On this week's episode of the Odd Lots podcast, we talk to Hikaru Nakamura, one of the best chess players in the world. Currently ranking in the top seven, Nakamura achieved grandmaster status at a younger age than Bobby Fischer did. These days in addition to chess, Nakamura actively trades options, and on this episode he talks about the similarities and differences between the two pursuits. We also talked about poker, what it takes to be a pro chess player, and how computers and artificial intelligence are changing everything.
But knowledge to work and grow your business with c i T from transportation to healthcare to manufacturing. C i T offers commercial lending, leasing, and treasury management services for small and middle market businesses. Learn more at c i T dot com put Knowledge to Work. Hello, and welcome to another episode of The Odd Lots podcast. I'm Joe Wisenthal and I'm Tracy Alloway. So, Tracy, before we uh, before we got on here, you were joking that today's episode, if we wanted, we could probably go for three hours, or at least I could. Yeah, I'm I was joking about that, and I'm laughing right now because I think I can sense your excitement from thousands and thousands of miles away from New York. Yeah, I'm not going to deny that I'm extremely excited about today's episode, and if we didn't have time constraints, we could probably go a long time. But I really think our guest today is right in the sweet spot of some of the biggest themes that we've covered on this podcast and all the time that we've done it. Wait, so who is it and why do you think that? So we're not We're We're just gonna completely dispense with all the preamble and jump straight into the guests and just just get right into it. Well, I have a major preamble that I want to give before we get to the guests. But why don't you say who it is? Because I know that you you want to talk about him. Okay, I'm very excited. Our guest today is maybe the first sort of legit celebrity that we've had on the Odd Lots podcast. His name is Hikaru Nakamura. He is one of the top chess players in the entire world right now. He's rated around number seven. I believe he he was a prodigy, he earned his he became a grand master at age ten. If Wikipedia is correct. He's mad, he's giving a face. I don't know if that's completely agurd, but very young. And in addition to being a chess phenomen he also does other stuff like trading options and at times play poker competitively. So he's just a completely sweet spot Odd Lots guest here, all right, And obviously we've had a lot of episodes about trading and investing. We've also had episodes in the past about chess and poker, so I can see how you would be very very enthusiastic about this one. Here is my major preamble for you, Joe. I know absolutely nothing about chess. In fact, I find chess extremely frustrating because whenever I play with my husband, he doesn't let me win ever. In fact, he uses that what's that thing where you win in like two moves? That's so cringe, so cringe the the scholars mate, Well, whatever it is, he's done it to me several times now, and I fall for it every single time. So everyone is just going to have to bear with me asking very very basic questions about chess. But I actually read on Hikaru's Wikipedia page as well that he has an uncommon enthusiasm for chess and is known for being far more approachable than other players of his abilities. So I'm I'm sure he's going to humor me, right, Well, I think that sounds like an ideal guest. So I say we should just get started, Karo. Welcome up, Welcome to the show. That's good to be here, Joe. So you were making a face. I said something about when you achieved grand master status? When did you become a grand master? And uh, I think it said you got there faster than Bobby Fisher did, Is that right? Yeah? So, um, so when you referred to being ten years old, that's when I became the youngest master. That's slightly lower ranking, but um, at the time, at least they had they kept that record in the Guinness Book of World Records. So when I was very young, like I was trying to get to that level and so that was important. But I became a grand master I was fifteen years old. I was about a month and a half younger than Bobby Fisher. So that made me the youngest American grand master in the world at the time. I guess that's impressive. Uh when did you so, you know, it's always sort of an interesting question with sort of young prodigies phenomens. What was the moment early on where someone or you recognize that you were on a different level than other people who were learning at the same time. Well, I think, um, it's not so much that I was on a different level. There are there are a lot of talented young kids who played chess, and um, I think it was just that I had this this will will in, this motivation with within me to just keep trying to win every game all the time and UM. And when when you start performing, even at like eleven or twelve years old, by being strong grand masters, UM, it certainly shows that you have talent and and it's it's a matter of taking that talent and just keep keeping up and keep going forward with it and UM. And basically, I would say from the time I was about fifteen, I had a certain inclination that I might become a professional chess player, but it wasn't until I was probably nineteen or twenty that that actually came to fruition because I've had a lot of many other interests in my life, so there there have been many other things that I've I've been doing with my time as well. Was chess something that you were naturally attracted to at a young age? And you know, if so, what did you like about it? Well? I think when when you think about chess, you hear a lot of stories about these kids who are just great from the time that they first started playing. It's just they're they're just amazing and they just win every game the start. UM. Whereas for me, that certainly wasn't the case when I when I started out playing my first tournament, for example, I played four games and I lost every single one, and the first year that I played chess, I did not have many great results, and my parents actually stopped me from playing for about six months. And it was only when I came back that that some something clicked and I just happened to start winning games, um and then from there it just kept, you know, I just kept going forward. But certainly it's not something that I had a natural talent for, and actually most things, um, I don't seem to have a natural talent, which in a way, I think is a good thing, because I think the harder you have to work for something, um, the better you become at it. And when you hit the when you hit the wall, you kind of you you keep trying, you find a way to persevere. Whereas there there have been a lot of other kids who were much better than I was when they were young, but it's just it was a straightforward path, and so they just became really good, really quickly, and then at a certain point they hit the wall and they didn't know how to how to go from there because they just couldn't couldn't improve. And I basically had to learn how to improve from the very start. So I think it's it's uh for me at least, it's been very useful that I don't have a natural talent for a lot of things. Talk about that a little bit more breaking through because I think had something a lot of people experience and all kinds of endeavors where maybe they hit a wall for their talent or they can't figure out how to take it to the next level. What was it? I mean, anyone could say you have to work hard and concentrate, but even that often doesn't do it for a lot of people. So that process of figuring out your problem, solving it, and actually being able to make material gains in your improvement, what did that entail? UM? I mean obviously working hard, I mean it is a big part of it, but I think in general it's just you know, believing, believing in yourself, believing in the process no matter what. UM I think. There there were many times when I stopped, stopped improving, and and one one good example was when I was about seventeen years old. I had become a really strong grand master. I was top one hundred in the world, but I was stuck around fiftie in the world, and for a period of time, I went to college I quit chest for for about seven to eight months, um, and just by being away from it. When I came back, of course I i started working hard again, but I just learned how to enjoy it. And I think it's it's important that besides the hard work that you have to you have to enjoy it. You have to really be into and be passionate about it, because otherwise, uh, otherwise you're just not going to go anywhere. And um, I think I think for me it was it was just learning how to enjoy it again and kind of like remembering what the whole point of it was in the first place, which is you know, it's a game, but you you want you want to have fun, you want to do well, but just enjoying enjoying everything about it. How did you actually turn professional? And how does the business of being a professional chess player actually work? Like? How are you rewarded for playing games? Are there sponsorships? How do you make money? So? Yeah, so chess, um, it's it's one of those fields where it's very much a meritocracy, so it's all based on your results and going professional. It's not like like a major sport, for example, where you know a team drafts you or something along those lines. Basically, uh, you just decide on your own to just devote your life to laying chess and um, and they're there are people in the world who would consider themselves professional chess players who are who are not even grand masters. So um, there there are. There are a lot of different ways of defining a professional. But UM, I would say that probably the top twenty five thirty players in the world make a very good living playing it. Um in large part because the major events with big sponsors, UM, they are invitational only, so you have maybe the top ten, top fifteen players in the world and in some order who are invited and therefore, um, outside of that, it's very hard. Usually you go from tournament to tournament, country to country just trying to earn a living, and it's it's very difficult, which is why there are a lot of people who I think when they're younger, like in their early twenties, they try to play chess professionally, but at some point if they don't break into that top twenty five, top thirty in the world, UM, they they eventually quit. And as far as the rankings go, every game, UM, you you gain points or you lose points based on what you're elo ranking is UM and whether the opponent you're playing as lower ranked or higher ranked than you. So let's saig here a little bit, because in the intro we talked about how chess isn't your only pursuit. It's not your only passion. You're also into trading and options trading. In fact, you tweet, UM. I think you actually tweet a lot. I've seen more tweets I think about options, various options trades that you do than chess, at least as far as I've noticed. Where did that come from? UM, I've I've always had an interest in finance since I was very young. UM. When I was about fourteen or fifteen, my my my mom bought me a couple of books that it was just about general general investing UM, and I happen to read them and I found it found it quite interesting, quite fascinating, UM. How the markets work, UM, you know, in investing in companies, trying trying to make money UM over the long term. And so I kind of started with a very small account UM. And it remained that way for a long time. Primarily I was just trading in equities UM. But about a year and a half ago I started I started getting into options. Originally it was because I started looking into um uh you know, writing calls against stock that I had purchased, and from there kind of I started looking at more options strategies and a few people I know, I'm very fortunate in that regard um have been options traders professionally, and so they they've helped me along the way to you know, kind of figure out how how to learn strategies and go from there. This might be a slightly random question, but is there any direct relation between what you do when it comes to chess and the way you trade options. I think one of the main things is not just options, but markets in general, is um that chess players tend to be very analytical. And I think that when you're looking at the markets, whether it's options, whether it's equities, no matter what the time frame, you have to be analytical. You have to look at it from a perspective of you know, planning ahead, trying to figure out what can go right, what can go wrong? What are what are the very scenarios? UM. It's much with options. You know, if you're if you're doing um, you know, say like a a spread for example, or if you're doing like you know, ratios or just straight you know, calls or puts um trying to figure out, you know, based on certain events, what happens, you know, what's the breaking point assuming it you know, you don't it doesn't go uh, you know, straight up or straight down, um, and going from there. So in general, it's just being very analytical and thinking ahead. That's that's the biggest correlation there. There are, in fact, a lot of people I know growing up who actually have ended up in finance as well, and I don't think that's a coincidence. Now, a lot of people would say that there's a fundamental difference between any sort of trading activity and chess, And of course the sort of big gap is the role of chance and the role of psychology playing a much more outsized role in markets. And so you can calculate something perfectly in chess and then you can execute it, and if it's if you calculated correctly, there's nothing your opponent can do, where as all kinds of things can happen in markets. You could have the perfect strategy and then something could come out of nowhere, or there could be a bubble or some sort of panic that totally destroys the calculations. You know, there's this element that doesn't exist on the chessboard. How hard is it to shift thinking from one realm to another? For me, it's not that hard. And and actually it brings up something else that I'm kind of curious about, which is I've actually thought that trading is a little bit closer to poker in some ways from that standpoint, and um, I'm a little bit curious to kind of try it out because originally I played, I played some poker, and then then then I eventually got into trading. So it's kind of like, because I was a strong chess player, I couldn't handle the chance element in poker, whereas I seem to handle handle the chance and the risk management much better in trading. So I'm kind of curious to say, like, go from this and then play some poker again soon and see if see if it changes, because that is a very big difference. That that is. Uh, the biggest difference is that in chess, if you play well, um, I mean I would say probably at the time something good will happen. You might not win the games. Your opponent plays very well but you aren't gonna lose if you make, say, forty good moves in a row, and so therefore that that is a big difference. But for me, UM, I've I find that I don't have that much difficulty switching and making just straightforward decisions. UM. For me, it seems much more logical actually with trading that it does with chess in a way. Yeah, So I have to say, UM, poker is probably the analogy that we hear the most when it comes to trading. Uh. And you said you played a little bit of poker in the past. Did you find it more difficult than chess or can you kind of walk us through what your performance was like on that front. Yeah, I found a poker quite difficult. And it's for the exact reason that you would think that the trading should be difficult compared to chess, which is that, UM, I felt like I was making a lot of the right decisions more often than not, but the results were were not right. I would end up you know. I mean. The best example is when I played the World Series of Poker or the Main Event and an eleven and UM, in that event, I played tight, I played normal, normal solid poker and then at the end of the second day, and probably like the last twenty minutes, I ended up with this hand where I had kings and the other guy had a pair of eights, and uh, on the flop there was an eight and and I busted out that way despite really not doing anything anything wrong at all. Um. And that's just one example. But I think that at the time I found it very hard because again compared to chess, uh, that there is that luck. You can make all the right decisions, but then somehow you you lose, so you're all the tournament or you you know, you bust in the cash game. It's like it's a very strange feeling. Um from that standpoint. But for for me, I don't know what the difference is, but I have found with trading it's much easier for me than than than it was with poker. But of course I haven't played poker seriously in a few years, and maybe it would be an interesting experience experiment to go back to playing some poker now just to see if see if because I have this experience with trading, whether it's a little bit different. Let's take a right now for a word from our sponsor. But first we want to take a moment to let you know about something new from Bloomberg that's really cool. It's called Lens, and it is an iOS app and a Google Chrome extension, and it enables you to scan any news story on any website and instantly look up relevant news and market data from Bloomberg and other sources, all related to the companies and people you are actually reading about online. So pretty cool, right, So starting right now with the app or with the Chrome extension, and let's say you're on the web and you go to the New York Times and you read an article about Facebook. You can instantly pull up all of Bloomberg's data about Facebook, pull up relevant articles. It's basically a way to take the complete power of Bloomberg, the terminal, the database, and have it overlay your entire consumption of news around the world and around the web. Right and you can learn more about it at Bloomberg, Calm Forward, slash Lens. But knowledge to work and grow your business with c i T from transportation to healthcare to manufacturing. C i T offers commercial lending, leasing, and treasury management services for small and middle market businesses. Learn more at c i T dot com. Put knowledge to work, and we're back with Karu Nakamura, one of the top chess players in the entire world and therefore obviously also one of the top players in the US. We're also talking about his experience having played poker, his experience and options trading car The obvious sort of follow up is that all of these areas, whether it's poker, trading, chess, the nature of active participation has changed dramatically due to the use of computers artificial technology the top. It was probably a point or no one imagined that the top chess computers could compete with the top humans. Now that question has been changed. Obviously, computers have completely changed the way markets trade or you know, changed the balance of um, how humans interact with it. Computers are getting better and better all the time at a poker as well. Let's talk about this a little bit in chess. How have computers in your view changed the game? How have they changed your preparation? How do you see them having influenced it? Basically, I think the main thing that's changed with computers UM is that at this point in time, because it becomes so strong, you just automatically assume that they're right. So, for example, if you put a certain chess position and you have one of the computer engines analyzing it, you just trust the evaluation what it says. You know, white's whites better, whites winning, or the position is completely even, you trust it without without a second thought. Whereas in in the early days, UM saying the nineties, for example, computers could come up with evaluations were wrong and a human would still be right. A human wouldn't know the understand the position better, whereas now, UM, that's not the case. You just it's just flat out the computer's right, you're wrong. You trust what it says, period, end of story. And so because of that, Um, one of the main things that that has changed is there are a lot of positions which in the past you would have thought one side, the way they're playing is very unusual, it's dubious, it's not quite correct, it's not correct play. And because of computers, if you see a position now where there's some strange moves, the computer says it's completely fine, and you just you believe that it's not. It's not like before, whereas if I played some position against a cast brought, for example, he would just you know, he would just go, that's not good. You don't know what you're doing, your complete pots or whereas now because of the computer. Uh, he couldn't really say that, because the computer just it understands chest so so much better. And basically the main thing is that now almost any position in the game of chess, if you find the right moves, is probably okay unless you're just complete losing. There always are going to be defensive resources. So Joe and I have talked about this a number of times now. But in markets, you know, the rise of machines as well as passive investing has I think it's fair to say, given way to a sense or maybe an existential crisis for fund managers, like there's just a sense that you can never beat the market or the machines now. Um So when it comes to chess and computers, does the rise of computers just make playing chess less fun? Like knowing that a computer is all powerful and always has the right decision, does that make the game less enjoyable for you? It does at times. I think. Another another big thing that's happened in chess as you have these huge databases with millions and millions of games as well, So it's not just the computer analysis, it's also the factory of databases, which means that probably the first like ten to fifteen moves of every single game, both sides are gonna know exactly what they're doing, which means that it's getting deeper and deeper where you reach a new position where it's just the human is just you know, like I'm playing against someone else. It's it's become deeper and deeper in the game. That makes it quite a bit less fun at times, because because it's just like you, you don't play at the start. You you're just repeating whatever the computer says. And then uh, somewhere in the early middle game, somewhere around like the move in the game, you're you're starting to play the game, whereas in the past it might have been like the fifth move or the tenth move. So it just keeps getting deeper and deeper, and that that does take quite a bit of the fun out of it because it makes it a lot harder to win. But at the same time, um, it's also a challenge, and it's it's fun to to try and out prepare your opponents, to try and try and just you know, outsmart them and beat them, so it cuts both ways. So just to clarify what you're saying is you'll play games with someone and the first fifteen moves or more will be identical to numerous games that have been played, and only deeper than that will one of you have played a new move that hadn't been played before. So in theory, you know, as as a trader, in theory, you shouldn't be able to make money trading. I mean there's this whole school of thought essentially efficient markets that someone trying to do active stock selection or active any sort of active trading shouldn't really be doable, that no one has any more information or insight or anything, and that if you do make money over a period of time that it might be luck something like that, And with computers being able to research and analyze probabilities so aggressively, in theory, it should be even harder than it has been in the past to exploit inefficiencies. Why why is that an endeavor that you think you can make money in? Um, Well, I mean, to be be fair, I do them next. So it's not just I'm not a hundred percent trading I also do do pass that in a trading component. Why do you feel like it's an area that is worth your time and worth trying to beat the system? I mean I I I enjoy a challenge. I mean, to to be frank, I enjoy a challenge. On It's quite difficult. It takes a lot of time, a lot of a lot of work, and even then you still aren't always going to be right. Um. I mean I wasn't right this morning on caterpillar for example. But um, but but in general, uh, you know, I think, um, I really, I really enjoy the process. So maybe over the long run it's not going to pan out, But but I enjoy the process, and I've been successful in the past year. Wait, what was your caterpillar trade? Oh? I was for some reason, I was expecting, uh, expecting them to go down. I did a put spread on them. I was expecting, uh, because of the commodity prices for them to not uh not report and the and the stock for what it's worth is up about six and a half percent. You know, I'm letting our viewers now, I know you you probably are feeling the pain of that trade today. I just want to you know, but another thing also, uh, you know, like there's a there's another trade, for example, which I'm not doing well in, which is Tesla. But I think one thing that that I also enjoy is because I'm just a you know, a retail UH investor, is that through traveling around a lot, I get to have a different perspective on certain things. You know. It's like, um, everyone says Tesla's UH is overvalued right now, and I think I think it is. But for example, I was in Italy last week, and I was in southern Italy, no less, and I was really surprised to see that on the weekend down town there was there was some some sort of exhibition. It was for electric cars. And I think that when you see things like that, it also it also it changes the perspective a little bit. You don't have the standard standard view like I would if I'm just here when I actually get out and I see certain things, um like that or unfortunately things like in retail where you go to malls and you see, uh, nobody, nobody there. I mean, I think I also find that to be one of the advantages as well of just being being who I am, traveling around a lot, I get a lot of different perspectives and I think that does help me with trading. Tracy and I were in a Hong Kong a little over a year ago, and I remember being pretty stunned by how many Tesla's were on the road. So I know what you mean in terms of getting out and being uh, you know, having feeling like you have a new piece of information that you didn't have before. Yeah, I mean, because I think it's like I've traveled around the US a lot, but I mean, if you go to somewhere in the middle of the country, I mean, one place where I've spent a fair amount of time would be St. Louis, I mean, you don't see Tesla's. I don't think I've seen a single Tesla when I've been out there. I've seen Tesla's, you know, I'll see them in New York or San Francisco or Florida, but never in the middle of the country, despite traveling around a lot. So it's I think, uh, it's it's quite nice to have that extra perspective, that extra viewpoint for um, for for making possible trades. Yeah, I think research and data is clearly of growing importance for trading and investing. And Joe and I we've talked about this on the show before as well. But this idea that we have news sources of proprietary data now like you know, you have hedge funds that have access to satellite data that shows which factories in China are manufacturing a lot, and that kind of throws up some questions about data inequality in the market. I'm just wondering when it comes to chess. You mentioned the idea that you know, you have these big databases that show all the moves in thousands and thousands of various games of chess. Do certain people have better databases or better computational power when it comes to that, Uh, In terms of database is known. In terms of computational power, certainly there there is a difference because some people will spend some extra money and go out and buy supercomputers or just have clusters of various computers altogether. Um, And I think when I say that not, I would say not all the top players have that. So there there are some computational advantages if if you, you know, spend the money. Obviously, this whole debate about humans versus computers or computers augmenting the ability of humans is it has much broader macro implications for the economy. This is an endless source of debate about whether humans will have any jobs to do, or whether there will be a few people with jobs programming computers and the rest of us will be unemployed and living on a drip of soilent and basic income check or something like that. I'm curious, you know, you whether through the chess experience, because I think in chess there's two things. There's man versus computer chess, but also chess or computers. As you've said, aiding your play, whether you have some perspective on where you see sort of the future of work and the future of human ingenuity. Well, the first thing that I'm gonna say is actually on Chustell. One of the really weird things is that when humans play against humans most games and in a draw, it's something like six of games and in a draw. But when you have computer programs playing against each other, there are a lot less draws. Most of the games are decisive, which should not make any sense whatsoever, because you figure the computers. Again, what is the difference between one computer and another computer? Um, And I'm not a computer guy, so I can't really explain it. But It's kind of amazing when you think about it. That like when two computers that should be the same same computational power and ability they play, one computer wins, which I think bodes very well for the future of chess UM in general. But us as far as the world UM, I don't know. It's it's hard to say because UM. I actually was was down in Florida recently. UM and there's this this I T company which builds UM builds various platforms through AI UM and using bit bit chain technology. And uh, certainly jobs are going to disappear with AI going forward. But at the same time, you also need people to train and build build these platforms and and and everything. And uh, like when I was in Florida, there were a lot of a lot of kids coming straight out of college who are doing this. So I think jobs are certainly going to disappear. I don't know if it's the end of the world, but I mean, I think going forward, there will probably have to be some sort of a shift in terms of jobs, job skills and and all that, because certain jobs like I think being a mechanic for example, UM are just gonna simply vanish over the next ten to fifteen years. It's really odd that games played between computers are more decisive than games played between humans. But on some level, I guess if you're a chess spectator, that would be more desirable, right, Like, would you ever get a situation where we all go to chess tournaments and we just watch one robot play another robot? Um? I I don't know. Maybe if that happens, I'm not gonna be playing chess a better better just to do something else all the time. Um, But yeah, I think you know that that that's actually a big, big problem with chess, for example, is because the the database has become so so good in the players have also just become so good through learning from the computers. The margin of difference is so small that most games do end and draws, and for spectators that's not exciting at all. Um. So there have to be some changes in chess, and I think it's a it's if you look at it, that's, you know, a microcosm of the bigger picture as well. Do you ever worry that? Like, so there's one At one point when people thought the chess that computers would never be able to compete with humans. There was obviously this view that there was something in chess, or there's something in poker or any of these other games that required an intuitive, creative element that could never be programmed into the computer. And then of course computers don't have any creativity or intuition, but they do have raw calculation power, and it turns out that that's enough to make them really good at chess. Do you ever worry there's like something unromantic about it, in the sense that it turns out that sort of intuition and creativity and these sort of skills that we think of as innately human maybe aren't worth very much. Yeah. I think it's it's a little bit depressing, you know. For me actually, like Caspar Lost a Deep Blue, it was already I think probably twenty years ago now, so I think there's ninety six, wasn't it. It was? Yeah, I remember being there and like at that point, like we had started to accept the computers are better, and like for me it was it was so bizarre. Um. Actually, another speaking of another game was go where Uh it was it's, you know, it's more difficult than chess. You can't compute it. And then then like you have this computer just destroy this world champion. It was just like this whole weird flashback to to what happened like twenty years ago. Um so I think in a way it's sad, but um if we can still learn from computers and uh become better at various skills, and I don't think it's all all for not. I have one question, which is, if you are a human, what's your what's your number one tip for someone with a very basic knowledge of chess who is very tired of constantly losing. Just pick up a book or go online and find some some some some quick tactics, like some tactics in the first like five moves of the games, some basic tactical sequences, just tricks, play for trucks, all right, I have to I have two final questions. Uh. The first one is very closely related to tracies. I have a thirteen month old daughter, and I want her to be the next car Nakamura. Of course, what's the how would you you know? I'm not just looking for technical tricks, but I want to turn her into a great chess player one day if she wants to be. What's the best way to uh start training her? Well, nowadays it's it's so easy, um. I mean just going online and on any of the various chess sites, just just studying tactical sequences um or just looking at various games. I mean, there's so much information out there that it's not hard to get started, um by by any means. As I said before, there are a few a few different chess sites like chest dot com. I think it is probably the main one where you can just go get a free account and uh, look at games or do some tactics and and that's the easiest way to get started. All right, I'll sit here in front of the computer today and this show you know longer with the chess dot com account by your one year older book. Yeah, I was gonna say that. That's another thing, is like when I became grand master at fifteen, that was a big deal. That was quite young at the time. But nowadays they're there are kids who are becoming grand masters at uh twelve or thirteen. So it just keeps getting younger and younger and uh and and again who knows where that's going to lead as well? I have one other question. So I used to be I'm not very good at chess, but I used to play a lot when I was in college, and that was I graduate in two thousand and two, so you're probably like early teens at that point. And my friends and I who played, we were aware of you. So it's very exciting because we knew about this young guy, Kara Nakamura was becoming one of the best in the world. And I yesterday I texted a friend and I said, oh, we have Nackamara on the podcast, and he was really excited. But he wants to know you have a prediction for the two thousand eighteen Chess Olympiad because I know the US one in its pretty extraordinary. That was in Buku and Azerbaijan. How's it looking for we? We should be the favorites. Uh, I mean, the one thing I will say is it felt way too easy winning this last time in Azerbaijan, So there's there's some kind of, uh, there's this weird feeling that like somehow if we do when it's not going to be as easy as it was. So I think we're we're probably the favorites. But uh, it's also Russia, I would say, one of the two, one of the classic the classic countries, and again exactly alright, Hakaro knackermar thank you so much. Been a great pleasure to chat with you, and thanks for coming on the Odd Lots podcast. Problem. So, Tracy, I'm not gonna lie. I really enjoyed that it totally lived up to the hype, as I said at the end, and I've been following her Car's I have have been aware of her Car's career for like fifteen years now, and so it's pretty thrilling to get to chat with him. You know, I'm just reading the Wikipedia entry again and it sends it says that he is sometimes nicknamed the h bomb because of his explosive style of playing. Do you know what that means? I imagine it's aggressively, aggressively tactical and stuff. But he's still here real quickly, her Carl, what what does that? Where's that nickname come from? Yeah, it's it's just it's just being a very aggressive player, trying to win every game at all costs, from from when I was a bit younger. Well, I'm lead up. We got to get an answer to that, no, And I really sort of appreciated the perspective. I mean, you know, we sort of talk about this eternal sort of epic battle of humans versus computers and robots, and we sort of act like it's, uh, like there's this zero sum element and one is going to win out. But I like this idea that, yeah, there is of that, but then there's also this way in which computers make humans way better at doing human tasks, like being able to play a much more advanced game of chess, or being able to learn chess at a much earlier age, and now they're all these young grand masters. So kind of gave me an optimistic, kind of optimistic on that. Really I don't know, so, I mean I just kind of see like chess in some respects is kind of at the forefront of the man versus machine argument, right, and like, yes, yes, people can use computers to augment their own performance, but ultimately, when humans are pitted against computers, the computers are the ones that went out. And I mean, just going back to my experience, I get really frustrated with the game because I never ever win. And so I wonder, if you're a human constantly competing against a machine, if eventually you just give up, you know, you should really buy a booker. I'm sure you're not that you could find some local grandmasters to teach you probably you know, you know, actually try to improve it the game, yes, okay, I I will try maybe, And I will say one other thing is frustrating, is it It might be to lose every game. There's nothing more boring than winning every game. So you're actually, I think you're getting on the You're you're on the right side of the equation. Is that how the computers feel? You think they're like, oh my god, I've just won another game. They probably are on that note. This has been another episode of the Odd Lots podcast. I'm Joe Wisn't Thal. You can follow me on Twitter at the Stalwart, and I'm Tracy Alloway. I'm on Twitter at Tracy Alloway. And you can follow Hakaru on Twitter at GM Hakaru, where you can see all of his uh later. I don't know about all of them, but his chest exploits and many of his options trades, including a recent trade on Young China that apparently worked out pretty well. So thanks for listening. Put knowledge to work and grow your business with c i T. From transportation to healthcare to manufacturing. C i T offers commercial lending, leasing, and treasury management services for small and middle market businesses learn more at c I T dot com put knowledge to work