1. Phase 2 is designed with the requirement for using the mechanisms and methodologies the subjects found in Phase 1 to repeatedly transcend their old self.
2. In days to come, they will go beyond their old limits. This will be discussed in the next article where we will see that Phase 2 comes with the end goals in mind.
3. Each goal targets the delta(s) of what they cannot do before the start of the game.

It might break someone trying to go beyond his limits everyday, but it shouldn’t hurt to touch that limit and check for that time to cross it eventually on a daily basis.

• Phase 1, Phase 2, and Phase 3 follow part of the principle of `Control your mind, Control your situation`.
• In Phase 1, the subject begins to grasp the principle to contain his mind, the system puts the control gradually back to the subject.
• However, in order to wrest back the focus and controls, s/he needs to go beyond the momentum gained in Phase 1.

• You would have realized by now, the `100 Day Game` was designed to tool for self-discovery and enhancement.
• As you continue to “Adapt, Improvise, and Overcome ”, you will evolve your methods further.
• The controls of the conditioning should already be set in your hands.

1. In order to pass Phase 1, it is recommended that you gain 75% of the total score.
2. Above 50% may be acceptable, however the further you are away from the 100% mark, it is likely that you will face the difficulties in Phase 2.

Passing Phase 1 means:

1. You have worked according to plans

2. You should have found some enhancements and removed some barriers. Which means, you have understood yourself better as compared to Day `0` before starting Phase 1. You would be capable for introspection.

3. You acted according to plan and is able to focus and follow through under the Ulysses’ pact.

The race is not to the swift nor the battle to the strong. Do not hesitate to do a few rounds of conditioning as a drill set to prepare for Phase 2. This is also part of the survival guideline for Phase 2.

1. In Phase 2, the scoring is graded by relative calibration .
2. The reason is because the human mind itself is subjective and relative to themselves. One person’s 100% is not the same as another’s.
3. The second reason is because the human perception is also relative to the situation and scenario at hand, i.e., the happiest event and the most sorrowful event is not the same in different parts of our life.
4. It is also dissimilar based on the context and other events happening on that same day.
5. The third reason is due to that the human memory is not as extensive as we would like to be confident with. It remembers the first, last, most significant events and memory based on recency, i.e. the events that are most recent.

Note: 50% is the normalized functional level. 0 to 50% may signal lower energy that does not meet the requirement to accomplish certain tasks or function properly. Negative is the abrasion state where if persisting will cause the subject to be on the downhill.

1. Recency (time-based) : The human memory working is limited — very limited. However, the more recent the event is, the more the clarity. Hence, the very next thing the human can reference to is — the most recent event.
2. Referential (event-based) : The mind requires significance and significant references. The more events you have reference or relate to, the more, the clarity of why and how you are feeling and behaving in a certain way can be explained. It also draws the boundary of your limits and significance your focus will be captured by, especially, the things that you value and/ or like / dislike. Hence, effectively, you are building a framework to describe your mental terrain.
3. Relative (event-based) : The human perception is easily distorted, but it is relatable. The more referential points you have to relate to, the easier you can relate and anchor on to estimate where you may position your current state of mood / mind.

The significant references to how the scoring is determined are recency , frequency , intensity and effect .

1. Subject’s dimension of emotions has expanded, and his/her mean has shifted.
2. The granularity and the definitions of each grate of his/her emotionality has also been redefined in his/her mental terrain.
3. Hence, we contend that the common `1 to 10` medical scoring with no referential framework is meaningless.
4. It will only become meaningful when it is mapped to a context, and calibrated to a person’s state transitions throughout his/her life, and the more data we have, the widen the context, the more meaningful information we can obtain from the scores to conduct analysis , and to design interventions as part of the solution synthesis . Any solution requires these 2 parts.

1. For Phase 2, the objective is to design and learn to plan for overcoming personal limitations.
2. The subject is required to conduct vigilant assessments, set the requirements and map the working criteria to requirements.
3. Hence, s/he is required to detect personal lack, identify possible improvement approaches and provisions, and strategize contingencies to mitigate if not fully overcoming them.

It is critical to plan very carefully before starting the game. One must identify the targets (outcomes to be achieved), forecast the problems faced, set the countermeasures, contingencies (a.k.a back-up plans), and determine what is the desirable criteria to know that the requirements are met.

1. For example, a target may identified as to overcome his/her shyness, and the outcome may be a challenge to be able to gain the confidence to do street magic — something that the subject has never done before.

1. It is important to understand why you are doing it, as well as how you would be able to reach the target. State the motive, motivation, significance and opportunities that achieving them will bring.
2. The target has to be possible, yet difficult, with certain risk of failure, but surmountable, and qualifiable as a life-time record to-date that was never achieved.
3. The target, is thence, termed as a delta , i.e. something one had never been able to do before, and requires work to achieve a certain effect, and after the fact of Phase 2, s/he would be able to accomplish it.
4. Phase 2’s little idea is to use micro-feats as evidence for transformative leverages on the individual.
5. Once the subject gets the methodology, s/he will be able to use it to conduct a series of similar transformative projects into a scheme to mine for methods. This hints the next phase, Phase 3, `Metamorphosis`.

1. It is recommended that the subject drill through them before starting the game, and re-calibrate how s/he will manage the game.
2. The central idea is to learn life management. Once s/he starts the game, s/he can only adjust to the storm.
3. Hence, the war-gaming trial before the actual game gives an insight how the subject may fare. The central rule is `plan the test, test the plan`.

1. The difference between Phase 1 and Phase 2 is in Phase 1, you only focus on setting yourself going.
2. You plan what you do every day for the 100 days, and assess only to adapt and hunt for Kairos/ anti-Kairos.
3. For Phase 2, you make targets for minor, yet significant breakthroughs .

1. Logging the scores and monitoring the journals are key to the game.
2. In Phase 2, the subject should also induce a sense of proactive curiosity — with just 1 more baby step every time,
3. i.e. do `just a bit more` to induce curiosity for the next session, and holds suspense creating Zeigarnik effect.
4. You `reduce` impediments and barrier, `induce`, `conduce` and `seduce` yourself forward.