The ace pair at the poker table phenomenon

Last Saturday, I did something that I would probably never ever forget for the rest of my life.  It was something I just had to do; it wasn't something that I could live to regret.

Ever gone on a venture on the primary basis of some key factor and enduring despite the odds?  This is the "ace pair at the poker table" phenomenon.

If you draw a pair of ace at the poker table, you're definitely going to be calling the blinds.  Up pops the community cards.  Still no combination.  Yet chances are, you're still going to be calling the blinds. 

Crazy maybe, but you just never know.  After all, a pair of ace is often enough to win.

Shoot, score, smile.

The Solo Theorem

You know, I meant to write this way earlier, but I got really busy, with tests and assignments.  Thankfully, the assignments were individual assignments.  Scholars continually crap about synergy raising productivity and theories like 1+1=3.  Well, it is not true in the environment of school (unless somehow you can fulfill following conditions).  There are several reasons why, starting with the fact that it takes time for two people to gel.  Secondly, different intellect levels.  Thirdly, different attitude towards the assignment.

Back to the main story.  There was a dark period in my life, when I felt desperate to get that sense of belonging.  I became someone of no opinion; simply going along with the vast majority.  It was really sad.  That is not how it should be.  Everyone should have their own objectives and goals in life, therefore, resulting in having their own agenda.  If it should fall in alignment with others along the way, great.  Liken this to buses.  Sometimes, two buses may be traveling on totally different routes, sometimes similar routes, sometimes, routes that diverge after a certain distance.  But you won't find two bus services going by the exact same route (what would be the point), and that is how it should be as well.  No two humans are exactly the same.  You need to get on with your own route.

What I am driving at, is well, stop giving a damn about people who don't matter.  The Solo Theorem, doesn't dictate you to be heartless.  It simply expects you to channel your emotions and feelings in a logically and sound way.  The bottom line:  Care about people that should and do matter to you. 

You see, it is always more enjoyable to operate alone.  Batman fought crime alone.  Sure, he had his butler, but his butler didn't literally fight side by side with him.  Yeah, there was Robin, but once he grew up, he left, didn't he?  Superman and Spidermen flew (swung) solo as well.  X-Men was a coalition but its members came and went, with no long-term obligations.  Ever wonder why vampire films (with werewolves getting owned) are popular?  Well, quite simply, it oozes sexiness the way vampires are aloof and move alone. 

What I am saying is, there is nothing wrong to be alone.  Social stigma has it that if you're alone, you're probably friendless and a loser.  That is just stupid and not being far-sighted.  Remember, only you can be with yourself forever. 

Yet bear in mind while I started off this article claiming people care about others too much nowadays (which really, account for I would estimate at least 90% of the problems that occurs), I have to reinforce that I did not say not to care for anyone else.  There are people whom I would give up things for; and you should have them too.  Just remember that you need to spread your love wisely.

Shoot, score, smile.

AvFB-Sports commentary

Now, every male should display some interest in sports.  Some, however, become over-zealous and appear as a faggot.  In fact, I have one friend (strained definition however) who does this.  He goes on and on about soccer matches (specifically Manchester United games) on Facebook.  I have mentioned him before here; he's the exhibit C.

Now it is one thing to be excited about a match; regardless if it is a big match, but commenting about it, from before the start of it to the entire duration of it to the aftermath-is just an awesome display of faggotry.  There are three fundamental problems when guys start giving their two cents about sports:

1.  Most of us haven't even played anywhere near that competitive level to understand.

2.  Most of us think we know better than the experts.

3.  Most of us fail to realize hindsight bias.

The first problem is very common.  You see people criticizing soccer players who miss crucial penalties, open goals; NBA players who fluff up a rebound, the list goes on.  The problem is, how many of us have even played anywhere near those levels to truly understand how difficult it is to be at that level?  It is quite understandable to express extreme disappointment, but to go on and say "I could do better" is just plain retarded.  No, you can't, which is why you're the one sitting in the couch.  So shut up.

Most of us think we know better.  Again, we don't.  I would safely say that 99% of those who watch NBA/soccer thinks that they are the experts and probably can make better deals than any other managers while simultaneously coaching their teams to championships after championships.  This is silly.  There is a reason why ESPN pays retired NBA stars much more (in the region of millions) to commentate.  This is because they actually talk sense (other than Charles Barkley).  There are reasons why top managers and coaches are paid exorbitant amounts.  So please, don't talk about "tactics" as if you're a grandmaster.  You only make yourself look bad; like a know-it-all who really doesn't know anything.  It is alright to be uninformed; just don't be an uninformed uninformed. 

The final issue, hindsight bias is a well-documented psychology academic.  Have you done something only to realize it was such an obvious mistake?  Well, in a nutshell, that is hindsight bias.  Seeing things as being more "duh" after it has happened.  A classic example would be the bombing of Pearl Harbor.  What were the Japanese thinking, provoking the Americans?  Guess it didn't seem so obvious to the Japanese generals then; but was it?  Maybe the Japanese truly believed that the Americans would be too crippled to strike back.  Or that they could hold off the American forces.  In fact, I can think of a very solid reason-Japan believed that by taking out the naval route, the Americans would be left with the air route; which they can take down with their kamikaze fighters.  Whatever reason(s) it was, the Japanese were very confident then that it was a correct and wise decision.  

It's fun to discuss about sports.  It's cool.  Just don't over-do it and bear in mind at the end of the day, you're the one scratching your balls in front of the TV.

Shoot, score, smile. 

Why you should never date a girl three years older than you

Here's why.

We'll start from the beginning.  By the time you are in primary school, she would already be in primary four-which, technically is upper primary and while you're still frolicking around with pokemon cards and going ewwww at the prospect of holding hands with a girl while walking to the canteen, she's already reading sweet valley high and thinking of kissing.  Perhaps more, but you get the drift.

By the time you enter secondary school, she would already be graduating that year; ala senior with some dork who is still trying to figure out his environment and a "himself" that he would ditch when he eventually matures.  By the time you enter JC, she would have already completed it.  And while you are slogging through National Service, you fall two years behind in terms of advancement on the corporate ladder.  That brings you to a grand total of being half a decade behind. 

The World Cup, Olympics and General Elections are held once every four years.  Surely that indicates how drastically things changes across a four year period.  Need I mention five?

Look, I'm not saying not to go for someone older.  In fact, I think that doubles the fun.  Just cap it at two.  Anything more is just heading for a colossal mindfuck.  Besides, I don't think you want a mother for a wife, do you?

Shoot, score, smile.

The Russian Roulette of Logic and Being Correct

Sometimes, the logical choice and the correct option are not the same.

Suppose you would be rewarded with an astronomical value of money (whatever arbitrary value I state, there would be someone unsatisfied, so let's go with this) for a go at the Russian Roulette.  Logically, you should accept it.  I mean, let's get real; there is a staggering 83.3% chance to win.

You see, this is a very simple game.  There are only three outcomes:

1.  You die.

2.  You survive and become richer.

3.  You walk away from the game.

However, unless you are deep in debt or have an otherwise deeply-rooted agenda, I doubt anyone would participate in this proposal.  Outcome 1 is way too heavy a price to pay.   Do not argue that 16.7% is too high and you would accept an otherwise risk percentage.  In terms of real-time decisions, there are generally a few broad outcomes and I find 6 to be a pretty realistic figure in terms of  deciding on a maximum  number for the varying of results. Yes, I believe that as wealth increases, so will happiness.  Readers with good memory may contest this point with my minimalist ideology mentioned here; my simple explanation is that one can lavish his wealth to pursue his focused agenda deeply.  Yet there are things that wealth cannot buy; I know, sounds cliché.  

Now let's refer to a very famous motivation model-Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs, as drawn below:

Those familiar with this simple pyramid would know that the bottom levels need to be fulfilled before one can move on to the next level.  Considering that the safety of one cannot be assured, then well, it brings doubts as to whether the logical choice of making advancements, should be done.

More importantly, there is a difference between playing poker and "Big-Small" (think coin toss).  In poker, you actually have to make evaluate your position and make sound decisions.  In "Big-Small", it is simply a cast of the dice and luck.  Alpha men do take gambles; but only calculated ones and those which they still can exercise some form of control over.  Of course, the amount of control one requires to have and the  magnitude of the luck element differs based on the Risk-Security in differing circumstances as well.

It would be logical to pull the trigger for fortune-hunting.  But would it making the right choice?

*Sidenote:  On the other hand, how could one resist such a temptation?

Shoot, score, smile.