The Tim Ferriss Show - #739: Brené Brown and Edward O. Thorp

Starting point is 00:00:00 This episode is brought to you by Element, spelled L-M-N-T. What on earth is Element? It is a delicious, sugar-free electrolyte drink mix. I've stocked up on boxes and boxes of this. It was one of the first things that I bought when I saw COVID coming down the pike, and I usually use one to two per day. Element is formulated to help anyone

Starting point is 00:00:20 with their electrolyte needs and perfectly suited to folks following a keto, low-carb, or paleo diet. Or if you drink a ton of water and you might not have the right balance, that's often when I drink it. Or if you're doing any type of endurance exercise, mountain biking, et cetera, another application. If you've ever struggled to feel good on keto, low-carb, or paleo, it's most likely because even if you're consciously consuming electrolytes, you're just not getting enough. And it relates to a bunch of stuff like a hormone called aldosterone, blah, blah, blah, when insulin is low. But suffice to say, this is where Element, again spelled L-M-N-T, can help. My favorite flavor by far is citrus salt, which, as a side note, you can also use to make a kick-ass no-sugar

Starting point is 00:01:00 margarita. But for special occasions, obviously. You're probably already familiar with one of the names behind it, Rob Wolf, R-O-B-B, Rob Wolf, who is a former research biochemist and two-time New York Times bestselling author of The Paleo Solution and Wired to Eat. Rob created Element by scratching his own itch. That's how it got started. His Brazilian jiu-jitsu coaches turned him on to electrolytes as a performance enhancer. Things clicked and bam, company was born. So if you're on a low carb diet or fasting, electrolytes play a key role in relieving hunger, cramps, headaches, tiredness, and dizziness. Sugar, artificial ingredients, coloring, all that's garbage, unneeded. There's none of that in Element. And a lot of names you might recognize are already using Element. It was

Starting point is 00:01:45 recommended to me by one of my favorite athlete friends. Three Navy SEAL teams as prescribed by their master chief, marine units, FBI sniper teams, at least five NFL teams who have subscriptions. They are the exclusive hydration partner to Team USA weightlifting and on and on. You can try it risk-free. If you don't like it, Element will give you your money back, no questions asked. They have extremely low return rates. Get your free Element sample pack with any drink mix purchase at drinkelement.com slash Tim. That's drinkelement.com slash Tim. And if you're an Element insider, one of their most loyal customers, you have first access to Element Sparkling, a bold 16-ounce can of sparkling electrolyte water. Again, check it all out, drinkelement.com slash Tim, drinkelmnt.com

Starting point is 00:02:34 slash Tim. This episode is brought to you by AG1, the daily foundational nutritional supplement that supports whole body health. I view AG1, the daily foundational nutritional supplement that supports whole body health. I view AG1 as comprehensive nutritional insurance, and that is nothing new. I actually recommended AG1 in my 2010 bestseller, more than a decade ago, The 4-Hour Body, and I did not get paid to do so. I simply loved the product and felt like it was the ultimate nutritionally dense supplement that you could use conveniently while on the run, which is for me a lot of the time. I've been using it a very, very long time indeed. And I do get asked a lot what I would take if I could only take one supplement. And the true answer is invariably AG1. It simply covers a ton of bases. I usually drink

Starting point is 00:03:22 it in the mornings and frequently take their travel packs with me on the road. So what is AG1? What is this stuff? AG1 is a science-driven formulation of vitamins, probiotics, and whole food sourced nutrients. In a single scoop, AG1 gives you support for the brain, gut, and immune system. Since 2010, they have improved the formula 52 times in pursuit of making the best foundational nutrition supplement possible using rigorous standards and high quality ingredients. How many ingredients? 75. And you would be hard pressed to find a more nutrient dense formula on the market.

Starting point is 00:03:58 It has a multivitamin, multimineral superfood complex, probiotics and prebiotics for gut health, an antioxidant immune support formula, digestive enzymes, and adaptogens to help manage stress. Now, I do my best always to eat nutrient dense meals. That is the basic, basic, basic, basic requirement, right? That is why things are called supplements. Of course, that's what I focus on, but it is not always possible. It is not always easy. So part of my routine is using AG1 daily. If I'm on the road, on the run, it just makes it easy to get a lot of nutrients at once and to sleep easy knowing that I am checking a lot of important boxes. So each morning, AG1. That's just like brushing my teeth, part of the routine. It's also NSF certified for sports,

Starting point is 00:04:44 so professional athletes trust it to be safe. And each pouch of AG1 contains exactly what is on the label, does not contain harmful levels of microbes or heavy metals, and is free of 280 banned substances. It's the ultimate nutritional supplement in one easy scoop. So take ownership of your health and try AG1 today. You will get a free one-year supply of vitamin D and five free AG1 travel packs with your first subscription purchase. So learn more, check it out.

Starting point is 00:05:11 Go to drinkag1.com slash Tim. That's drinkag1, the number one. drinkag1.com slash Tim. Last time, drinkag1.com slash Tim. Check it out. Opt time, drinkag1.com slash Tim. Check it out. over metal and postcard. The Tim Ferriss Show. Hello, boys and girls, ladies and germs. This is Tim Ferriss. Welcome to another episode of The Tim Ferriss Show,

Starting point is 00:05:57 where it is my job to sit down with world-class performers from every field imaginable to tease out the habits, routines, favorite books, and so on that you can apply and test in your own lives. This episode is a two-for-one, and that's because the podcast recently hit its 10th year anniversary, which is insane to think about, and passed 1 billion downloads. To celebrate, I've curated some of the best of the best, some of my favorites from more than 700 episodes over the last decade. I could not be more excited to give you these super combo episodes. And internally, we've been calling these the super combo episodes

Starting point is 00:06:31 because my goal is to encourage you to, yes, enjoy the household names, the super famous folks, but to also introduce you to lesser known people I consider stars. These are people who have transformed my life, and I feel like they can do the same for many of you. Perhaps they got lost in a busy news cycle. Perhaps you missed an episode. Just trust me on this one. We went to great pains to put these pairings together. And for the bios of all guests, you can find that and more at Tim.blog slash combo. And now without further ado, please enjoy, and thank you for listening. First up, Dr. Brené Brown, a research professor at the University of Houston

Starting point is 00:07:14 and author of six number one New York Times bestsellers, including Atlas of the Heart, Dare to Lead, and The Gifts of Imperfection. You can find Brene at brenebrown.com. I think you can have self-love and self-acceptance and want to be better in ways. Here are the things I want to unwind. I don't think you can truly change for the better in a lasting, meaningful way unless it is driven by self-acceptance. I agree with that. So I think being the shit out of yourself for performance, which I work with a lot of sports people now, it works. And if all you have to do is pay someone for one season, or all you do is

Starting point is 00:07:57 one game or one whatever, you're okay. But lasting, meaningful change has to be driven by self-acceptance. Yeah. seen meaningful change has to be driven by self-acceptance. The other thing that is just so shocking to me about complacency and self-acceptance is, as I think back, and I would really have to go into the data, but just sitting here, I don't think I have ever come across a single person, not a single person that I can think of who was complacent driven by self-acceptance. I don't know that that is not an oxymoron. I got to tell you that self-aware complacency doesn't work for me as a construct. Self-aware, no. Or self-accepted complacency. I don't know that I believe that. Yeah. I mean, I'll push a little bit.

Starting point is 00:08:45 I knew you were going to get the look on your face. Yeah, I would say, and I think that I'm struggling for the right terminology, but I think we all know people who are alcoholics, have various issues, and they are in denial of having problems. Yes. Let me stop you there. Yeah. And say that is neither self-awareness nor self-acceptance. Definitely not self-awareness.

Starting point is 00:09:09 But not self-acceptance either. Well, I would, and maybe there's a better word, but I would just say that there are people who are delusional to the extent that they either believe they don't have a problem that they have, or they have a problem and refuse to accept it as a problem. We can go a lot of directions with this, but I would say that I think we can agree there are complacent people. There are complacent people. And among those complacent people, I think there are those who hate themselves. There are those who love themselves and are narcissistic. And I know a number of these. And then there's a lot in

Starting point is 00:09:46 between. And I think that there are complacent, in some respects, complacent narcissists who, almost by definition, being a narcissist, love themselves. So is that self-acceptance? Maybe yes, maybe no. I would say that it is, but it's a disabling self-acceptance. Whereas to your point about lasting behavioral change, I think that at least psychologically, if you are divorcing parts of yourself, if you hate parts of yourself, aspects of yourself that have been informed by your history, and I'm borrowing this phrase from somewhere else, but what you resist persists. And that you are going to carry that unproductive and in some ways self-defeating tension within you, even if someone is forcing you to change your behavior or incentivizing you to change your external behavior.

Starting point is 00:10:38 And so even if technically you're changing a behavior, if you carry self-loathing, even partial self-loathing with even partial self-loathing with you, hating an aspect of yourself or a certain emotion within yourself. I view that as a loss. I agree. Yeah. So this is getting out there a bit, but this is the type of stuff that sometimes I worry that I've lost my audience. Can I make a confession? Yeah. Because for a long time, I was thinking about writing a blog post about this,

Starting point is 00:11:05 but for a very long time, if you look at all the books that I've written, it's like book on entrepreneurship, book on physical performance, book on cognitive performance and learning and the four-hour chef, et cetera, et cetera. It's mostly developmental. It's about improving performance in one or more areas. And now what I've spent more and more time on, like we're spending time on it right now, is the inner game. For sure. And the importance of developing a keen level of self-awareness so that you can examine the contents of your, this is going to get super woo for a second, but the contents of your consciousness, wherever you go, you're carrying your mind with you. And so to develop a familiarity with that, I think is the crux skill

Starting point is 00:11:50 that underlies everything else. And you and I both know plenty of achievers who are miserable, who are high performing, well-known people who are utterly miserable. And to me, the question of why is that? How can that be the case? Is the question that I'm extremely interested in these days. But I worry that having built an audience who is largely, not entirely kind of go, go, go, rah, rah, rah, win, win, win, and there's nothing wrong with that, but people who are trying to develop skills and competitive advantages and so on, then I may lose a large portion of those people in shifting into talking about more of these things. We'll see where it goes, but that's something that has occurred to me. And I think I'm willing to make that trade. I think I'm willing to take that if that's a cost of doing business. I don't know. So a couple of things. One, the go, go, go audience that you've built,

Starting point is 00:12:49 this may scare them, but I mean, as someone who works with elite athletes and professional folks and CEOs and those things, what I can tell you is this is the hardest challenge you've issued. And it's not about the conceptual complexity of what we're talking about. It's about unlocking performance is one thing.

Starting point is 00:13:08 Unlocking people, way harder, way scarier. And unlocking ourselves and creating self-awareness. To me, you would be remiss not to go here. Because, I don't know, I think something you said when you were talking about we all know a lot of narcissists and they love themselves, but that's actually not true. Do you know that narcissism is the most shame-based of all the personality disorders? Narcissism is not about self-love at all. It's about grandiosity driven by high performance and self-hatred. I define it as the shame-based fear of being ordinary. And so you have, to me, you have this audience that, and I'm one of them, I mean, like, and I'm probably an outlier, I guess, and it's like me being a Rush fan.

Starting point is 00:13:54 Like, there's always outliers. The audience is like 40 to 50% female, but I appreciate it. Yeah, yeah, it is. It's shifted a lot in the last handful of years. Yeah, but I think it. Is it? Yeah. Yeah, it is. It's shifted a lot in the last handful of years. Yeah. But I think when I get invited in by a Fortune 50 CEO and here she says, look, we need help. We need help with the team. They're not asking me to help with time productivity. They're not helping me to set up a scrum or agile process for software development. They're saying we're at each other's throats. We hate each other.

Starting point is 00:14:28 It's a shame-based finger pointing. Like it's all about self-awareness and changing those behaviors. And to me, the hard thing about this area in your work is a lot of what I've learned from you that has changed my life has been not only effectiveness-based, but efficiency based. And so where you can lose people with this conversation is this is not an

Starting point is 00:14:49 efficient process. Yeah. Right. Do you know what I mean? There's no, I don't think there's a four hour self-awareness. It's like, I have no plans to write that.

Starting point is 00:14:58 Yeah. But I mean, but I, but people would love it if you could, if you could unlock that fast. But to me, this is the capstone conversation for you. Yeah.

Starting point is 00:15:07 Do you know what I mean? I do. Because what's it all in for? Yeah. You know, like, I'm fit, I'm winning, I'm smart, I'm successful, and I'm on my third marriage, and I don't speak to any of my children. Yeah. Which you see a lot. I see all the time. All the time, yeah.

Starting point is 00:15:29 Right, because I'm going to tell you, not to dismiss the importance of that work, that's easier. Yeah, yeah, it is easier. It is easier, you know, because the thing about these conversations that you and I end up having every time we sit down, or this is the second time, but both times we've sat down, is what differentiates us as a social species is the need to be seen and known and loved. And the need to see and know and love others.

Starting point is 00:16:00 And no one rides for free. Like, we all come into this adulthood with hard stuff. And what I would say is true about complacency. And 95% of what I see that people call pathology is it's armor. Yeah. It's behaviors and ways of thinking that I've developed to protect myself from being hurt. I have a question for you about that. So my question related to armor is, I'll get to through a segue, which is a quote that I want to say Tara Brock,

Starting point is 00:16:38 the well-known meditation teacher, also writer, Radical Acceptance is a fantastic book, shared with me, which I'm going to paraphrase, and it's along the lines of, you know, a great sage once said, there's only one real question that matters, and that is, what are you unwilling to feel? I've thought about that a lot. And not to say I have any concise answers to that, but I think it's an anecdote really worth meditating on. I've thought about it. What do you say to the people you meet who are on the third marriage, their kids don't talk to them, and there are certain things that they have convinced themselves subconsciously or otherwise, maybe through an abusive upbringing or trauma, whatever it might be, that it is unsafe to feel certain things. And you come in, they've asked for help,

Starting point is 00:17:26 but they do not want to open Pandora's box, right? They do not want someone to drag them into the deep waters of emotions that they've kept under lock and key for so long. How do you help someone like that? What do you suggest to them? Because it does get messy, right? It's going to get messy before it gets clean, right? At least in my experience, it's like, oh, you're going to do spring cleaning? Guess what? You got to take all the things that are up on the shelves, all the things in the drawers, all the things that are hanging on coat hangers, and you're going to put them in the middle of the room and it's going to be a mess. It's going to be a fucking mess. Yeah. And you're going to be pissed that you did it halfway through.

Starting point is 00:18:01 But you can't really get past go without that type of step. So for someone who's listening to this and says, you know what, I buy it. Like I get it. And yet, what do I do? Because I've had on this armor for so long. So I would say a couple of things. I mean, the first thing I always feel like

Starting point is 00:18:18 is really important to say is that I'm a researcher. And so I'm not a therapist. That would differentiate me with Esther. Like I don't see clients. If I go in and I'm working with CEOs and this question comes up all the time, what I would say to people is, Pandora's box is closed right now, but are you under the impression that you're living outside of the box or in the box? Yeah, I like that.

Starting point is 00:18:40 You don't want to open Pandora's box. That's strange to me because you're living inside Pandora's box and I feel like you've asked me to come here to open it up. We're not going to do this process without walking through some deep shit. There's going to be deep, swift water. And if the water is super deep and swift, sure the same for you, that we all grew up and experienced to varying degrees trauma, disappointment, hard stuff. We armored up, and at some point, that armor no longer serves us. And so what I think I would say to that person is, how is not talking about this serving you? I've been sober for 23 years. So someone in AA would be like, how's that shit working for you? I probably would put a softer spin on it than that over black coffee and a cigarette. But I would say that it's not serving anymore. And now the weight of the armor is too heavy and it's not protecting you. It's keeping you from being seen and known by others.

Starting point is 00:19:51 And so this is, I mean, just how you quintessentially, this is the developmental milestone of midlife from late 30s to through probably your 60s. This is the question. This is when the universe comes down and puts your hands on your shoulders and pulls you close and whispers in your ear, I'm not fucking around. You're halfway to dead. The armor is keeping you from growing into the gifts I've given you. That is not without penalty. Time is up. So this is what you see happen to people in midlife. And it's not a crisis. It's a slow, brutal unraveling. And this is where everything that we thought protected us keeps us from being the partners, the parents, the professionals, the people that we want to be. And I've only seen, this is a fork in the road. I've only seen two responses to this

Starting point is 00:20:46 visit from the universe. There was my response, which I was like, screw you, bring it. Do you think you can best me? And then it was just one nightmare situation after another until, you know, you're not going to win that fight. I think if you say, you know what, I'm not going to do it, then you've got to double down. These are the people that walk through the world, double down on their own shit in denial, cheek squeezed as they walk and cause so much pain in the world. To themselves as well. I mean, yes, because it is so much easier to offload pain than to feel pain. And so you really have a choice in midlife. The first step of it, the whole process is what armor, I'm not saying just pull off all the armor

Starting point is 00:21:35 and streak through Austin, because I think you can't replace the armor with something. I think it's curiosity is what you replace it. You just become very curious about yourself, about the world. Why did I react that way? When Tim asked me that question, I wanted to hit him over the head with a Topo Chico bottle. What was going on there? Do you know what I mean? What is my obsession about this?

Starting point is 00:21:56 You just become very curious. Curiosity is really the superpower for the second half of our lives because it keeps us learning. It keeps us asking questions and it increases our self-awareness. But when you see, and I think it's really hard because I'll walk into a situation and the person who invited me is usually the CEO. And then you'll have the cross-armed, pissed off, clenched cheek, like F you looking person, usually in operations or technology, you know? And then they're like,

Starting point is 00:22:29 what's the business case for you being here? Yeah, right. Like, cause here's our stock price. Here's what's going on. Here's our valuation. Like, what do you need? And then, you know, the CEO usually say, fucking hate each other.

Starting point is 00:22:40 And this can only last for so long. You know, it's the end of every great band, right? Like this is going to come to an, and it's going to be terrible. And so, I don't know. I think you can't pull it all off at once. For all of us, there's trauma. And people are like, no, there's not trauma for all of us. There's trauma for people who have been abused physically, sexually, emotionally.

Starting point is 00:23:03 There's trauma for people of color and people who have been on the margins. There's trauma for all of us. It's just different levels of trauma. Yeah. You know, I mean, escape childhood with nothing is, I haven't met that person yet. No, I haven't either. Right. So the trauma stuff, literally the trauma message in our body is you take this armor off, we die. So you protect us at all costs and leave this on. A lot of that work has to be done with a therapist. The other two hacks that I think have saved our marriage besides just showing up and kind of using

Starting point is 00:23:39 some of these things like what's working, what was hard is the 80-20. So everyone says marriage should be 50-50. It's the biggest crock of bullshit I've ever heard. It's never 50-50, ever. And so what we do is we quantify where we are. So if Steve comes home and he'll be like, I got 20. Just in terms of energy. Just energy, investment, kindness, patience, I had 20. And I'll be like, I'll cover you. I got you, brother. I'll pull the 80. Sometimes we come home, which we have done a lot. My mom has been sick. And I'll say, I've got 10. And she, like two days ago said, I'm riding a solid 25. So we know that we have to sit down at the table anytime we have less than 100 combined

Starting point is 00:24:24 and figure out a plan of kindness toward each other. Oh, I love that. Yeah, because the thing is, marriage is not something that's 50-50. A partnership works when you can carry their 20 or they can carry your 20. And that when you both just have 20, you have a plan where you don't hurt each other. Yeah, it's your threadbare, right? Yeah, and so what we'll say is, I'm like, I've got 10. And he'll be like, I got maybe 25.

Starting point is 00:24:49 We're like, put all the groceries that are supposed to be great and healthy in the freezer. We're ordering out. Get the housekeeper here an extra day. And we're canceling anything with people that we really actually don't like. So how can we create some buffer in the system? No, we do that. And then a day or two later, he'll be like, I'm riding a 60. I'm like, oh my God, work is kicking my ass.

Starting point is 00:25:09 I'm still at a 20. He's like, I got you, but we're a spare 20. So let's ask Charlie if he wants to skip water polo practice today and let's all turn in at eight o'clock. Huge. The other thing I would say too that now I'm thinking about that is we made a determination very early. There's kid-focused families, parent-focused families, and family-focused families. We're a family-focused family. So that means that if you want to do water polo, Eagle Scouts, tennis, and skeet shooting, then that comes to the family.

Starting point is 00:25:40 And the family agrees what will keep the family healthy. Like I've got a book launch. I've got this. Steve's got patients. He's taking on others I've got a book launch. I've got this. Steve's got patients. He's taking on others. You know, he's a pediatrician. He's doing this. So what works for our family right now is you can do two extracurriculars and I'm going to have a two-week tour, not a four-week tour. But we put the family as the system that we serve.

Starting point is 00:26:00 It's not the kids at the parents' cost or the parents at the kids' cost. It's the family. And it is remarkable. How do you weigh, if you do at all, the voting system, so to speak? If you all come to the table, does everyone have equal vote in the decision-making process? No. No, this is a dictatorship. Yeah, we don't even bullshit around that.

Starting point is 00:26:24 It's like when my kids, if I say, oh, shit, my kids are like, Ooh, you can't say that. I'm like, I say anything I want. You can't say that. And when you're old enough, you can do whatever you want. You get your cursing license. Yeah. But right now I can totally do that. Watch me. So we have very, we talked to our kids about everything. We're super open. Steve and I both have veto power and we rarely use it. I bet I pulled out my veto card once in the last five years. Veto meaning kid says, I want to do X, and you say, can't do X. Or Steve.

Starting point is 00:26:54 Or Steve. Yeah. I'm like, I have to veto that. I cannot do that. And then we really respect the veto because we don't overuse it. So our thing with our kids, this is my theory on parenting. My theory on parenting is the best we can do is a loving course from compliance to commitment. That your kids need to do what you're asking them to do out of compliance. So don't run into the street,

Starting point is 00:27:19 don't do this. You're not allowed to watch that kind of TV. You're not allowed to play that kind of video game. You need to comply. Otherwise, there's some natural consequences. At some point, I've got a 14-year-old now. He's at other people's house doing video. And so if all I teach him is compliance and don't give him the why about why you can't do that. If I don't say yes every time I can and explain the no's, then when he's there, and I can tell you that we got a call from a parent maybe a month ago and said, the boys were having a sleepover. They wanted to watch, I don't know,

Starting point is 00:27:51 some R-rated violent thing. And Charlie said, can we watch something else? My parents are not cool with us. He didn't have to do that. But he's moved to a commitment to our family values because we say yes every time we can. We don't do any of that stuff that my parents did because I said no.

Starting point is 00:28:10 Just a quick thanks to one of our sponsors and we'll be right back to the show. This episode is brought to you by LinkedIn Ads. As a business-to-business marketer, your needs are unique. The B2B buying cycles are long and your customers face incredibly complex decisions. Isn't it time you had a marketing platform that was built specifically for you and your needs? LinkedIn ads allows you to build the right relationships, drive results, and reach your customers in a respectful environment. You'll have direct access to and build relationships with decision makers, 1 billion members, 180 million senior level executives, and 10 million C-level executives.

Starting point is 00:28:47 You'll be able to drive results with targeting and measurement tools built specifically for B2B. In technology specifically, LinkedIn generated a 2 to 5x higher return on ad spend than other social media platforms based on an assessment by analytic partners. 79% of B2B content marketers said LinkedIn produces the best results for paid media. So make B2B marketing everything it can be and get a $100 credit on your next campaign. Check it out. Go to linkedin.com slash TFS to claim your credit. That is linkedin.com slash TFS as in Tim Ferriss show. One more time, linkedin.com slash TFS. Terms and conditions apply. And now, Edward O. Thorpe, legendary blackjack player, hedge fund manager, and mathematics

Starting point is 00:29:38 professor, and author of Beat the Dealer, and A Man for All Markets, From Las Vegas to Wall Street, How I Beat the Dealer and the Market. Find him on Twitter at Edward O. Thorpe. Ed, it is so nice to see you and thank you for making the time. Pleasure to be here, Tim. I've enjoyed many of your podcasts. It's lovely to finally connect and perhaps we'll get to the small world that connected us at some point. But I thought we could begin with a little bit of background for people who may not have the entire context and then we can fill in the gaps. So perhaps you could speak to a little bit of your growing up and your formal education, if you wouldn't mind. I was born in Chicago during the reign of Herbert Hoover, president number 31.

Starting point is 00:30:30 So I've seen 16 presidents. I moved out to California with my parents during World War II and basically grew up in California, went through junior high school and high school out here, and then went to UC Berkeley and UCLA. And I got a bachelor's degree and a master's degree in physics. And then in the middle of my PhD for physics, I realized I needed more math. So I started taking it and then I saw I could graduate more rapidly in mathematics. So I got my PhD in math instead. And then I went on

Starting point is 00:31:05 to teach at UCLA, MIT, New Mexico State University, and finally, the University of California, Irvine. Now, how did gambling or interest in those types of applications of physics or mathematics enter the picture for you? Well, I'm a curious person, and you could say that it happened purely by chance. When I was teaching at UCLA, I got interested in beating blackjack. Somebody told me about an article that would let me play almost even. So one Christmas vacation, my wife and I went out, actually Christmas vacation of 1958, just after I got my PhD. We went out to Las Vegas, and I never gambled because I knew it was a loser for most people. And the odds were against you, but I bet $10, and I played for about 40 minutes, and I had an interesting experience.

Starting point is 00:32:01 The first 20 minutes, I had a little card telling me what to do, and people thought I was a fool who knew nothing about the game. And they were right that I knew nothing about the game, but the card made me much smarter than the other players. I made some remarkable plays that attracted their attention, and then they all hovered around. They wanted to see how I was making these plays. In one of them, I got a seven card 21,

Starting point is 00:32:26 which is very rare and in most places paid a bonus. They didn't pay a bonus in this particular place, but they thought I was trying for that and I somehow managed to produce it. So I realized they didn't know much about the game really. And I went back and read carefully the statistics article and realized that I could see from my math background how to actually devise a system to beat the game. Then I set about to do it.

Starting point is 00:32:53 And about that time, I moved from UCLA to MIT, and I had access to the big computers at MIT. This was back in 1959. They had an IBM 704, which was a refrigerator-sized machine that served 30 New England universities. So I taught myself how to program. And as I worked my way through with my ideas, I saw that I had a winning system. And it was just a matter of finishing all the calculations. So I went ahead and did that. I wanted to get this system published because I thought that from my experience in mathematics and what I'd seen happen elsewhere, other people would claim they did it and grab

Starting point is 00:33:31 the credit. That annoyed me because it already happened to be in mathematics a couple of times. So I went shopping for somebody who could get me quick publication. And it turned out that on the MIT campus, there was a man who I knew nothing about named Claude Shannon, who was an institute professor, and he was a member of the National Academy of Sciences. So he could get me, if he approved of what I wrote, a quick publication in the Proceedings of the National Academy. It would only take a couple of months to get it out. So I looked him up one day and the secretary at MIT's math department said, there's no point going to see him. He doesn't see people. He's very private. And if you do get to see him, you're only going to have five minutes.

Starting point is 00:34:16 So I finally managed to see him at lunch for five minutes. After we talked, he said, well, it looks like you've got all the main ideas here. Yes, I'll put this through, but we have to change the title. The title was A Winning Strategy for Blackjack, and he changed it to something like A Favorable Strategy for 21, which sounded better. He didn't want to make too bold a statement for the National Academy and make it look like this was just a gambling paper. So anyhow, the paper got sent in, and it caused a sensation because I had submitted an abstract to the American Mathematical Society meeting in Washington, D.C., where I was going to present. By the way, they initially rejected the abstract, saying that this is just another fool with a system that doesn't work, because we know you can't beat gambling games. But on the abstract committee was a person I knew

Starting point is 00:35:16 well from UCLA, a number theorist named John Selfridge, became quite well known in number theory. And he said, well, if Thorpe says it's true, it probably is. So you should accept this abstract. So I went there and I presented. And I thought there'd be about 50 mathematicians in the audience. But instead, there were 300 people. It was jammed. And a lot of people were very odd looking.

Starting point is 00:35:40 They had pinky rings on and sunglasses and tropical shirts in the middle of winter. So after I finished, they lunged for my little handout. I brought 50 handouts, thinking that's all I need there. And I basically tossed the handouts out and left as quickly as I could. Then I was picked up by a fellow named Tom Wolfe, who became a famous American novelist. He was a young reporter then. He wrote a piece for AP, which went across the country. And so it got massive press. That led to me writing a book and telling everybody how to do it after a couple of years. Between the time I wrote the book, though, and when I told people how to do it by publishing, I went out and played blackjack myself

Starting point is 00:36:26 and proved the system worked. I figured that there's no point in writing a book unless I knew it really worked. I knew it worked in theory, but what if you actually tried to do it? And you know, a lot of things, they seem to work in theory, but when you get down and actually put something to the test,

Starting point is 00:36:42 you find out there are all kinds of things you didn't think of. Turned out in this case, it worked very well. We made in one weekend with a test $11,000, which is about that with a zero on the end. In today's money, this is in about 20 hours of serious play. So I had a lunch money at MIT for a very long time thereafter.

Starting point is 00:37:04 Ed, let me just jump in for a moment. So a couple of questions. I could have a thousand follow-up questions, but I'll just limit it to a handful. The first was for that $11,000, which would be, say, $110,000 in today's dollars, 20 hours of serious play. Do you recall roughly what the bankroll was? Yeah, it was $10,000. Oh, that was the starting. Okay, got it. We started and we added $11,000. I see. I see. Got it. On top of that.

Starting point is 00:37:33 And my prediction before we went was that that's what would happen. So it panned out. All right. Two other questions, rewinding a bit to your earlier story. When you were first sitting at that blackjack table, if I heard you correctly, you said you had a little card. If I heard you correctly, could you describe what was on the card? Yeah, it was a set of rules for hitting and standing, doubling down, and pair splitting. And it was the best way to play with a higher degree of approximation. It was the best way to play against a full deck or what was left of a randomly shuffled deck if you didn't know anything more about the cards that had been used up. And my contribution after I understood this was to figure out what would happen when some of the

Starting point is 00:38:17 cards are missing from the deck because the cards that are used up are not a representative sample of the cards in the deck. They can vary quite radically. For example, you might use all the aces early, and that would be bad for the player. Or you might use none of them up until late in the game, and that would be quite good for the player. And with Claude Shannon, the person who doesn't meet anyone, you said you were able to get five minutes at lunch. Why were you able to get time with Claude? Or why do you think he were able to get five minutes at lunch. Why were you able to

Starting point is 00:38:45 get time with Claude? Or why do you think he was willing to spend time with you? It turns out that he was willing to spend five minutes, I think probably just to get rid of me. But after we talked, he kept asking me questions and it became 15 minutes. And then he approved the paper that I wanted to submit. And then he said, what else are you working on? So I said, well, there's another project which actually I started before Blackjack and which got me interested in gambling. And that's a way of beating roulette. And Claude Shannon, it turns out, was probably the king of gadgeteers.

Starting point is 00:39:22 He built many ingenious machines over the course of his life. He built robots that would run mazes, machines that would play chess. He just loved all that sort of thing. And he had a house full of gadgets and equipment, hundreds of thousands of dollars worth, valued money back in 1958, 59. So when he heard about roulette and I explained to him what my ideas were there, he got very excited. So we continued to talk and this five-minute meeting became half an hour and then an hour. And then we adjourned to the cafeteria at MIT to grab a bite

Starting point is 00:39:59 and we went on for another couple of hours. And we decided that we would join together and make an all-out effort to build a machine that would allow us to predict the outcome of our roulette game. And the house and casinos have had to, I was going to say adapt, but really counteract your strategies and tools by changing the rules. So could you say more about what you then devised in the case of Roulette? What we did was we built a small computer that had about 11 transistors in it. 11 or 12, I don't remember which because we had two versions, and I forget whether we ended up with the 11 or 12 transistor version. The computer is now at the MIT Museum in Cambridge. It's been on exhibit in various parts of the world at one time or another.

Starting point is 00:40:55 In any case, over about a nine- or ten-month period, we worked in Shannon's basement almost full-time, and we built this wearable computer. It turned out to be the first wearable computer according to the MIT Media Lab. And one person would wear the computer and enter push-button information about the position and velocity of the ball and the rotating wheel in the center. And then the computer would instantly, there's a trick there, I do mean instantly, it would instantly tell you where to bet. And so the other person would sit at the roulette table, apparently connected with the observer who was busy putting in the roulette information. And that person would hear a series of musical tones. And when the musical tone stopped,

Starting point is 00:41:43 the last tone in the octave would tell them what section of the wheel to bet on. And when the musical tone stopped, the last tone in the octave would tell them what section of the wheel to bet on. We divided the wheel into eight sections with a little bit of overlap. And so the person who bet, which happened to be me, was able to quickly put down money on five neighboring numbers on the wheel and had a massive edge of 44%. So the piles of dimes we started out with our experiment, dime chips, became huge piles of dimes very quickly. So the computer worked wonderfully well. Yeah, I want to take a step back just for people who are listening and say that there are many reasons that I wanted to have this conversation with you. And it is not specifically related to gambling in the sense that what most,

Starting point is 00:42:31 there are many things that interest me about your life and your thinking. And my hope is that for people listening, they get a window into at least two things. One would be your methods of thinking, frames and works for thinking, how you think about thinking, and then also your personal approach to health and fitness. Because as people may have picked up with some of the references, could you tell everyone listening what your age is as we speak today? I'm 89. And for those people who can't see video,

Starting point is 00:43:06 you look like you're in your 60s. And I am just beyond excited to hop right into that. So we're going to jump around quite a bit. We want to do this exactly chronologically. But could you perhaps describe your approach to health and fitness? And you could tackle that starting wherever you like. Is it just that you were given the right parents and out of the box have tremendous genetics? Is there more to it? How would you begin to unpack this? I kind of wandered into health and fitness by accident initially, just like I've wandered into blackjack and roulette. I'm curious and always looking for things to understand. I like the idea of self-improvement too. So I was walking behind

Starting point is 00:43:51 the student co-op one night when I was about 20 and heard a bunch of clanking. And I looked down in the basement and there were some fairly burly guys down there pumping iron. And I walked in and I said, you know, this is a waste of time. This is ridiculous. So one of them said to me, I'll bet you a milkshake that if you work out with us for a year, just one hour an evening, three evenings a week, you'll double your strength in a set of exercises that they described. So I said, I don't believe it. Let's try it. So I went down and the four exercises were the squat with a barbell on a rack, the military overhead press, the bench press, and deadlift. It wasn't deadlift. It was something else. I forget the fourth one at the moment, but I'll think of it. Yeah. Clean and jerk, maybe. Who knows? Or bent row.

Starting point is 00:44:47 It was something along those lines. But a compound exercise like the others. Yeah. So there was a fourth exercise. So anyhow, what happened was I was a, I wouldn't say 98-pound weakling, but maybe a 150- pound weakling. And at the end of the year, I could military press 185, which was at least double what I started with. I could bench press 375. I could do 15 at 325. And I could,

Starting point is 00:45:20 yeah, I could squat with 375. I could do sets. I forget what the other one was. I wish I could squat with 375. I could do sets. I forget what the other one was. I wish I could remember it. In any case, I was astounded that all this came to pass. So it made me pay attention to strength at least. And some time went by, and I did a little swimming because I got interested in scuba diving. And then one day in my 30s, I was jogging along the beach with my brother-in-law.

Starting point is 00:45:52 And he said, let's go for a little jog. I went for about a quarter mile and I was gasping. I was 35 then, I remember. I said, this is awful. I'm in terrible shape. I have to do something about this. So they had a book on aerobics by somebody named Ken Cooper, who had a lab down in Texas and started, in large part, the aerobics revolution that swept the country. So I started keeping track of his points. He gave you points for

Starting point is 00:46:17 various degrees of aerobic effort. I think if you did a mile in between 12 and 15 minutes, you got one point. And you did between 10 and a half and 12, you got two points and so forth. So I started trying to run a mile a day and I did that. Well, I ran a mile every Saturday to start with. And then one Saturday, I decided to try a little further. So I ran two and then three. And then I said, I'll try a 10 mile race. So I got under a 10 mile race, which was kind of foolish, but I finished and I did reasonably well. So then I said,

Starting point is 00:46:53 I'll try a marathon. So then I got into marathon running and I really liked that. I did that for about 20 years until I hurt my back weightlifting. All my bad events have been from pushing myself athletically. So hurting my back was probably the worst thing. It herniated the disc, so I had to stop heavy pounding and heavy running. But 20 years of road running, well, more than that, maybe 25 years, and a marathon gave me, I think, a very good base for going forward. And so now I do things like I'll walk about three miles three or four times a week, and I spend about two days in the gym doing stretching and strength exercising, core strengthening, and so on.

Starting point is 00:47:39 A lot of emphasis on core because of my back, which is just fine now. I was just going to ask how your approach seems like it has evolved and changed over time, say after 50 years of age or in the last, say, 40 years or so. Are there any particular changes that you made in addition to the core strengthening to support the back that you think have contributed to your longevity? I've evolved. I try to listen to my body, so I do what I enjoy. And the rule I started to follow was, some is better than none,

Starting point is 00:48:13 and more up to a point is better than less. So there's no excuse. I mean, if you tell yourself, I'm not gonna do this because I can't do the whole program, that's a big mistake, just start doing it. And I find that if you start doing it and you get used to it, you find more and more things that you kind of like that you could build on. And then you just keep getting better at it. I was probably in my best shape at around 55 to 65 because of all this.

Starting point is 00:48:40 That is inspiring. I am just about to turn 45, and even amongst my, let's just say, age cohort, it's very common for me to see people giving up even in their 40s and blaming it on age. But with you sitting in front of me describing your trajectory and sort of adaptive habits, I feel like those excuses don't hold a whole lot of weight. One thing that's pretty neat is race walking. I did that for a while. And that's something that is lower impact than running, but you can get the same kind of aerobic workout. So that's something I direct people towards. What does your strength training look like now or over the last few decades? Well, as I get older, it declines. I get weaker and it gets a little harder to do things. And I feel a little tired where I can't do as many reps or sets of things.

Starting point is 00:49:41 So I have a mix of things that I do now. I will do squats, usually now just body weight. And I try to, I'll do dumbbell squats or lunges with a lot of emphasis on one leg and then shift and do a lot of weight on the other leg. Do pull-ups. I think the best I've done recently, which is not very much, is four underhand pull-ups and two overhand pull-ups. I think the best I've done recently, which is not very much, is four underhand pull-ups and two overhand pull-ups. Ten years ago, I could do a dozen of each. Well, I do a lot of back exercises regularly on the mat, and that's very helpful for keeping my back in shape and keeping my core in pretty good condition. So we may come back to this, but let's segue and go back in time

Starting point is 00:50:26 yet again and look at investing. How did finance or investing enter the scene for you? Well, the way I got into finance and investing was that I made money at Blackjack and from book royalties. This first time in my life I had any spare money. Before that, as an academic, my wife and I were living from month to month with no surplus. And then kids were coming, and that made it even tougher. So once I had some money from both gambling and book royalties, I wanted to figure out what to do with it. And so investing made good sense to me. I would put some capital aside and let it grow.

Starting point is 00:51:10 I started out by making a lot of foolish beginner mistakes, which cost me. And then I decided to sit down and really figure this thing out. And so I began to study investing in my spare time. So I spent the summer of 1964, which was, I guess, the third year I was at New Mexico State, just reading all summer in a big bookstore in Beverly Hills, Martindale's, reading all the investment books and newspapers they had. And then I started again in the summer of 65, reading whatever I could find. And I happened to get a little book on warrants, common stock purchase warrants, which were the forerunner to what people call call options now. And when I saw that, a light came on and I realized that I could mathematize this and I could figure out how to value these things.

Starting point is 00:52:02 And if I did that, I'd probably be ahead of the crowd who didn't know how to do these things. And if I did that, I'd probably be ahead of the crowd who didn't know how to do these things. And so I'd probably have an edge. By chance, I came to UC Irvine when it opened in the fall of 1965. And I was telling one of the deans there about this idea that I had and that I was working on. He said, oh, we have someone else who does that. And it turned out to be Sheen Kasuf. And so the two of us hooked up and Sheen Kasuf had actually been doing it in practice. And he'd already made an elementary model for trying to charge warrants. So we decided to write a book together and work out more of the details and theory. And so that became the book

Starting point is 00:52:42 Beat the Market. And that launched both of us into separate businesses. And so I began to do what I call warrant hedges. And basically, you buy a cheap warrant and you short common stock against it. That's one way. Or you buy an overpriced warrant and you short it. I said, buy. You short an overpriced warrant, and you buy the common stock against it to hedge the risk because they tend to move together. In the case of the overpriced warrant, as it collapses toward zero or toward its conversion value, you capture an excess return. And what I found was that you could make a steady 25% a year with practically no risk doing this. So I was doing it for myself, and then word spread around UCI campus, and people wanted to sign up.

Starting point is 00:53:39 So I signed up the dean of the graduate division, and I also signed up the secretary to the chancellor, and some people in the math department and so forth. So I was managing a whole collection of little accounts for people and they were making 25% a year and they kept telling everybody about it. The dean of the graduate division happened to be an investor also with a fellow named Warren Buffett. And Warren Buffett was at that point shutting down his partnership because everything was overpriced back in 1968. Prices were crazy. And the dean of the graduate division wanted to know where to move his money to. So he introduced me to Warren Buffett to kind of check me out to see if I might be a good place to

Starting point is 00:54:14 put it. And so Warren and I got along fine. And apparently, I passed the test because the dean gave me his money to invest. And so I got to know Warren Buffett and I was sorry to see that he was going out of business because I thought, as I told my wife then, this is going to be the richest man in the world. We'll come back to that a little later. I think you'll find the follow-up to that quite interesting. So I got the idea of forming a hedge fund from Warren Buffett who was just closing down his hedge fund. So I went into business managing accounts and then merged the accounts into the hedge fund and started this hedge fund for private limited partnership. That ran for about 20 years and used ideas that I kept generating, mathematical finance

Starting point is 00:54:59 ideas to keep staying ahead of other investors and making excess returns. And in 20 years, we only had three down months out of all those months. And those down months were less than 1%. So basically, just printed money every month. And it made just under 20% annualized during that time. I'm very risk averse, as you'll find as we continue to talk. And so this thing ran with extremely low risk, but yet had very high return. So that was my entree into investing. That's one hell of an entree.

Starting point is 00:55:34 20 to 25% annually. Let's touch on a few points here. So there were two other people who I believe read Beat the Market or were influenced by it, Fisher Black and Myron Scholes. Could you just perhaps fill in the dots with that? Because Nassim Taleb refers to the Black-Scholes model with a different name. Could you perhaps just fill in the gaps there for people who are listening? I actually figured out what this model was back in the middle of 1967. And I decided that I would just use it for myself. And then later, I kept it quiet for my own investors. The idea was to basically make a lot of money out of it

Starting point is 00:56:21 for everybody. And it was fun to me just to develop it and apply it to various things. Now, Fisher Black and Myron Scholes read Beat the Market, which was sort of the launching pad for me into finding this model. And it was also a launching pad for them. They saw how to improve the ideas in Beat the Market. And they made a mathematical finance model that value warrants and options very accurately. So it was based on a set of assumptions that are fairly narrow, but pretty good. And I thought that I was the only one who had this model. So when the Chicago Board Options Exchange opened in 1973, I thought I'd have the feel to myself.

Starting point is 00:57:08 But unfortunately, Fisher Black and Myron Scholes published the idea. And they did a better job of the model than I did because they had very tight mathematics behind their derivation. I had to make a couple of assumptions to get to the same point, but they were reasonable assumptions. I turned it out to stand up in practice and in theory later on. So in any case, they published the model, and I thought, oh, I have this hedge fund I've been running for a few years. It's been doing well. We're going to make a lot of money in options, but now Black and Scholes have told everybody what the secret is.

Starting point is 00:57:42 But people didn't catch on right away. So when the Chicago Board Options Exchange opened for business in April 1973, the only people on the floor were my traders. It was like having machine guns against bows and arrows. For people who don't know, Scholz went on to win the Nobel Prize for Economics in 1997. Yes, and a black would have been there too if he hadn't died of cancer before that. Robert Merton was at MIT where they've been doing a lot of good theoretical work on the development of warrants and options. And so he wrote some beautiful papers about this theory about the same time that Black

Starting point is 00:58:22 and Scholes were doing their work. So the prize was awarded jointly to that Black and Scholes were doing their work. So the prize was awarded jointly to Merton and Scholes. And I will say this about the prize. The people who publish are the ones who get the prizes. The people who don't publish, it doesn't matter what they figured out or when they figured it out, they don't get the prizes, since they don't deserve to. Because if you don't publish, you haven't really proven to the world that you really did this on the one hand, and you haven't really changed the world

Starting point is 00:58:48 in the same way that people who publish do. So I think the people who don't publish don't have claims to these prizes. Having the tool in place turned out to be revolutionary for my life because I was able to use this tool and I had some shortcuts in using it that other people didn't have for a very long time because I developed it myself beforehand and they didn't

Starting point is 00:59:11 get around to seeing it the way I saw it. These shortcuts were very useful. We stayed ahead of the marching legions of PhDs who came later. We stayed ahead of them all the way through into the Atomic Cl atomic close partnership in 1988. Let me hop in for a moment here to ask a few questions about your meeting, or at least one. With Warren Buffett, why in that meeting did you come away saying you thought he would end up being the richest man in the world? What did you see or hear or observe in that meeting that led you to that? I saw that he was compounding at a high rate of return, that he'd been doing it for a long time, that he was very, very smart, and that he really knew a tremendous amount about companies. So he was a good evaluator of companies.

Starting point is 01:00:06 And he demonstrated a very large edge already. He'd been running his partnerships from 1956 to 1968 and had about a 30% before fee annualized return rate. And I was sorry that he was going out of business and that things looked so bleak from the standpoint of stock pricing to him at that time. Interesting follow-up to that story, what Warren Buffett did at that point was he decided to make a poor textile company in, I forget where it was, somewhere in New England called Berkshire Hathaway. He decided to make that his own little private mutual fund. And he bought up as many shares as he could. He didn't particularly encourage his exiting partners to take shares in that company because he wanted them himself.

Starting point is 01:00:52 They didn't have a choice. They could take cash or they could take shares in Berkshire. Not knowing what to do, many of them just took cash and exited. Some of them took Berkshire, though. Berkshire, I think, they would have gotten it at something like $12 a share in 1964. Now it's a little under $500,000 a share. The Berkshire story is kind of interesting. I knew how smart he was, and I said, the way he's compounded, he's going to be, in my opinion, the richest man in the world in a while. It'll just take time. I lost track of him. I figured he was just working for his own account and there was no opportunity for an investor. That was largely the case. But then up in 1982, I happened to see an article about Berkshire Hathaway and I saw that he was running it.

Starting point is 01:01:41 And then I decided to take a look and I said, oh, it's gone from 12 to 982. So is the opportunity gone? Many people who owned it had sold on the way up, taking their enormous profit of a multiple of five or 10 or 15. And I said, I know what he's doing. I know this man. I know what he's going to do. I'm buying at 982, even though I missed out the move from 12 to 982. And of course, buying at 982 turned out to be a good move. Yeah, I would say so. Just a quick thanks to one of our sponsors, and we'll be right back to the show. This episode is brought to you by Wealthfront. Wealthfront, you may have heard of it, pioneered the automated investing movement, sometimes referred to as robo-advising, and they currently

Starting point is 01:02:29 oversee $27 billion of assets for their clients. Given all the stories out there, all of the flashy media pieces, you might think that day trading stocks is the secret to investing success, but Wealthfront's data show that time in the market almost always beats timing the market, or I should say trying to time the market. Not even the best investors I know can successfully time the market. So don't miss out on the best days in the market. Stay invested in a long-term automated investment portfolio. Wealthfront's globally diversified portfolio is automatically optimized to hit the goals you set at the risk level you choose and apply tax breaks that can boost your returns

Starting point is 01:03:09 even when the market dips. For the curious, that's called tax loss harvesting. You can also personalize your portfolio with a selection of funds handpicked by Wealthfront's financial experts. Categories include social responsibility, clean energy, cannabis, and cryptocurrency. Wealthfront is helping nearly half a million people build their wealth, and Investopedia just named them their best robo-advisor for 2022. To start building your wealth and to get your first $5,000 managed for free for life, go to wealthfront.com slash Tim. That's W-E-A-L-T-H-F-R-O-N-T.com slash Tim to start building your wealth. One more time, go to wealthfront.com slash Tim to get started today.

Starting point is 01:03:57 Let me ask you, if you were teaching a, let's just say, what could be undergraduate or graduate seminar in investing now? So you were teaching a class of neophytes how to invest, and some are, say, mathematically inclined and some are not. It's a very mixed group. What types of tools or thinking frameworks, heuristics, mental models, anything would you focus on in the first handful of lectures? Well, the first thing I would tell them is the answer is really easy for almost everybody, but you're not going to believe me until you work through yourself and understand it. And I'll tell you the answer to start with, and then I'll try to convince you that it's the right answer. So I'll just tell you the answer to start with. The answer is, if you're a long-term investor, you should just buy and hold

Starting point is 01:04:56 equities. And the best place to have bought and hold equities has been the U.S. for the last couple of hundred years overall. Equities here have compounded at about 10 or 10.5% for 200 years. The data for the first hundred years is not as good as the data for the last hundred, but the data for the last hundred is quite good and very well documented. How does that do against everybody else? Well, you can prove by logical and mathematical arguments, and I won't go into all the details here. Some of it's in my book. It's also in other places. You can prove that if a person simply buys the index and holds it, he will outperform most all the other players. The people who buy and hold the index will beat the whole collection of people who don't do that. They do way better on average. The ones who don't do that pay trading costs. They have more volatility from diversification

Starting point is 01:05:58 generally, from lack of diversification. And they often pay investment advisors and all this, and they also pay taxes when they trade. So the upshot is that you might make 10.5% if you don't pay all these people. You might make 8% or 7% or 6% if you pay the crowd of people waiting to, quote, help you, unquote. So that's the simple answer for people who don't know anything about investing. Now, you might say, well, yeah, but I'm pretty smart. I hear all these stories. I listen to Kramer on TV. He jumps around and makes a lot of noise and sounds good. So why can't I do better? Well, the academics have something called the efficient market theory, in which they claim that you can't do better. Now, I've already explained that that's wrong. You can find instances where you can do better.

Starting point is 01:06:50 Warren Buffett apparently did much better. I found with my hedge fund, I could do much better. But the kind of work you have to put in to do much better is substantial. It doesn't seem like it at first, but when you get into it, there are all kinds of details and follow-ups and things to be checked out. And you end up spending a substantial amount of time and energy figuring out how to do it better. And for everybody who finds out how to do it better, the rest of the crowd who isn't buying the index is doing a little bit worse because you can show that the whole collection of people who don't buy the index are themselves as a group like the index because everybody as a group is like the index you subtract the index part out and the rest is like the index too so the people who aren't buying the index but are like the index as a group are busy paying

Starting point is 01:07:46 all these costs, taxes, investment advisors, and so forth. So on average, that whole group does worse. You're paying basically casino vigorous or whatever if you're not indexing. And you've got to beat that in order to do better than the indexers. And obviously, the group can't beat that. So it's only a small collection of people, some by luck and some by skill, who end up doing better. So you're basically betting against the odds if you just step in and buy stories and invest in various mutual funds that are actively managed and so forth. So that's what I would tell people. Now, on the other side of the coin, if you really are interested in investing, it's worth educating yourself and trying to do it because you will learn a lot about investing.

Starting point is 01:08:31 You might actually find a way to win and you'll learn about how the world works and a lot about life too. The things you learn from what seems like a narrow specialized field generalize very widely to all kinds of things. If you're the kind of person who can take a lesson in one part of life and transport it to another part of life. What are some of those transferable lessons in your mind? Let's take risk as a good example. You learn about investment risk and how you want to avoid very great risks

Starting point is 01:09:07 or minimize them. Great investment risks can take you out of the game altogether. So you might have a thing where you multiply your money by 10 times, but you might also lose it all. Some things that are highly volatile, like buying cryptocurrency, are in this category where you may have the chance of a very large where you may have the chance of a very large gain, but also the chance of a very large loss. And if you lose most of your capital, it's very hard to climb back out. For instance, if you lose 90% of your capital, you've got to multiply what's left by 10 in order to get back to even, which means you've got to make 900% to offset that 90% loss. That's not going to be easy to do. It takes a long time. So you want to avoid really bad outcomes. So I applied that, for

Starting point is 01:09:56 example, to COVID. I thought about what to do and how to deal with it. And I said, you know, at my age, the stats from China, which came over in early 2020, showed that people 85 and up were dying at the rate of, if they were male, 18% of those who got it. And even now, the death rate is very high for those who get it. If they're unvaccinated, it's probably pretty close to that. And if they're vaccinated, it's maybe a tenth that. So I consider that a risk that can take me out of the game with a fairly high probability. So I'm going to avoid getting COVID if I possibly can. I'm going to mask up.

Starting point is 01:10:40 I'm going to avoid crowds. I'm going to think about what the risks of various activities are that I do and decide whether it's worth it. So I did my own analysis of COVID and its risks and tried to be very careful from that on. I think it's paid off and it's paid off for my family too. I've passed this information on to people around me. Do you have any recommendations for, and this might sound a little meta, but how people should think about long-term thinking or the long-term? Because the recommendation for, say, an equity index or index ETFs was predicated on investing and holding for a long period of time. What would you consider the minimal viable long period of time, if you have an answer to that? And how can people become

Starting point is 01:11:31 more aware of their own weaknesses related to short-termism or short-term thinking and switch to more long-term? I tend to be a long-term thinker. You might say, well, if you're 89, how can you be a long-term thinker? Well, I have children and grandchildren. I'm also feeling pretty good and staying in good shape, so 89 may not be all that old at this point. In any case, I would say that if you're looking at 15 or 20 years or more, maybe you have a dynasty trust or something like that, or you have descendants, and you yourself expect to live 15 or 20 years or more.

Starting point is 01:12:13 The best investment, I think, is to buy almost entirely equities and hold it. You might want to have a little cash around. I think Buffett recommends 90% index and 10% bonds or short to intermediate term bonds for cash. That does just about as well as 100% equities. I just put it all in equities because I have enough so I don't have to worry about fluctuations up and down. If you have a shorter time horizon, you may want to do things differently. And it depends on how much you're going to need and how much you have. I have a set of rules that are a little bit helpful here.

Starting point is 01:12:51 I'll start with what I call the 4% rule. Suppose that you're going to retire and you want enough to last you from your capital throughout the rest of your life. I would say a pretty good working rule. Put it mostly in equities and spend 4% of your capital each year or less if you can. And that ought to last you from, say, the 60s till the end of your life. It's not guaranteed, but pretty good chance it will. Then I have the 2% rule, which I found by studies, both mathematical and by simulation of stock returns, if you only drain 2% out per year, then that money will probably grow in perpetuity.

Starting point is 01:13:35 There's a small chance it'll be extinguished by really bad downturns, but it's very small. There is an organization that freezes people, and they asked me for advice about how to invest their endowment fund. Freezing meaning cryogenically freezing people? Cryogenically, yes. And so I said, for the endowment fund, which is going to get people out of being frozen sometime in the far future, 50, 100, 200 years out, for that fund, you're going to want to invest long-term and let it run because that's going to get you the most money down the road. And if you're going to attempt to reanimate somebody, there's no specific timetable. If you don't have enough money to

Starting point is 01:14:18 reanimate them at a certain time, you can wait a few years and let the money grow a little more. So you want money to grow to as big an amount as possible in the far future. And so the 2% rule for the endowment fund, I think was a pretty good rule for spending because all the simulations showed that it will grow to a very large amount over a period of time. So that's long-term thinking. Intermediate term, I think of that as maybe five to 15 or 20 years. And there, something like the 4% rule that I described might be good. And for short-term, it's just a matter of what your needs are and what you're going to have to come up with. And people are in various ranges of wealth. There's what you

Starting point is 01:15:07 might call poor, where you don't have very much to save or put aside, and it's going to be hard to retire and hard to make it. Then there may be middle-class people who can put a moderate amount away. I know somebody, for example, she has saved about a million and a half, and she is in her mid 50s. I think she'll be fine. So I've explained to her, pilot all inequities and let it rip. She gets scared every so often when there's a downturn. She calls me and I tell her, hold fast. And then it goes back up. She said, I'm really glad I held fast. A lot of people are what I call scared rabbits. And when the market goes up, they get confident, they start buying. And then it drops, and they get really scared at the bottom, and they sell out.

Starting point is 01:15:50 And then it goes back up, and they buy again. And it drops, and they get really scared at the bottom, and they go back out again. So they seem to have the worst of it all the time. Yeah. It doesn't feel good to go through life as a scared rabbit. It certainly hurts your financial standing. That's where thinking for yourself comes in. You won't hold fast to something unless you understand it yourself.

Starting point is 01:16:13 There's an old saying, give a person a fish and they eat for a day. Teach a person to fish and they eat for a lifetime. And there's a similar thing for thinking. If you give somebody advice about a problem, they might solve that one problem. If you teach them how to think about problems, I was invited to review the portfolio of McKinsey and Company back in New York. And so they had a profit sharing and a pension plan. And I came and I looked at all the things they had and the things they had were really quite good. But there was one very strange investment they had. It printed out one or two percent a month every month. They've been doing it for years. They had a record going back into

Starting point is 01:17:11 the late 60s, supposedly. And I said, how do they do this? And they said, well, we don't know exactly. They tell us that they won't explain what their method is, but we can show you our accounts. So I looked at their accounts, and I saw that this account bought stock, and it put option positions on call callers. They had to put option a little below the stock price, and they bought a call option a little bit above, and the two things paid for themselves. It was self-financing. So they didn't have, apparently apparently a whole lot of risk. But I could show that in a down market, they would lose in a down month. In an up month, they would win.

Starting point is 01:17:53 But they won every month. And the reason they won every month was because a mysterious trade was put on involving S&P index options. And it was always in the right direction. So if they were going to lose, it would be a winner. And if they're going to win, it would be a loser. So I said, this is not possible. I said, I want to go over and look at this place.

Starting point is 01:18:16 So they called the person in charge, who happened to be at that time, Peter Madoff, the brother of Bernie Madoff. Bernie was off in Europe raising money. This was 1991, mind you. So when Peter Madoff heard I was coming, he said, no, I won't let him in the front door. So I held my nose and I said, I want to take a better look at all this. So I looked at all their trades and I saw that half the trades never happened when I researched them. That is, there was no trades occurred on any exchange at the prices they were making them at for these

Starting point is 01:18:46 options. Another quarter of the trades had so much volume that the volume couldn't have happened because there wasn't that much volume on the exchanges where they traded. The last quarter of the trades, which consisted of 40, there were 160 to start with, the last quarter of the trades, which consisted of 40. There were 160 to start with. The last quarter of the trades didn't happen anywhere. There was no explanation. So I said, okay, let's look at some of the trades that actually could have happened. So I went to a vice president of Bear Stearns, rest in peace, and said, you know, we do a lot of business together. I'd like to ask you a special favor, which you might or might not be able to grant. I'm going to give you 10 options trades.

Starting point is 01:19:31 I'd like to know who was on the other side of these trades. In particular, was Madoff & Company on the other side of any of them? So they researched the trades and they came back and said, no, can't find any trace of any Madoff and company. So I said to McKinsey, this is a fraud. And they said, but we're making 20% a year. And I said, well, you're making 16% a year currently in your other investments. If I'm right, this 20% is not real and the roof is going to fall in someday

Starting point is 01:20:01 and you might lose your jobs. On the other hand, if I am right and you move, you have saved this problem. If I'm wrong and you move, you're only going from 20% to 16%. So, you know, it makes a lot of sense to just exit. So they exited in two months, And we inquired of everybody we knew. I threw my network, they threw their network to find out who had investments with Madoff and how much they had. Now, we could only cover a small part of the territory because our network was not comprehensive. And it turned out that about half a billion we were able to identify. Now, that meant that there was a lot more than half a billion out there. How much more? We couldn't say, but things were

Starting point is 01:20:54 looking very bad. On the other hand, how could you challenge Madoff? He was a pillar of the National Association of Securities. I think he'd been a past president. He'd been on committees there. He was the biggest third market that has thought the exchange maker in the country. So a respected person and well-known to everybody. And he had thousands of investors, as it turned out. And because he had so many investors,

Starting point is 01:21:21 everybody knew it had to be right because surely those people had checked it all out. Now, the finale of the story is that when I was doing this, the person who invited me, who was a hedge fund manager himself, who invited me to do this for McKinsey, he had been an advisor to them. This person believed in Madoff and continued to go out and raise money for him. And in 2008, when the news came out that Madoff was a fraud, my son called me up and said, you know, dad, the stuff you've been telling me about for 17 years, it finally happened.

Starting point is 01:21:59 It blew up. So anyhow, this fellow who had been running a fund of funds and included Madoff in that fund of funds. It's a special type of hedge fund that invests in other hedge funds. He had been doing this and had a very big fund of funds. He was raising money for Madoff the same week that the bad news came out. And he had his own personal money and his family's money and trust fund money with Madoff. But I had explained everything to him in great detail. I knew him quite well. At the time, back in 1991, that McKinsey and company had this analysis explained to them and decided to pull out. So the whole point of this is, here's a person who had all the information.

Starting point is 01:22:49 It was explained very clearly, and he just didn't believe it. And he himself was in the investment business and was very successful. But he was a reporter in times past, and his family made a lot of money in the 30s. He came from a rich family in Chicago. And the way he figured things out was he would poll people. And he would ask people what they thought about something. It would be like I asked you, what's the best diet pill I can take? You'd probably say there aren't any good ones, and I'd probably agree with you. He'd ask 100 people, and then they would, in fact, be a pole, and he'd go by the pole. So just imagine that you asked 10,000 people whether they thought you could travel faster than light. And all but one said, yep, you can do it. I saw it on TV. And only one guy said, no, you can't do it, Albert Einstein.

Starting point is 01:23:49 So a guy like him would overwhelmingly reject Einstein and believe the 10,000 average people who just said, yeah, you could do it. Because the poll was 9,999 to 1 on one side. So he doesn't think for himself. He lets the crowd think for him. And that, I think, is a fundamental mistake that many people make. They let the crowd do their thinking. They don't figure it out for themselves. Let's talk about toolkits and bring in, we don't have to focus on him necessarily,

Starting point is 01:24:23 but since Warren Buffett came up earlier, you have then his partner, Charlie Munger, who is well known for mental models. And I think Buffett describes him as having the best 60 second mind he's ever met, something like that. What mental models do you find helpful or would you teach in that class that I mentioned earlier? And you can really approach it in any way that you think is sensible. But how should people think about mental shortcuts or mental models? And are there any that come to mind that you think are particularly valuable? I'll tell you about a few, and then I'll tell you where to get more. Perfect.

Starting point is 01:25:08 Let's take a notion that economists call by their priestly name, externalities. Have you heard of that term? I have. I have heard the term. Okay, good. Most people have not, as it turns out, so you're way ahead already. Well, we'll see where we go. An externality, simplistically, is a consequence of somebody's action that's generally not intended. And it's usually bad, but it's sometimes good. And I'll give you examples of each of varying sizes.

Starting point is 01:25:46 Here's a bad one that happened to me actually last week. I go out to get my car and I find out that the tire is flat. I look and I see a sheet metal screw in the sidewall, which means that this tire is going to have to be replaced. So I end up taking care of the problem. Where did the problem come from? Most likely, I think, down the road from me, there's been a lot of construction going on. I've noticed as I go for walks

Starting point is 01:26:16 that pieces of metal are often lying in the road. Sheet metal screws, nails, other things that aren't good for tires. I pick them up when I happen to walk by, but I don't get them all. And the workers are carelessly depositing more, not very many, but it only takes one to give me a flat. So this is an unintended bad consequence of the work going on there. Who benefits? Well, the homeowner does because he doesn't have to police his guys to clean up carefully and sweep the streets afterwards.

Starting point is 01:26:55 He doesn't have to spend another $5 a day on sweeping labor to make sure that none of these things are there. But it cost me $500 for new tires. Unfortunately, it's a Tesla Plaid with a 10.5-inch wide Michelin tire, so the tires are not cheap. So this is an unintended bad consequence for me that saves a very small amount for the guy who's doing the construction, a few doors down. Let's take a little bigger one.

Starting point is 01:27:35 When I was a chemistry student back at age 14 in 1946, teaching myself, I mean, there wasn't a decent chemistry class around. I came across a fellow named Svante Arrhenius, a great Swedish physical chemist from the latter part of the 19th century. He, at that time, and I learned it then, did a study of how gases in the atmosphere trap heat. And he explained how much the heat trapping power was of various gases, including carbon dioxide. He explained very clearly how much carbon dioxide would contribute to global warming as it increased. So this was known way back then. I knew it as a 14-year-old, and the mechanism is obvious. You can sit behind a plate glass window when the sun is shining and feel everything heat up around you, the greenhouse effect.

Starting point is 01:28:24 So it's simple, it's obvious, it's got plenty of science behind it. What do people do now? Well, they create a negative externality by polluting. People drive around in cars and dump CO2 into the atmosphere, and each individual is convenienced by being able to drive around in his car, but he contributes to a global problem, a problem that won't come back perhaps to haunt him if he doesn't live long enough, or maybe so gradually he doesn't notice it. But everybody together is busy contributing this major externality to the world, which leads to a second little mental model. It's called the tragedy of the commons.

Starting point is 01:29:09 That's a pretty famous thing by a guy named Garrett Hardin. And the simple example is you've got a village with a little green in the middle, and it's got a lot of grass growing. And only a few people live in the village. So one guy has sheep, and he lets his sheep graze on the green and there's plenty of grass, so that's not a problem. A few more people move in, they get some sheep, they turn them loose on the green. Pretty soon, there are too many sheep for the green. It's all eaten up. So each person acts in his own self-interest, but collectively,

Starting point is 01:29:41 what they do is against the common good. So that's another little mental model or idea. So the whole collection of these things that are out there that are very valuable for thinking purposes. One collection is, there's a 50-item collection that came out under INC period on the internet from Elon Musk. It's quite good. There's also Charlie Munger's book. Poor Charlie's almanac. Yeah, which has a lot of these things embedded in it.

Starting point is 01:30:18 One of my favorites is it has a strange name of fundamental attribution error. And I didn't like the name. I said, Charlie, why are you calling this fundamental attribution error? Well, Charlie actually just picked it up from sociology and psychology. That's what they call it. And I thought, it's a terrible name. You should call it something else. But as I thought about it some more, I decided it's actually not a bad name after all. Roughly speaking, what it does is it's a human tendency to make assumptions that are not

Starting point is 01:30:49 fully justified by the evidence for instance you go to lunch and the person you invited doesn't show up so you begin to speculate well maybe he just forgot he's a forgetful guy or maybe since we had a little quarrel two weeks ago, maybe that was it. Maybe he's just mad and he's going to show me or something of that sort. You start making up stuff to try to explain it, but you don't have the evidence for it. It turns out that he had a car accident on the way, and he's busy dealing with all the fall off in the car accident. And two hours later, you find out what actually happened. And it's too bad. And he apologizes profusely.

Starting point is 01:31:27 But you didn't have any idea what actually happened. You just started making stuff up. That is something that humans do over and over. And we're wired for it. It's evolutionary. It ties into a famous book, Thinking Fast and Slow. Daniel Kahneman. Yes, exactly.

Starting point is 01:31:41 And so he has an example there. You're in the forest. and you hear a roar. You don't stop to find out where the roar is coming from. You run up the nearest tree because it might be a lion. In fact, it might be something entirely different, but you don't take any chances. You react. And if it's not a lion, you've made fundamental attribution error. You attributed it to being a lion when it wasn't. But it saved your life, often, when it wasn't an attribution error. That ties in with something else, which is learning how to think. If you think fast, it's kind of emotionally from the gut, responding without really reflecting, you will make a lot of mistakes. Sometimes, though, it's a way of saving your life. For example, somebody yells fire fire you're at you're at the door of the theater you run out the door immediately before you find out whether there is

Starting point is 01:32:31 a fire that might or might not have been but running out the door before there's time to reflect in which case it might be too late is a good thing to do i hold it open for everybody else too as I run out. I just want to mention a few things on the externalities piece and thinking about the, say, unintended secondary or tertiary effects on the collective. There can also be positive externalities or externally benefit, like if you were to buy fire insurance for your house, your neighbor might be a little bit safer, right? So it can go both ways. That's a good example. And it's one that actually was a real life experience for me right here. We had a fire, wildfire a couple of months ago. We all had to evacuate. And I have Chubb and they have wildfire insurance. And so I have that.

Starting point is 01:33:26 And so Chubb actually had a water truck out here, which protected not only me, but lots of other people in the neighborhood. how to somehow create and enforce incentives such that someone is acting to the benefit of the collective? For instance, the construction site where someone's not spending $5, but it costs individuals who are affected $500 to replace a given tire. I'm sure there are a million different examples of this. Does that then lead to a study of incentives? Yes, that's a good point. If somebody creates an externality that's negative, a good thing to do is to tax it. What we've learned is if you tax something, you get less of it. Let's take carbon, for example. If you tax carbon, you'll get less of it in the air. So, a carbon tax is the rational, logical solution to the whole pollution problem. All you have to do is make the tax big enough and people find other ways to do things than pollute with carbon. However, that leads to another thought principle, which is the difference between rational solutions to social problems. A rational solution is one that is generally good for almost everybody, as opposed to a select few. You can have rational solutions to social problems,

Starting point is 01:35:01 but you often can't get them implemented. So you also have to think about what can you actually accomplish politically. And there's a great book about that. There's a professor at Yale, the Sterling Professor of Political Science, Ian Shapiro. I happen to listen to podcasts, yours included, when I go for my walks. And his course was one of the ones I listened to. It's absolutely great. It talks about how to actually get something done politically. And we've seen, for example, the Biden administration has had great difficulty getting very much of what it wants it to pass. And it could learn a lot from this professor who has a lot of good things to tell them. He has a book called The Wolf at the Door, which is fairly recent, which basically explains the things that I learned in his political science course a few months ago.

Starting point is 01:35:56 And it tells you how to form coalitions that can win and how to pass things that will stay in place. For example, Social Security stayed in place because it had a strong constituency that it created right away, and that constituency was going to defend it forever after. And politically, even though some politicians and occasional political parties have tried to destroy it, they have not been successful because the constituency is so embedded and so strong now. So anyhow, he has a clear description of how you can actually get things done. And he believes, I think, that you can make incremental progress, discouraging as though it seems these days, by doing the right way of putting coalitions together and defending against blocking coalitions.

Starting point is 01:36:47 So it's a very insightful course. Anybody who wants to get something done evolutionarily, I would recommend reading his book. And I might say, we're in a crisis of democracy now, in my opinion. And simplistically, we have three paths. There's devolution, which I think we're undergoing now. There's evolution, which I hope is the way things work out, in which we fix things and things get better. And then there's revolution, which is extremely ugly and unpleasant. And one of your previous interviewees, Ray Dalio, has a book that I think is very well worth reading, even though it's a tough slog.

Starting point is 01:37:26 And maybe I'd change the writing a bit. But, you know, it's a real contribution to thinking about the crisis that we're going through now. And it talks about the changing world order. I think that's the name of the book. And the rise of China as an empire and the decline of the United States as an empire. And I think that we have some serious thinking to do. We can't just sit back on our laurels and say we've been so great, we've been the world's superpower, and hope that it's going to last.

Starting point is 01:37:56 We have to do things differently. I'd recommend that. I also would second that recommendation. Francis Fukuyama has also some fantastic writing that is worth exploring. And I have that Dalio book within 15 feet of me here where I sit right now. And speaking as someone who studied also in China myself at a pretty fascinating time to be there. I was around in Beijing at two universities in 1996, and I've tracked things pretty closely since. It's definitely worthwhile to read up also on the history of China, because that is going to and is coming to bear as we speak on the entire three-dimensional chess of geopolitics, which is fascinating and also at times terrifying, certainly. Let me ask you, if I may, what other investors, aside from Warren Buffett, impress you? And they could be people who are no longer actively investing, they could be current, but are there any other investors who come to mind who have particularly impressed you outside of Buffett? And the reason I ask for people who are wondering is related to what you said earlier, that by studying investing, by participating

Starting point is 01:39:16 in investing, you get to stress test and look at how other people stress test thinking and cognitive biases and so on. Is there anyone who comes to mind for you outside of Buffett? There are people in the hedge fund world who have done remarkable jobs at various times, but they're not accessible to most people. For example, let's take Jim Simons of Renaissance. Renaissance Partners is basically a private operation at this point. But it's been extraordinarily successful. It uses PhDs and computers and math and code breaking and so forth. And it has, from around 1989 or 1990 on, been spectacular in its performance.

Starting point is 01:39:59 Probably the best risk-adjusted record in the world from that time forward. And for people who want to read more about Jim Simons, there's a book called The Man Who Solved the Market, which is a good read. Although you're probably not going to be able to, as you mentioned, emulate the sort of quant approach that he is taking for a million and one reasons, but absolutely fascinating story. Any other names who come to mind? I'm trying to think of who I would give money to to invest. I don't have anybody now that I'd give money to to invest. There are a few good hedge funds around, but they take too much for the general partner and leave too little for the limited partner. And they also generate income that is

Starting point is 01:40:46 highly taxed if you're a taxable investor. So they're only good for nonprofits at this point, tax-exempt investors. What about past investors, say, in decades past who you would have given money to willingly? Does anyone come to mind? Well, I did give money to Ken Griffin's Citadel from the time it started. I think I was investor number one after Frank Meyer, who was the other general partner with Ken Griffin. Frank Meyer was a longtime friend of mine from the past, so that's how I learned about it. I actually had Ken Griffin after the house when he he was about 18 or 19 and just starting up with Frank and talked to him about how my hedge fund Princeton Newport worked. And we discussed at some length the idea of profit centers and subsidiary businesses. And I handed him boxes of prospectuses that were hard to get on all kinds

Starting point is 01:41:41 of convertible securities. These things would come out when the securities were issued, and then they would no longer be findable anywhere. They were just like rare books. So I handed them my whole collection of cartons of these things. So I had a very good ride with them, and I finally exited recently because the taxes take too big a bite out of the returns that I get. It's just simpler to invest in an index fund.

Starting point is 01:42:06 I end up better off than if I were to remain in Citadel. Also, it's complicated. You get all kinds of papers. I had four feet of paperwork when I finally boxed it all up at the end. That is a lot of paperwork. work. Now, I know you had the introduction, but what was it at the time about Ken Griffin and Citadel that made it past muster for you? Well, they were going to follow the exact plan that I was following when I shut down Princeton Newport. So that was good. Got it. And I knew Frank, and he was smart and capable. And ken seemed very smart and capable and energetic so

Starting point is 01:42:46 they were doing what i would be doing if i had i stayed in business so let's let's talk about staying in business because i had a question that i wanted to make sure i touched upon and there are a million others that I would love to talk about. But could you please speak to having enough? You've spoken about, or at least written about, how your hedge fund could have taken over your life and you could have just ended up as a capital accumulator, as your full-time job plus. How did you make the decision to wind it down? And how do you think about having enough? Because

Starting point is 01:43:28 it doesn't strike me as something I come across often with people who are really good at investing. The way I got into the investment world, I was an academic and I was curious and I found things interesting. And I wasn't really in there to get rich. I was in there to deal with interesting math problems that kept coming up. Blackjack, roulette was a math slash physics problem. Investing was, for me, lots and lots of math. So I enjoyed that. I just do things I like. And I don't worry about money.

Starting point is 01:44:00 As my former sister-in-law once said, do what you love and the money will follow. She wrote a book with that title. And I said, you know, that's right. Do what you love and the money may follow. And if it does, that's fine. If it doesn't, you're still doing what you love. And what's important in life, I think, is the journey and the people you know and you spend your time with and how you spend your time otherwise also. That's how I looked at things. And I started out as a child of the Great Depression,

Starting point is 01:44:34 so I knew what it was like to have basically no money. I used to sleep four or five hours a night in high school and get up at two or three in the morning and build over newspapers. And I made $25 a month, which seemed like really big money. And I saved part of that for college and invested part of it in science equipment, chemistry, telescopes, electronics, and so forth, just because I like playing with those things and learning about them. My goal wasn't to make money. It was to have a good life and enjoy myself and have fun. And it just so happened that it turned out a lot of money too. What I found though in the investment world is lots of people go in it for the money. And when they do, they keep going and going and going. And it's a validation of them. They can't stop. They end up with, oh, five or ten villas, a yacht, a jet. And let's imagine you have five houses, just to take an example. How much of your time

Starting point is 01:45:37 are you going to spend in each house? It can't be, on average, more than a fifth, which is by math. And you're not going to be in your house all the time anyhow. You're going to be vacationing, traveling, meeting, and so on. So maybe it's a sixth or seventh of the time on average. Now, some houses, you're going to spend more time in and some less. You may spend a 10th or 15th of your time or none of your time almost in one of those houses. So you end up with a whole lot of stuff to manage and take care of. And you end up hiring people to do that. So you don't have to do it. And then you have to manage those people. And then you have to hire people to manage

Starting point is 01:46:10 the people who manage the people and so on. It's like running a business. It's terrible. You don't get to enjoy the important part of your life, which is time. Did you have a set point at which point you knew you were going to exit the business, so to speak? Or was there a particular day that prompted, a particular experience that prompted you to say, enough is enough, I want out? Do you remember what the catalyst was, if there was one? I wasn't having fun anymore. It was turning into work. And I said, well, I don't need to do this. I have enough wealth. I'm never going to spend it all.

Starting point is 01:46:50 Why keep doing this? So I decided to wind it down. It was fun for a long time because there were challenging problems. It was challenging to try to figure out new things and to deal with all the issues that came up. But when it became bureaucratic and paperwork and a grind where I had to do things I didn't want to do, that was enough. It was time to go. It was the same thing in academia. I loved academia, but there were aspects to it that became burdensome.

Starting point is 01:47:23 Committee meetings, endless reviews, grant proposals. What I liked was research and teaching and the people that I met there, the students and the faculty that were smart and challenging. And if it was only that, I'd still be there. But it wasn't only that. And I found other things that were equally or more fulfilling. So anyhow, I just migrate to where I want to be. I don't have a set thing that I have to keep doing. So let's explore that a little bit further. Nassim Taleb, who many people will know because of books like Fooled by Randomness, The Black Swan, Anti-Fragile, wrote the foreword to your memoir. And in that, he writes about your restraint, not getting caught up in the golden

Starting point is 01:48:14 fetters of large structures, multiple offices, morning meetings, et cetera. And he highlights the value or the fact that you value independence. So what does independence mean to you? And how did you spend your time after winding down the investment side of things? I spent my time reading, traveling, exercising, enjoying my family and my friends, and learning things that I could learn. And then it's also entertaining to casually manage my investments. I might just interject here that one of the things that makes you independent is to accumulate capital, because then the capital can grow on its own

Starting point is 01:49:00 if it's simply invested, as I described before, for example, in an index fund. And once you have capital, then you have the chance of independence. If you have enough capital, it will support you indefinitely. When you've achieved that goal, there's no point in spending time doing anything you don't like doing if you can help it. You know, I have to do some things you don't like, like gather all your tax information together every year or go in for routine medical appointments. Is there anything that you are particularly interested in learning more about now or in

Starting point is 01:49:34 the process of learning about or looking forward to learning about? What I've focused on for the last year or so is reading about what's going on in American society, what may happen. I don't think we can predict for sure what's going to happen, but we can map out scenarios. We can map out possibilities. We won't get them all, but we can map out quite a few of them and ask ourselves, what will we do if scenario A, scenario B, scenario C materializes and have some sort of preparation and readiness for that. And I won't go into a list of extreme scenarios, except maybe a few. You could have an autocratic country where a minority pretty much rules everything and dictates to everybody else. You could have a turbulent country where a large part

Starting point is 01:50:26 of the country, maybe a majority, is badly upset and just wants to bust everything up and start over somehow. So you could have the choices I described, a devolution, evolution, or revolution. I don't know how it's going to play out, but it's worth thinking about what might happen and whether there's anything any of us can do about it. And I don't think there's much an individual can do on a grand scale unless he happens to be in a position of great importance or manages to get himself in a position of great importance. But I think there's a lot that an individual can do on a small scale. And I think the best thing we can do is teach everybody to think for themselves so they don't just take what they're told in the

Starting point is 01:51:11 press for example or in the other forms of the media internet twitter so on they don't just take that and sop it up and believe it but they question it. And they ask whether, in fact, it might not be true, and what the motives are of the people who are putting these things out, and so forth. And when you begin to think for yourself, the whole world changes and becomes much clearer, in my opinion. And you can manage your life much better. Fundamental attribution error. Learning about things like that and putting your own thinking

Starting point is 01:51:46 under examination. Ed, this has been so fun. And I know that there are a million other things we could talk about and hopefully we'll have a chance to do a round two at some point. But I wanted to be respectful of your time and begin to bring this to a close. Is there anything else that you would like to mention or call attention to? Any requests of my audience that you would like to make? People can certainly find you online at edwardothorpe.com, and I'll link to that, as well as your books and everything else that we've discussed in the show notes at tim.blog.com. Is there anything else that you would like to bring up before we end this round one conversation? I'll tell you one story that you probably read in my book.

Starting point is 01:52:31 It's about Joseph Heller and Kurt Vonnegut. Yes, please. Joseph Heller wrote this famous book, Catch-22, of which they made a movie way back, maybe 50 years ago. I'm not sure exactly when, but it was very well-known and famous at the time. And Kurt Vonnegut is well-known too for a variety of books. And Joseph Heller died, I'm not sure when, maybe early 2000s. And Kurt Vonnegut was writing in the New Yorker about him. And he said, Joseph Heller and I were at a hedge fund mogul's house. I'm not sure if it was a hedge fund mogul, but somebody very, very rich in New York. And I said to Joseph Heller, you know, you've made a lot of money out of Cash 22.

Starting point is 01:53:20 This guy makes as much money in a day as you're ever going to make he's got penthouses and yachts and jets and villas and models falling off his arm and so on and just hello look back and said you know i have something he'll never have kurt vonnegut was puzzled he said what's that heller said i have. And that's something that people who endlessly chase money to the end don't figure out, that you can have enough, and it's better than not having enough. It's certainly better than never being sated and staying on that sort of compulsive track. And I am so endlessly fascinated by you, your story, your lessons learned. And I really hope we have a chance to have another conversation because I have still so many different notes and questions that I would love to tackle, but we'll leave

Starting point is 01:54:24 people wanting more and hopefully we will make time to have that second conversation. But thank you so much for taking the time today, Ed. It's been a real joy to spend this time with you. Well, I enjoyed it very much. It was a pleasure to meet you. And now I know that since I'm on your podcast, my wife will listen to me. Well, one can hope, one can hope, one can hope. And to everybody listening, thank you for tuning in as always. And until next time, try not to act like a scared rabbit and be just a little bit kinder than you think you need to be. And as always, thank you for tuning in. to my free newsletter, my super short newsletter called Five Bullet Friday. Easy to sign up, easy to cancel. It is basically a half page that I send out every Friday to share the coolest things

Starting point is 01:55:31 I've found or discovered or have started exploring over that week. It's kind of like my diary of cool things. It often includes articles I'm reading, books I'm reading, albums perhaps, gadgets, gizmos, all sorts of tech tricks and so on that get sent to me by my friends, including a lot of podcast guests. And these strange esoteric things end up in my field, and then I test them, and then I share them with you. So if that sounds fun, again, it's very short, a little tiny bite of goodness before you head off for the weekend, something to think about. If you'd like to try it out, just go to tim.blog.com slash Friday. Type that into your browser, tim.blog.com slash Friday. Drop in your email and you'll get the very next one.

Starting point is 01:56:13 Thanks for listening. This episode is brought to you by AG1, the daily foundational nutritional supplement that supports whole body health. I view AG1 as comprehensive nutritional insurance, and that is nothing new. I actually recommended AG1 in my 2010 bestseller more than a decade ago, The 4-Hour Body, and I did not get paid to do so. I simply loved the product and felt like it was the ultimate nutritionally dense supplement that you could use conveniently while on the run, which is, for me, a lot of the time. I've been using it a very, very long time indeed. And I do get asked a lot what I would take if I could only take one supplement. And the true answer is invariably

Starting point is 01:56:55 AG1. It simply covers a ton of bases. I usually drink it in the mornings and frequently take their travel packs with me on the road. So what is AG1? What is this stuff? AG1 is a science-driven formulation of vitamins, probiotics, and whole food source nutrients. In a single scoop, AG1 gives you support for the brain, gut, and immune system. Since 2010, they have improved the formula 52 times in pursuit of making the best foundational nutrition supplement possible using rigorous standards and high quality ingredients. How many ingredients? 75. And you'd be hard-pressed to find a more nutrient-dense formula on the market. It has a multivitamin, multimineral superfood complex, probiotics and prebiotics for gut health, an antioxidant immune support formula, digestive enzymes, and adaptogens to help manage stress. Now,

Starting point is 01:57:45 I do my best always to eat nutrient-dense meals. That is the basic, basic, basic, basic requirement, right? That is why things are called supplements. Of course, that's what I focus on, but it is not always possible. It is not always easy. So part of my routine is using AG1 daily. If I'm on the road, on the run, it just makes it easy to get a lot of nutrients at once and to sleep easy knowing that I am checking a lot of important boxes. So each morning, AG1. That's just like brushing my teeth, part of the routine. It's also NSF certified for sports, so professional athletes trust it to be safe.

Starting point is 01:58:22 And each pouch of AG1 contains exactly what is on the label, does not contain harmful levels of microbes or heavy metals, and is free of 280 banned substances. It's the ultimate nutritional supplement in one easy scoop. So take ownership of your health and try AG1 today. You will get a free one-year supply of vitamin D and five free AG1 travel packs with your first subscription purchase. So learn more, check it out. Go to drinkag1.com slash Tim. That's drinkag1, the number one,

Starting point is 01:58:54 drinkag1.com slash Tim. Last time, drinkag1.com slash Tim. Check it out. This episode is brought to you by Element, spelled L-M-N-T. What on earth is Element? It is a delicious sugar-free electrolyte drink mix. I've stocked up on boxes and boxes of this. It was one of the first things that I bought when I saw COVID coming down the pike. And I usually use one to two per day. Element is formulated to help anyone with their electrolyte needs and perfectly suited to folks following a keto, low-carb, or paleo diet. Or if you drink a ton of water and you might not have the right balance, that's often when I drink it. Or if you're doing any type of endurance exercise, mountain biking, et cetera, another application.

Starting point is 01:59:37 If you've ever struggled to feel good on keto, low-carb, or paleo, it's most likely because even if you're consciously consuming electrolytes, you're just not getting enough. And it relates to a bunch of stuff like a hormone called aldosterone, blah, blah, blah, when insulin is low. But suffice to say, this is where Element, again spelled L-M-N-T, can help. My favorite flavor by far is citrus salt, which, as a side note, you can also use to make a kick-ass no-sugar margarita. But for special occasions, obviously. You're probably already familiar with one of the names behind it, Rob Wolf, R-O-B-B, Rob Wolf, who is a former research biochemist and two-time New York Times bestselling author of The Paleo Solution and Wired to Eat.

Starting point is 02:00:18 Rob created Element by scratching his own itch. That's how it got started. His Brazilian jiu-jitsu coaches turned him on to electrolytes as a performance enhancer. Things clicked and bam, the company was born. So if you're on a low-carb diet or fasting, electrolytes play a key role in relieving hunger, cramps, headaches, tiredness, and dizziness. Sugar, artificial ingredients, coloring, all that's garbage, unneeded. There's none of that in Element. And a lot of names you might recognize are already using Element. It was recommended to be by one of my favorite athlete friends. Three Navy SEAL teams as prescribed by their master chief, marine units, FBI sniper teams, at least five NFL teams who have subscriptions.

Starting point is 02:00:58 They are the exclusive hydration partner to Team USA weightlifting and on and on. You can try it risk-free. If you don't like it, Element will give you your money back, no questions asked. They have extremely low return rates. Get your free Element sample pack with any drink mix purchase at drinkelement.com slash tim. That's drinkelement.com slash tim. And if you're an Element insider, one of their most loyal customers, you have first access to Element Sparkling, a bold 16-ounce can of sparkling electrolyte water. Again, check it all out. drinkelement.com slash Tim. drinkelmnt.com slash Tim.

The Tim Ferriss Show - #739: Brené Brown and Edward O. Thorp

There aren't comments yet for this episode. Click on any sentence in the transcript to leave a comment.