets of exercises like 10 push ups, and i end up doing around 100-150 push ups daily (i'm stopping this for other reasons)
im decreasing/regulating my sleep hours. i used to sleep around 12 hours daily, i have issues falling asleep and waking up. and when i make the effort to wake up 5 mins earlier, shorten my entertainment by 5mins etc, and now im sleeping somewhere closer to 9-10 hours. its still too much, but its much better than the 12 i used to have and im looking to decrease further to 8 hours.
poker playing mindset
i have noticed one particular pattern in my poker playing, and that is occasionally when i am very involved in the thinking of other players and the game, so much so that i actually exceed my schedule and miss skype messages, i tend to do better. i guess this has very much to do with the mental armour being reduced. i used to ignore what everyone else is thinking assuming i am correct and focus on why i am right. i have since made the shift to consider why other people do what they do and why it could possibly be better, or worse and then learn from that. and since then i became more involved in the game and the results can be very obvious. i now make an effort to immerse myself in the game and reduce distractions from other applications.
attention span
my attention span is very short and difficult for me to maintain focus and motivation for long hours. ill touch on motivation later. this paragraph is on focus. everytime i work on something, my focus drifts away and time is wasted leading to low productivity. i started making marginal improvements under the "1% improvement project", my friend rio shared with me this pomodoro timer, what it does is fairly simple, it sets a 25minute duration for work and then tells your when its up and take a 5 minute break. i used it around 1-2 months ago and have used it everyday. though it takes away 10mins from every hour, which is a 16.7% reduction in time, i noticed my productivity has shot up tremendously, and i am working more hours. we are vulnerable human beings and our mind is not made up of steel. it breaks down and we need to take care of it and give it breaks.
ill cover more on motivation later, im now more motivated, more productive, work longer hours, but definitely still far from where i want to be.
Originally posted by cutegoldfish
3. 1% improvement
i recently read this post on how a coach trained his British team to do very well in the Tour De France cycling event - http://jamesclear.com/marginal-gains
what he did is relatively simple, everyday he finds one small thing to improve on, which may or may not be cycling related.
the usual strategy that everyone hears of would be to come for training and just keep grinding the basics, paddle more, longer distances but we already know that.
Warning: This is a long cycling/drug sidetrack/rant
I've followed pro cycling in a rather tragic way for a number of years now. This is my alternative answer to the Brailsford's theory of a 'marginal gains' approach to improvement. One that doesn't come from Brailsfords PR department. 
For the last 30 years, and probably longer, success in cycling (and many other sports) has been about who can stay ahead of the game with Performance Enhancing Drugs (PED's). This consists of two parts:
1. Better drugs/drug techniques
2. Not getting caught (bribes, careful doses, etc)
If you go back over the years, it's literally impossible to find a competitive world class cyclist (talking top 20 tour de france placing)who has not in someway been implicated with PEDs.
Every year we hear from riders, teams and the UCI (corrupt as hell cycling governing body) the same line, 'this time, it's different'.
It never is.
For riders to be caught within 5 years of competing they have to be either unlucky, unorganized with their doping or to have seriously pissed off someone higher up on the food chain.
Brailsford and SKY haven't been seriously implicated yet. But if I were a betting man (and this is being written on a poker site ♦ ) than I would bet that it's only a matter of time before Brailsford (with frome and wiggo) are implicated.
Every 5 or 10 years, there is a bit of a purge in pro cycling. Where the public gets a little upset with all the doping and the UCI make a bit of a token effort to clean things up.
About 5 years ago, they came up with an initiative called the 'blood passport'. What this does, is tracks riders blood values, mostly stuff like how many red blood cells (oxygen carrying) to white blood cells in the body. This is called a hematocrit level. At say Lance Armstrongs peak, they didn't track stuff like this, and riders used a cocktail of drugs. One result was a significant increase their hematocrit level.
The blood passport rules draw a line at things like what hematocrit level one may have before being punished. So now what happens, is cyclists dope right up to, but not beyond this level. Sky has or had been (their edge may be diminishing) the best team to adapt their doping program to this new system.
The biggest factor on cycling performance is doping. Marginal gains help, but in this case, it's really just a cover for 'we have a better doping program'. Lance Armstrong had the same sales speech. Sky have pretty much plagiarized the whole thing. Perhaps Lance can take them to court and get some royalties to help pay for his current court cases.
So, in conclusion, 'marginal gains' in this context = newspeak for 'better doping program'.
Another example of marginal gains, is the English football team at this years world cup. Check out what they did, and how that went! 
I think genuine marginal improvements in techniques, lead to only marginal improvements in results.
So to relate this to poker, I'd say work on the big stuff. Work on the doping. Like ones 3bet ranges preflop and importantly postflop, where changes will have a big effect on one's winrate. And don't worry too much about 'sleeping on the right pillow' if you're a cyclist. Or to relate to poker, those near 0 ev call down spots. Or weather or not one can be playing those few extra hands from the BB.
PS, go Contador in le Tour! Coz I got on him 6 months ago at 19/1 to win ♦ ♦
just have to post this to share some learning points,
i previously had the issue of
1. getting called too much when i CB oop and then having to give up turns
2. when im IP and have a hand and bet, i seldom get paid off
today i happen to be in a few situations where i had a very strong hand and villian simply cant have much so i bet smaller, and i was very surprised to see him call twice with 2nd pair in a 3way pot.
it occurred to me that the bet sizings i was using was not suitable. i was betting too small oop, causing wide flaots and then having to give up turn. so now i bet bigger oop and have more folds.
when i am IP i bet too big, isolating myself against strong hands. i should bet slightly smaller around 60-70% of pot when opponent's range is weak to get wider calls especially when my hand is not that strong.
Originally posted by jules97
Originally posted by cutegoldfish
3. 1% improvement
i recently read this post on how a coach trained his British team to do very well in the Tour De France cycling event - http://jamesclear.com/marginal-gains
what he did is relatively simple, everyday he finds one small thing to improve on, which may or may not be cycling related.
the usual strategy that everyone hears of would be to come for training and just keep grinding the basics, paddle more, longer distances but we already know that.
Warning: This is a long cycling/drug sidetrack/rant
I've followed pro cycling in a rather tragic way for a number of years now. This is my alternative answer to the Brailsford's theory of a 'marginal gains' approach to improvement. One that doesn't come from Brailsfords PR department.
For the last 30 years, and probably longer, success in cycling (and many other sports) has been about who can stay ahead of the game with Performance Enhancing Drugs (PED's). This consists of two parts:
1. Better drugs/drug techniques
2. Not getting caught (bribes, careful doses, etc)If you go back over the years, it's literally impossible to find a competitive world class cyclist (talking top 20 tour de france placing)who has not in someway been implicated with PEDs.
Every year we hear from riders, teams and the UCI (corrupt as hell cycling governing body) the same line, 'this time, it's different'.
It never is.For riders to be caught within 5 years of competing they have to be either unlucky, unorganized with their doping or to have seriously pissed off someone higher up on the food chain.
Brailsford and SKY haven't been seriously implicated yet. But if I were a betting man (and this is being written on a poker site ♦ ) than I would bet that it's only a matter of time before Brailsford (with frome and wiggo) are implicated.
Every 5 or 10 years, there is a bit of a purge in pro cycling. Where the public gets a little upset with all the doping and the UCI make a bit of a token effort to clean things up.
About 5 years ago, they came up with an initiative called the 'blood passport'. What this does, is tracks riders blood values, mostly stuff like how many red blood cells (oxygen carrying) to white blood cells in the body. This is called a hematocrit level. At say Lance Armstrongs peak, they didn't track stuff like this, and riders used a cocktail of drugs. One result was a significant increase their hematocrit level.The blood passport rules draw a line at things like what hematocrit level one may have before being punished. So now what happens, is cyclists dope right up to, but not beyond this level. Sky has or had been (their edge may be diminishing) the best team to adapt their doping program to this new system.
The biggest factor on cycling performance is doping. Marginal gains help, but in this case, it's really just a cover for 'we have a better doping program'. Lance Armstrong had the same sales speech. Sky have pretty much plagiarized the whole thing. Perhaps Lance can take them to court and get some royalties to help pay for his current court cases.
So, in conclusion, 'marginal gains' in this context = newspeak for 'better doping program'.
Another example of marginal gains, is the English football team at this years world cup. Check out what they did, and how that went!
I think genuine marginal improvements in techniques, lead to only marginal improvements in results.
So to relate this to poker, I'd say work on the big stuff. Work on the doping. Like ones 3bet ranges preflop and importantly postflop, where changes will have a big effect on one's winrate. And don't worry too much about 'sleeping on the right pillow' if you're a cyclist. Or to relate to poker, those near 0 ev call down spots. Or weather or not one can be playing those few extra hands from the BB.PS, go Contador in le Tour! Coz I got on him 6 months ago at 19/1 to win ♦ ♦
thanks for sharing, i guess im going to need a while to respond, maybe a few days to study and process.
jules is right here. Focus on the big wins first then the smaller ones once you're done with the easier stuff.
IMO you should work on your game in this order
Preflop > Flop > Turn > River
Why? Because PF occurs the most frequently and thus should have the largest significant impact on your winrate. Although you could argue that river pots are much bigger.
This is how i think about it
1. Complexity of spot
2. Frequency
3. Size of Pot
Taking into consideration all 3 factors, you should first tackle spots which help you maximize your WR with the least amount of effort (highest efficiency).
Example: Preflop
1. Relatively simple to fix
2. High frequency
3. Small Size of Pot for this street
For point 1, some people argue that preflop is harder to model for GTO type of stuff cos you need to work backwards from the River. That's certainly true but I still think it's possible to get a good idea about what to play PF .
Regarding making big or small changes. I think there is no one size fits all solution for all problems, I was just talking about cycling and being a poker forum, I tried to relate it to poker at the end.
Sometimes smaller changes will be better as they are more sustainable. For things with inertia such as diet, exercise and some mental issues.
I like mbml's breakdown of where to focus on poker. The only thing I find different. Is preflop is harder, like mbml mentioned, because from a math or GTO point of view preflop is very tricky. I think the best way to deal with this is experience. So either play millions of hands or get some help from someone you trust who has played millions of hands, i.e a coach. Preflop is the hardest for me to think about alone I believe because I don't have these millions of hands experience (or database) to fall back on.
I think one of the most helpful coachings I had was I had a big list of preflop ranges and I got oblioo to go over some basic, solid default ranges for every positions RFI & cc/3b against every other position. This took about 90 minutes and was a bit of grind for both but was very, very helpful for me.
Then once I have some preflop ranges, I can kind of work out my own postflop ranges with some hardwork and CREV. I like to get a basic flop > Turn > River and then kind of work backwards adding in more detail and changing all streets as I get more detailed. So I end up working on the whole 3 streets combined by the time I'm finished.
I did think about another way to relate that Brailford cycling story to poker after I posted. That is that 'marginal gains' in Brailford speak is a smokescreen for what he is really doing. Perhaps in poker we should be careful about talking about what we think our big edges are in the games we are playing...
http://www.boomplayer.com/en/poker-hands/Boom/9606042_64D2303942
usually i make the mistake of betting too big on the flop and turn, and then whenever i make moves like this i always see a set/overpair. but when i started betting smaller on flops and turns, their check/raising ranges widen to these draws which i can then bluffcatch rivers.
Originally posted by jules97
Originally posted by cutegoldfish
3. 1% improvement
i recently read this post on how a coach trained his British team to do very well in the Tour De France cycling event - http://jamesclear.com/marginal-gains
what he did is relatively simple, everyday he finds one small thing to improve on, which may or may not be cycling related.
the usual strategy that everyone hears of would be to come for training and just keep grinding the basics, paddle more, longer distances but we already know that.
Warning: This is a long cycling/drug sidetrack/rant
I've followed pro cycling in a rather tragic way for a number of years now. This is my alternative answer to the Brailsford's theory of a 'marginal gains' approach to improvement. One that doesn't come from Brailsfords PR department.
For the last 30 years, and probably longer, success in cycling (and many other sports) has been about who can stay ahead of the game with Performance Enhancing Drugs (PED's). This consists of two parts:
1. Better drugs/drug techniques
2. Not getting caught (bribes, careful doses, etc)If you go back over the years, it's literally impossible to find a competitive world class cyclist (talking top 20 tour de france placing)who has not in someway been implicated with PEDs.
Every year we hear from riders, teams and the UCI (corrupt as hell cycling governing body) the same line, 'this time, it's different'.
It never is.For riders to be caught within 5 years of competing they have to be either unlucky, unorganized with their doping or to have seriously pissed off someone higher up on the food chain.
Brailsford and SKY haven't been seriously implicated yet. But if I were a betting man (and this is being written on a poker site ♦ ) than I would bet that it's only a matter of time before Brailsford (with frome and wiggo) are implicated.
Every 5 or 10 years, there is a bit of a purge in pro cycling. Where the public gets a little upset with all the doping and the UCI make a bit of a token effort to clean things up.
About 5 years ago, they came up with an initiative called the 'blood passport'. What this does, is tracks riders blood values, mostly stuff like how many red blood cells (oxygen carrying) to white blood cells in the body. This is called a hematocrit level. At say Lance Armstrongs peak, they didn't track stuff like this, and riders used a cocktail of drugs. One result was a significant increase their hematocrit level.The blood passport rules draw a line at things like what hematocrit level one may have before being punished. So now what happens, is cyclists dope right up to, but not beyond this level. Sky has or had been (their edge may be diminishing) the best team to adapt their doping program to this new system.
The biggest factor on cycling performance is doping. Marginal gains help, but in this case, it's really just a cover for 'we have a better doping program'. Lance Armstrong had the same sales speech. Sky have pretty much plagiarized the whole thing. Perhaps Lance can take them to court and get some royalties to help pay for his current court cases.
So, in conclusion, 'marginal gains' in this context = newspeak for 'better doping program'.
Another example of marginal gains, is the English football team at this years world cup. Check out what they did, and how that went!
I think genuine marginal improvements in techniques, lead to only marginal improvements in results.
So to relate this to poker, I'd say work on the big stuff. Work on the doping. Like ones 3bet ranges preflop and importantly postflop, where changes will have a big effect on one's winrate. And don't worry too much about 'sleeping on the right pillow' if you're a cyclist. Or to relate to poker, those near 0 ev call down spots. Or weather or not one can be playing those few extra hands from the BB.PS, go Contador in le Tour! Coz I got on him 6 months ago at 19/1 to win ♦ ♦
here comes the response!!!
firstly, i think what you highlighted there about drugs is sort of a fact in life, forever these events will have drugs. maybe thats why we should also consider performance enhancing drugs? at a suitable risk reward?
next, i think controlling drugs is possible, but not many countries are willing to do it. one of them happens to be Singapore, if you have some drugs, they will publicize you internationally, your home country kneels down, parents and kids cry and beg, and they hang you, and do it year after year. you might think twice about bringing your medications here. but how many countries are willing to hang a person in a case thats in a case thats heavily contested by human rights etc? every year? so if they are not willing to do this, then drugs are forever.
and who says im not already doping? and working on the 3bet ranges pre flop and pst flop? its just that i got stuck and dont know where else to improve that i went to something smaller haha
Originally posted by mbml
jules is right here. Focus on the big wins first then the smaller ones once you're done with the easier stuff.IMO you should work on your game in this order
Preflop > Flop > Turn > RiverWhy? Because PF occurs the most frequently and thus should have the largest significant impact on your winrate. Although you could argue that river pots are much bigger.
This is how i think about it
1. Complexity of spot
2. Frequency
3. Size of PotTaking into consideration all 3 factors, you should first tackle spots which help you maximize your WR with the least amount of effort (highest efficiency).
Example: Preflop
1. Relatively simple to fix
2. High frequency
3. Small Size of Pot for this streetFor point 1, some people argue that preflop is harder to model for GTO type of stuff cos you need to work backwards from the River. That's certainly true but I still think it's possible to get a good idea about what to play PF .
yes coach, working on it right now!!! and you might want to add this part into your video. maybe we need a rough plan on how to play post flop with the hands we dont usually play pre flop? like T2o K2o etc and we dont hit anything?
i happen to be reading the book on how to get rich by felix dennis, unfortunately he passed away just recently, happens to be the same day i started reading his book. i realised a few things.
1. i have been reading the wrong books all along. i have been getting the correct results though. i became like the people whom books i follow, and they were bullshit, so i became bullshit. the method is correct, but the choice of person was wrong.
2. when i read his book i realised i am fated to do business. there is a set of characteristics, you can call it problems or u can call it talents, that you need to have in order to do business. he calls one of them silver of razored ice, meaning something like a killing instinct, and its suppose to keep getting stronger. and i kind of like it. i used to be ashamed of this "killing instinct", but then i realised there is nothing to be ashamed of. sometimes having a scar on your face can make you look cool, a small tool can be unique, just to a different crowd.
3. i got mocked pretty often for the way i raised capital, which was from basically anybody. many of the professional venture capitalists, investors etc sort of found my method unprofessional and maybe even close to cheating, because contractually i did not promise anything, yet i took money. i felt really bad because some of this money actually comes from my trusted friends and their referrals. worst of all i lost that money.
then i realised felix dennis does the same thing. although he took the money from trusted people, he also remained highly accountable, and gave very good privileges to all those that trusted him. he managed to turn his business into a success, but i did not. however these investors stuck by me although i lost their money multiple times, which was a signal to me that what i was doing could be right. because most investors who lose money usually turn around and start suing the business owner, or have damaged relationships etc, but that somehow did not happen to me, maybe because i treated all of them like real friends? i always gave them a better cut than myself, just not that the risk of collapse of the company. and they actually helped me to get out of the mess. they are not stupid, in fact many of them are smarter and wiser than i am, and they are reading this. if we treat them like friends, they come back with the same attitude.
4. unforunately, a price that we pay for business is some kind of marriage problem. family will be worried. i actually strongly considered this point because i want to give peace to my family, that was the whole point of the business!!!. then i realised one thing. no matter what i did, they were always worried. the difference is whether i worry together with them? or they worry alone. kind of like comparing a losing situation to a even worse losing one. and the situation they are in is kind of bad, so i am left with 2 choices
1. they are worried and they suffer, and they enjoy little
2. they are even more worried, and they suffer more, but they also enjoy more.
the difference is that the extent of the suffering increases, but then the time frame shortens. but they get more, and so do i.
and lastly do i actually have a choice? most of my friends also had their girlfriends leave them. were they purposely creating problems? or was this just unavoidable?