This piece has a solid foundation in challenging the traditional, often misguided view of mental toughness. I appreciate the call to rethink what true strength looks like—emphasizing strategic effort, and emotional regulation over brute force. The distinction between reacting impulsively and moving with intention is valuable, and the 85% rule is a smart reframe of sustainable performance versus burnout.
That said, it still leans on a bit of a false dichotomy—swapping one rigid framework (grit at all costs) for another (effort must always be measured and restrained). While pushing mindlessly is counterproductive, growth often requires stepping into full intensity at key moments. The real strength isn’t just in strategic conservation but in knowing when to push, when to rest, and when to adapt.
I’d go further and emphasize the role of emotional intelligence—real control doesn’t come from suppressing emotions but from understanding them deeply and using them as fuel rather than friction. Many people struggle because they resist discomfort rather than learning from it. Further, it’s crucial to recognize that control is an illusion—clinging to it only creates more tension and resistance. True power comes not from forcing outcomes, but from mastering influence—over yourself, your emotions, and the environments you navigate. The most effective leaders and high performers aren’t the ones gripping the wheel tighter; they’re the ones who understand how to steer momentum without fighting it. Trying to control everything keeps you stuck in reaction mode, while influence allows you to shape outcomes without unnecessary struggle.
Instead of simply replacing "grinding" with "calculated efficiency," I’d push people to cultivate internal awareness alongside action—so we’re not just conserving energy, but directing it with clarity and purpose. Real strength isn’t about rigid control but about adaptability, knowing when to push, when to yield, and when to redirect energy to generate real progress.
This piece has a solid foundation in challenging the traditional, often misguided view of mental toughness. I appreciate the call to rethink what true strength looks like—emphasizing strategic effort, and emotional regulation over brute force. The distinction between reacting impulsively and moving with intention is valuable, and the 85% rule is a smart reframe of sustainable performance versus burnout.
That said, it still leans on a bit of a false dichotomy—swapping one rigid framework (grit at all costs) for another (effort must always be measured and restrained). While pushing mindlessly is counterproductive, growth often requires stepping into full intensity at key moments. The real strength isn’t just in strategic conservation but in knowing when to push, when to rest, and when to adapt.
I’d go further and emphasize the role of emotional intelligence—real control doesn’t come from suppressing emotions but from understanding them deeply and using them as fuel rather than friction. Many people struggle because they resist discomfort rather than learning from it. Further, it’s crucial to recognize that control is an illusion—clinging to it only creates more tension and resistance. True power comes not from forcing outcomes, but from mastering influence—over yourself, your emotions, and the environments you navigate. The most effective leaders and high performers aren’t the ones gripping the wheel tighter; they’re the ones who understand how to steer momentum without fighting it. Trying to control everything keeps you stuck in reaction mode, while influence allows you to shape outcomes without unnecessary struggle.
Instead of simply replacing "grinding" with "calculated efficiency," I’d push people to cultivate internal awareness alongside action—so we’re not just conserving energy, but directing it with clarity and purpose. Real strength isn’t about rigid control but about adaptability, knowing when to push, when to yield, and when to redirect energy to generate real progress.