Hi guys. I’ve been wrestling with a model for thinking about females for the past couple of days and I’d like to post it for some feedback. So, let’s see how this model runs:
I see the game of “women” as a half-court game of basketball. You play against the woman. You are represented by a proxy as one player. She can have anywhere from 0 – 5 defenders.
Now, one of the most important lessons that can be derived from such a model is that there are two levels to the game.
Level 1: (most important) Seeing the hoop.
Level 2: Shooting the ball in the hoop.
Level 1 is what I believe DeAngelo would call “getting it.”
Level 2 would be the techniques – e.g. C & F, challenge, aloof, etc. etc.
Let’s say, getting the ball in the basket is, well… getting the ball in the basket. Hitting the rim is making out, and hitting backboard is number close (maybe kiss, distinction not very important).
(1) girls rated 5 and up have defenders. Defenders = (ratings – 5), e.g. a 5 would have no defenders, a 7 would have 2, etc.
(2) strength/ability of defenders => the strength of her reality
(3) likewise, the skill and strength of your proxy => the strength of your reality
(4) you only get one shot at the basket => shot = close (one attempt to close)
(5) however, you also get a “beat-the-defense” mode to get a better look => done through techniques
If we run the model, we get some very interesting results:
(1) You can practice techniques all you want, but without knowing where the basket is, your shots have an extremely slim chance of ever hitting the backboard or rim, much less getting the ball in the hole. Sure, there’s a chance, but it’s slim. DeAngelo sounds like he believes most guys are blind or blindfolded (which may or may not be true - that's besides the point.) They have no idea where the hoop is. Thus, they don’t “get it.” They don’t understand the game.
(2) If you “get it” and know where the hoop is and that you’re trying to get the ball in the hoop (take that any way you want), your chances SKYROCKET. Even if your skills suck – let’s say you have NO skills at all, you’ll still do better than most other guys because they are blindfolded.
a. Think about it => even a little kid can hit the backboard almost 90% of the time.
(3) Pay attention: YOU WILL MISS SOMETIMES. Nobody makes all their shots. Nobody. Therefore, using this model, you realize that it is nothing to feel bad about personally. You just need to work on your skills. If you are “rejected” by a girl, it doesn’t mean you are a worthless human being, because just like in basketball, if you miss a shot, you may be frustrated, but you don’t feel like you’re worth nothing. When you miss, you keep taking shots, or call it an off day. Remember: even Jordan missed.
(4) So, what’s the key? What is this "getting it"?
That’s where you guys would come in. I feel like I’m on the verge of “getting it,” but I’m not quite there yet. So, that’s how far I’ve come with the model.
Feedback on the key, the entire model, DYD is appreciated and would make for an interesting discussion.
I see the game of “women” as a half-court game of basketball. You play against the woman. You are represented by a proxy as one player. She can have anywhere from 0 – 5 defenders.
Now, one of the most important lessons that can be derived from such a model is that there are two levels to the game.
Level 1: (most important) Seeing the hoop.
Level 2: Shooting the ball in the hoop.
Level 1 is what I believe DeAngelo would call “getting it.”
Level 2 would be the techniques – e.g. C & F, challenge, aloof, etc. etc.
Let’s say, getting the ball in the basket is, well… getting the ball in the basket. Hitting the rim is making out, and hitting backboard is number close (maybe kiss, distinction not very important).
(1) girls rated 5 and up have defenders. Defenders = (ratings – 5), e.g. a 5 would have no defenders, a 7 would have 2, etc.
(2) strength/ability of defenders => the strength of her reality
(3) likewise, the skill and strength of your proxy => the strength of your reality
(4) you only get one shot at the basket => shot = close (one attempt to close)
(5) however, you also get a “beat-the-defense” mode to get a better look => done through techniques
If we run the model, we get some very interesting results:
(1) You can practice techniques all you want, but without knowing where the basket is, your shots have an extremely slim chance of ever hitting the backboard or rim, much less getting the ball in the hole. Sure, there’s a chance, but it’s slim. DeAngelo sounds like he believes most guys are blind or blindfolded (which may or may not be true - that's besides the point.) They have no idea where the hoop is. Thus, they don’t “get it.” They don’t understand the game.
(2) If you “get it” and know where the hoop is and that you’re trying to get the ball in the hoop (take that any way you want), your chances SKYROCKET. Even if your skills suck – let’s say you have NO skills at all, you’ll still do better than most other guys because they are blindfolded.
a. Think about it => even a little kid can hit the backboard almost 90% of the time.
(3) Pay attention: YOU WILL MISS SOMETIMES. Nobody makes all their shots. Nobody. Therefore, using this model, you realize that it is nothing to feel bad about personally. You just need to work on your skills. If you are “rejected” by a girl, it doesn’t mean you are a worthless human being, because just like in basketball, if you miss a shot, you may be frustrated, but you don’t feel like you’re worth nothing. When you miss, you keep taking shots, or call it an off day. Remember: even Jordan missed.
(4) So, what’s the key? What is this "getting it"?
That’s where you guys would come in. I feel like I’m on the verge of “getting it,” but I’m not quite there yet. So, that’s how far I’ve come with the model.
Feedback on the key, the entire model, DYD is appreciated and would make for an interesting discussion.
