Chancing

How does one discover the missing ingredient?

By chancing it. 

One keeps trying different mixes…

…till something hits. 

The hit is then fine-tuned…

…such that it is reproduced again and again.

Once the hit can be reproduced at will, one has got the strategy all together. 

A successful strategy is then let loose. 

At first it is on manual.

Ultimately, it comes on auto, or semi-auto, whatever best is possible. 

There has come and passed a stage, when this same strategy has not been winning. 

Aha. 

What is the difference between the mix of that stage and the current – winning – mix?

It’s some kind of a twist you’ve discovered. 

Something you are adding, or doing differently. 

This something is making the strategy win. 

Congratulations!

You’ve kept trying. 

You’ve been in the field. 

You weren’t away from the field, ruminating. 

You were getting action. 

Losing action, but action. 

Losing action has huge educational value. 

It tells you how not to do it. 

You keep twisting, fitting, tuning, upon loss. 

You chance new stuff.

Eventually, something clicks. 

You develop that something further and take it to the nth. 

Where does that leave you?

You have to keep chancing it. 

There is no way around this. 

Make funds available for the R&D. 

Have the courage. 

Don’t be afraid of a hundred losses. 

Winning is around the corner. 

The Difference between Winning and Losing

It’s a whisker. 

You’re doing everything right. 

You’re following a proven strategy. 

You’ve adapted. 

You’ve removed many mistakes from your resumé.

Your strategy has undergone refinement. 

Why haven’t you started winning yet?

Yeah, we’re used to asking million dollar questions by now. 

In fact, such questions are all we ever ask. 

What do you think is the answer?

The answer is you. 

Yes. 

There’s something about you. 

It’s not fitting. 

You’ve got two options. 

Either make your strategy fit to this something, or …

… make yourself fit to the strategy. 

Both options can work, and you can start winning. 

Which option is easier to implement?

I think the more relevant question here is a different one. 

Which option befits the situation?

I’ll give you an example. 

I’ve got time issues. 

I make my market strategies fit my time issues. 

I can’t change my time issues, for something or someone will fall short then. Like everyone, I have many commitments too. 

Therefore, I fit my market strategy around me. 

I keep fitting, fitting, fitting, till the strategy either works, or is discarded for want of a win. 

Yeah, that’s me. 

Maybe your situation is different. 

Maybe you need to cater to the public. 

You’re not expecting the public to change to your whims and fancies, are you?

Not as a newbie, no no, that would be a cardinal sin. 

After all, the public is your paymaster, right?

Customer is your king, or queen. 

It becomes different when you turn into a celeb. 

Then you can dictate fashion. 

However, till you become a celeb, fit to the public, if you want to win. 

Behave in a manner that people want to pay for what you have to offer, again and again and again.

Maybe there’s a slight whisker of a trait in your behaviour that people don’t like. 

Change it. 

Whether you’re changing yourself, or fitting your strategy to meet your unchangeable nature or schedule, sometimes it’s only a whisker that makes the difference between winning and losing. 

People have lost olympic medals by one-hundredth of a second. 

What’s that millisecond lag in your own life that you need to get rid of?