Making Smarter Decisions When You Don't Have All the Facts

This is a book that delivers more than it promises. Annie Duke teaches us how to set aside many of our pre-conceived notions about positive and negative outcomes. She provides us with a framework to accept either result derived from the countless decisions we make in business and in our private everyday lives.
The titles for each chapter and subheading inspire the reader to hunker down and examine life through the prism of a poker player champion. How would each important decision be made if it were presented as a bet?
Using a myriad of mathematical, psychological, physiological and philosophical means, Duke pushes us to explore managerial dilemmas and gives us the wherewithal to consider these problems through the practiced mind of a disciplined poker player. Additionally, she shows how to extrapolate from these processes a blueprint for examining real-life choices.
Of particular interest to me was her embracing of "alternative hypotheses." While reading about this aspect of decision making, I caught myself nodding in agreement at how we always overlook the potential outcomes that would be detrimental to our own wants and biases. Duke provides strategies to combat this phenomenon in our decision-making process.
In or everyday lives we almost never have all the important information needed prior to making a sound, rational decision. Thinking in Bets... provides us with the necessary skillset to examine these questions; guides us towards making better decisions and accepting their outcomes.
Bruce M. Allman

I came upon this book when I read Stuart Firestein’s interview with Annie Duke in Nautilus magazine. The interview got me curious about the ideas in this book and I was fascinated by Annie Duke’s unusual background: being both a psychology graduate student at one time and a successful poker player. Graduate studies I know about, professional poker playing I did not. So the unique combination piqued my interest.
It was a fortuitous digression from my usual list of topics. Ms. Duke has a clear and eloquent voice and she has a way of explaining the same points in various ways so that she conveys the essential points which translates to understanding without seeming pedantic. She obviously knows the poker world, but it is remarkable how comfortably she steps into the academic mode without any noticeable change of pace. The book is loaded with references, other sources, and it is very well notated, no doubt a remnant of Ms. Duke’s academic training.
The tone of the book is very practical, it is a business book on decision making without reading like a business book, and I mean that as a foremost compliment.
The theme of the book is obviously noted in the subtitle: Making Smarter Decisions When You Don’t Have All The Facts. Ms Duke lays out her case in six succinct and information filled factors. The first two chapters are her problem statement and her light primer on the poker worls, she never gets bogged down in the intricacies of playing poker professionally, as she states in her introduction: This Is Not A Poker Book. She does yeoman work in trying to convince the reader that this poker player point of view is a valid one for all decision makers to adopt and apply regardless of our lot in life. In fact she does this throughout the book in unobtrusive but obvious ways. The next four chapters are a combination of how the betting mindset and probability frame of reference help the decision maker and how to go about adopting that frame of reference. In these four chapters she makes a cogent argument about the benefits of thinking in bets. Much of the reason for adopting this mental tool comes from the fact that we humans are disastrously biased in our decision making. We fool ourselves into believing our beliefs whether they are worthy of our trust of not. This, of course, is not anything new. Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky has laid the ground work for that work, Ms Duke makes use of their argument to support her case, but the uniqueness of her attack is that she is able to lay out a “how” component to the discussion on decision making.
Ms Duke uses her professional poker player circle of support network and what they do in order to check their own egos and false conclusions as an example and gives us a look at what they do to make sure their decision making is objective and accurate. She delves into how our inability and unwillingness to deal with uncertainty sends our thinking into erroneous conclusions and our own egos forces us into drawing wrong conclusions about the real reason for our own successes and failures. We will always attribute our success to our skills and our failures to bad fortune. She lays out the tools necessary for a decision maker to call themselves out when they start thinking in this ways.
Remarkably, the process that Ms Duke lays out aligns nicely with the Stoic philosophy, particularly with regard to dealing with uncertainty and the dichotomy of control which Stoics espouses. That exact point is notable in Ms Duke’s narrative.
The final chapter: An Adventure in Time Travel was especially entertaining and educational as she lays out the framework for an open-minded process of examining our problems and decision making regarding those problems. I am quite eager to apply this process in my own life now, as Ms Duke is quite convincing in her argument.
One point I need to make is that as I looked over my notes from the book, I realize that Ms Duke had repeated quite a few of her points. Usually I would attribute that practice to an author who had run out of things to say, as that is something that is easily discernable. In this case however, the repetition is written in such a way to reinforce the previous accounting of the concept and it manifests itself naturally and unobtrusively in the narrative. In fact, I would not have noticed until I saw that I had the same point written down multiple times, which means that I had noted the importance of those points multiple times, which in hindsight meant that the repetition was not only necessary but critical.
I am hoping that Ms Duke would follow this book with a deeper dive into the dynamics of her process and the intimate social dynamics of her CUDOS group. She already did a very succinct description of her group but I think an examination of the CUDOS group method as applied to different groups focused on different types of problems and existing in different milieus would be very good.
I obviously liked the book.

Annie Duke is, without a doubt, a very talented poker player with an impressive resume, and this book provides insight into the type of philosophy and approach that helped her become a winning player as well as a solid authority on decision-making in both professional and personal life choices. The opening scenarios and explanations are ones with which we can easily relate, and she challenges readers to not take the consensus opinions regarding what the general public may collectively accept as "winning" or "losing" decisions. I was pleasantly surprised at how she adeptly worded her points and explanations with scholarly research without getting verbose or mundane. Rather, the chapters expressed her ideas clearly with very interesting anecdotes, and she presented several real-life scenarios for readers to consider and assess. I found that this flowed very well, and it made me often stop to consider the messages and reexamine my own thinking and how I would approach the various situations presented.

One of the major themes is how people fall into the trap of "resulting," or letting the concept of depending upon results determine whether or not we made smart decisions. This would seem to be a common thing practiced by so many, since want to believe that good choices lead to good results, and bad choices lead to failure or negative consequences. Annie methodically and skillfully explains how this is erroneous thinking and how, if we can reevaluate how we look at things and not depend entirely upon those results to determine whether or not we made sensible choices, then we can accept the natural swings of some decisions and how outcomes may not necessarily always be what we want or expect. As suggested in the book, that is real life, and things don't always go as we would wish. Though odds may be in our favor, as long as there is room for an alternate outcome, we cannot ever completely rule out that possibility.

As a fan of poker, I appreciate the analogies and references, but you certainly don't have to be involved with poker to appreciate the lessons and ideas Annie presents. I found this to be a very impressive and thought-provoking read which has really helped me look at things in a new light. Much of what she says makes terrific, logical sense, and I found myself thinking that I should have known some of the very things she addresses. I realized that I am guilty of the very sort of thinking that can lead to a counterproductive outlook. The book makes pragmatic sense, and it provides strategies for how to easily use her methods and cognitive approach in our everyday lives. Sometimes it takes an outside influence or inspiring source to help us realize and appreciate a particular point of view. Annie Duke greatly succeeds with her message and delivery. This is a book for anyone who wants to honestly assess their own life decisions and assumptions and who is ready to make a significamt, positive change.

If you are serious about wanting to gain a new perspective professionally and personally, then bet on this book to make a real difference!

This is an excellent book. It offers a wide range of strategies and examples about how to make better decisions. I got the audio book from my library (which was read by the author) to listen to as I go to work. I had to buy the print version so I could review the good parts- the strategies about how to make better decisions. Every chapter had an excellent idea, lesson or plan about how to make better decisions far beyond the title "thinking in bets". No "pie in the sky" positive thinking mumbo-jumbo or fluff; just real, accessible, practical information-this is worth buying. It will definitely help you make better decisions.

A professional poker player applies lessons from poker to decision making in general. Some of the ideas are good – for example, being aware of and avoiding hindsight and confirmation bias, thinking probabilistically, becoming more comfortable with uncertainty, understanding “motivated reasoning” and “fielding outcomes,” using a “truthseeking pod” to improve our decision making, and conducting “pre-mortems” for decisions – although several are examined better by others (e.g., Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky). Duke sometimes oversimplifies, as in her example of Pete Carroll’s decision in the 2015 Super Bowl, but all in all, her ideas are sound and applicable to a wide range of situations. On the other hand, her attempt to tie these ideas together into a memorable framework doesn’t work so well; there could be more and more pertinent lessons from the world of poker, for instance. In other words, good ideas but could have been presented better.

My expectations were not particularly high in part due to the genre which tends to expand what should be a paper into a book, but I was very pleasantly surprised. The author synthesizes quite a bit of research on decision making, but where the books stands out is that it is prescriptive. For me that distinguished it from most decision-oriented books that I have read. She does have some good ideas of ways to deal with behavioral biases and other cognitive challenges. Many of these were derived from poker where she points out that high-stakes decisions need to be made quickly. I have no interest in poker at all, but I think that analogies and learnings generally work. Also the Audible version is well done.

A fusion of How to Measure Anything, Thinking Fast & Slow and Superforecasting that adds just enough new to justify a recommendation from me. The recommendation increases substantially if you haven't read those books. This book is a great introduction because Duke does an excellent job summarizing and notating her sources throughout. If you haven't read any of those three aforementioned books you'll probably come out of reading this book with a list of 3-10 books to follow up on.

The book has a number of issues that weren't that big of a deal to me. The poker anecdotes are hit or miss, there is a lot of repetition in examples and the book goes a little off the rails at the end. There aren't any real links to poker or betting in the final two chapters and it ends abruptly without a satisfying conclusion.

I had already learned the best lesson in the book 15 years ago through personal experience. I was working at a consumer products company and the CEO recommended betting to me as a means for gathering information. That topic was definitely under explored in the book based on my personal experience with it over the years. Most people aren't the poker experts portrayed in the book that have experience in betting. Reading people as you are discuss increasing the bet or altering the odds is extremely helpful in teasing out more information than you will get from simple bet. The dynamic constructs of a bet can force them to think more, consider confidence levels and explore alternatives.

Annie Duke has written an excellent book that will make you think before you make decisions. She cleverly uses her experience from being a poke champion on how we all can make bets. You are not always going to win but will certainly make the best decision using rational thinking over emotions.

The one thing I will disagree with Duke regarding Pete Carroll's passing play that resulted in an interception by Patriots and the loss of Super Bowl is the following. Lynch was simply unstoppable. He was a monster that could not be stopped by the Pats defense so Duke may know probability real well but she certainly does not know football well enough to know that handing the ball off to Lynch was the best play. Passing play would be preferred if Lynch was not your main running back. She needs to visit this since anyone who knows football and is not a Ptriots fan will not buy her explanation.

The book is well written and anyone can understand it. I highly recommend it. In fact, I will be coming to this book before I have to make a big decision.

I have previously read much of the underlying material and recommended reading Annie Duke included in this book. Annie weaves these resources together with her own experiences and insight in a succinct, interesting and practical way. I absolutely love this book and can’t put it down. I will read this again and again. It’s not another book, it’s so much more.

I find the book very repetitive halfway through. Again, maybe it’s due to the fact that when you’re listening to an audiobook, you’re more aware of the fact that a very simple idea has, so far, taken an hour to explain. I’m not saying this is exactly comparable to a college lecture, but this far I’m 3 hours in and I can’t help but think what the lecture attendance would be like if any of my professors took so long to get across so little. While I willing to grant that the ideas she presents are quite novel in public discourse, she reiterates the same points over and over again, giving multiple examples to illustrate the same point. And at this moment in the book, she hasn’t given very many concrete tips as to how we should apply her material except for “think in bets because everything is basically a bet. Oh and beware of cognitive biases”.

There is a breed of self help book I find rather contrived, where they take one or two good ideas that could be fully explored in a long’ish blog post or a news article, and then fills the book with far more anecdotes than are sufficient to illustrate the point (said anecdotes usually have mountains of unrelated details), and this is one of them. I’m seriously debating if I should finish the book.

In conclusion, 5 stars for the novelty of the ideas. 1 for the presentation.

A reminder of how some decisions are not so black and white - but percentages are - a timely book for me - Because it reminds me that it is ok - to live and make decisions - with a little uncertainty. That my decisions - if they turn out positive or negative - doesnt mean that i necessarily im responsible for the outcomes

luck - does play a part - my blind - spot to this - i can now open myself to accept this premise

an easy read - from soup to nuts - Timely and sprinkled in - are observations and advice from real poker professionals whose names are idols in the poker world

An entertaining, instructive and outstanding book from a sharp thinking writer... as most reviews attest to. For me the two stand out ideas - and they are very tough to come to terms with in with enough depth for it to affect your behaviour are (1) the idea that it is possible to make a perfectly rational, logical and well thought out decision (high quality decision) and still wind up, because of randomness and uncertainty, with a perfectly terrible outcome. Being "resulted". The opposite can occur and worse you believe its evidence of your brilliance. Think about it. (2) uncertainty is pervasive - truly ubiquitous and thus as rare as a free lunch. Thus - whether you know it or acknowledge it you are "behaving in bets" so very likely you should be "Thinking in Bets". Just read it.

Many people already know that Annie Duke was a world-class poker player and one of the finest women players of all time. Perhaps fewer know, however, that she has advanced degrees in cognitive psychology and is a wonderfully entertaining writer, as well.

With Thinking in Bets, Annie leverages all of her considerable talents into a finely crafted, meticulously documented narrative that is bound to create better decision-makers of us all. The major premise is a simple one: faced with life’s uncertainties and the randomness that often drives some of the most important outcomes we will face, how should we best assess each situation so as to maximize our chances of a favorable outcome?

In attempting to answer this fundamental question, Duke draws upon her vast storehouse of knowledge, artfully combining her experiences as a top poker professional with those from academia. The result is an entertaining page-turner that is, in the final analysis, a recipe for thinking more clearly, more dispassionately, and, therefore, more effectively.

We’re often told that life can throw us a lot of curves along the way. The mathematician (or poker player) might invoke probabilities to help sort out the multiple paths we might take to reach various decisions. But, be careful: biases can and often do invade our thinking process, leading to flawed conclusions and, ultimately, poor choices. And it is here that Annie excels. Patiently, she explains new concepts, taking potentially complicated ideas and, through examples and personal anecdotes, makes them easy for the reader to understand. Indeed, one of the hallmarks of a great teacher is the ability to make the difficult seem simple.

Many might argue that life, in general, is one big gamble. In fact, Duke explains, life is an ongoing series of gambles, each of which eventually requires one or more decisions on our part as to how to proceed. Thinking in Bets gives us the blueprint for the most productive way to confront each fork in the road so as to maximize the likelihood of success.

Here’s a no-brainer: faced with the decision as to whether or not you should buy this amazing new book, the answer is a resounding “Yes!”

If you’ve ever wondered if The Princess Bride, David Letterman, Pete Carroll, Snackwells, Pavlov, Universalism, Marty McFly and Henry Kissinger can exist – and make sense - in the same book…your search is over. “Thinking in Bets” is readable, entertaining and thought provoking. Annie Duke is clearly brilliant but writes in such a fun and approachable way that she educates us all. I learned about the world AND myself through this book and will never see either the same again. Bravo!

Wanted to like this book when I got it. Unfortunately the first two examples in the book that Annie Duke gives are totally incorrect in any reasonable logical decision making. Her first example is Pete Carroll's decision to pass on second down on the Patriots 1 yard line with less that 2 minutes left in the Super Bowl. She uses statistics from that year concerning passes on the one-yard line to claim that it wasn't a bad call but only looked bad in hindsight since it wasn't successful. However she lumps in all passes from the 1-yard line as the same. However as most everybody knows:

1) Most passes into the endzone are very safely thrown either to the corner of the end zones or high or two either sideline where the receiver has a favorable position on the defender (where in the case of of a sideline throw the receiver is between the ball and the defender with no defender between the receiver and the sideline) and if the ball isn't caught by the receiver chances are 99.9% of the time the ball will end up out of the end zone or out of bounds.

2) You had a relatively short quarterback in Russell Wilson at less than 6 ft tall trying to pass over lineman that are 3 to 5 inches taller than him into the middle of the field where the most amount of players are concentrated. Using just those facts the chance that a defender would get a hand up to deflect the ball increases the probability of an interception.

3) The fact that Russell Wilson's best passing comes in situations where he scrambles or moves in the pocket to allow himself to clear space so that large lineman are not blocking his vision is also ignored.

5) In addition none of the Seahawks receivers were known as strong possession receivers that would be able to fight for a reception from a Defender. As a matter of fact this was another criticism of the call and the play when people notice that the receiver was clearly out fought for the ball.

6) In addition Pete Carroll should have known that this was a play that they had used previously in the season. Knowing that he should have realized that Bill Belichick would have drilled his team on that specific play many times over in practice. That was exactly what happened and why Malcolm Butler knew exactly what to do on the interception.

In this way the call that Pete Caroll made was aberrant in every way compared to all the other passes on the one-yard line that year.

Ms Duke's next example is of another hindsight bias situation. She recalls a situation in which a chairman was upset that he could not replace the president that he had recently fired. The author asked why he fired him. The response was that the president of the company had certain skills but did not have the full repertoire of skills needed for the job. However since then they have not been able to find someone else to do as good a job as last. The chairman had considered dividing the job and giving someone else the responsibilities that the president did not handle well. However the individual decided not to take that path because he felt that it would look like a demotion to the president and that his employees would act accordingly. The authors contention was that this was hindsight bias because the individual had no way of knowing that they would not be able to find a better replacement soon. However the author's belief that the lack of finding a good replacement was not in partial control of this individual is entirely mistaken and indicates that this aspect was not an important part of the decision making process. Part of that individual's decision had to be weighing the probability of finding an individual who would be able to perform at the level or greater than the person he was firing. Part of his decision was to estimate or to personally find out what the market would be for a person of the skills that they were looking for. Without that information and without a rough probability of their ability to replace this employee quickly their decision to fire that person was flawed since in retrospect they realized that some of this person's qualities and abilities were an asset to the company It would have made more sense to take the intermediate step of dividing the presidents responsibilities and see if what happened. If it worked out you would have a stronger team than before where individuals worked to their strengths, if not they still had an option to find a new president. It wasn't hindsight bias this person was suffering from it was the regret at having made a poor decision. It's not much unlike a football GM when he is asked to make a decision to resign or cut a player. The GM will not cut or release a player if he does not believe that there is a high probability to find another player of equal or greater ability in the present Market.

The problem with the authors analysis of problems from a poker perspective is that in poker you have very little control over the cards that you are dealt with. You only have the ability to make decisions based upon what you are given. However in most business decisions you are given the ability to make a decision with as much information as possible if you are willing to spend the time and effort. It is true that you can't control all factors all of the time. However I don't agree as the author states that life is more like poker then chess. I wouldn't argue that it is just like chess but I would argue that it is more like chess then poker in that you have more control over the situation and decision-making process if you are willing to understand and analyze all the factors and the environment to the degree that it is necessary for that specific level of decision.

It is all in your perspective and unfortunately the author is only taking the perspective of the poker player as the given decision making criteria and mental habits and work habits as the criteria and environment in which these decisions are made. In that way I believe the premise of the book is biased and unfortunately the author is biased in her view of how to make decisions, what the environment of those decisions are encompassed in, and how much control one is able to exert on any one decision making process. After reading the author's first two examples in the book and seeing the more than obvious flaws in her analysis I lost all faith in the author's premise and research. It just felt like an editor came up with the idea and asked her to come up with a book for it. The title is Thinking in Bets: Making Smart Decisions when you don't have all the facts. I think it would have helped the author to get more facts on her first two teaching examples (Where these facts were clearly and easily accessible.) It seems that instead of concentrating so much on hindsight bias she should be focused more on confirmation bias which is an interesting twist because claiming hindsight bias is just another form of confirmation bias to make someone feel good about being exactly wrong. Claiming hindsight bias in these situations is just like the Love Story line. "If love is never having to say your sorry." Then premature knee jerk claiming of hindsight bias is never having to admit you were wrong.

Good luck to the author with her next book.

Loved this book! With her academic background and her professional poker background, Annie is one of the few people on the planet that can write a book such as this and truly have the credentials to back it up. "Thinking in Bets" just joined a slot next to Kahneman's 'Thinking Fast and Slow" on my book shelf. I've always battled against lazy thinking in my life.......having Annie's book nearby will help force me to overcome this bad habit and think beyond the first set of easy solutions that occur to me. I'm making this book required reading for my teen age kids........

A brilliant, thoughtful, super inciteful book by a very, very smart professional decision maker. And a terrific author. Who knew a game like poker was overflowing with so many priceless life examples. Please Ms Duke, more books please. I hated to get to the end.

Or at least understanding how irrational humans are by nature and how it affects people far beyond decisions and poker, from the angle of "bets". I really like the clarity and simplicity about such a deceptively nuanced topic that effects everyone everyday and sometimes for the rest of our lives.

In addition to the very practical pluses to this reading experience -- the reinforcement of examples that are reintroduced into new chapters, the crisp organization into manageable chunks, the casual and clean writing -- what I enjoyed most was the wide-ranging synthesis. Duke's domain is poker, but she is an interdisciplinary intellectual who builds her argument by reaching into sports, business, science, psychology, philosophy, and history. The result is a book that is incisive, comprehensive, and engaging...and very much worth the read.

I’ve enjoyed Annie’s anecdotes and rationale. The idea of thinking in bets resonates with me and can see the value of applying that framework of consideration in more areas than gaming or financial risk management. You’ll be enriched considering what she presents in the book

Leave it to Annie to write an excellent book again!!! She presents a lot of compelling dialogue backed up by some research and support regarding how we should all approach thinking about life, politics, views, data, news and so much more. Thank you Annie for this incredible work and presenting a framework for ways to think about decisions.

This book is excellent. The concepts are very clearly laid out and the anecdotes used to illustrate each point are excellent. I have the Audible version, and will likely double-down and get the print version as well.

Terrific book! Duke provides an in-depth look at how we often go wrong when making decisions and how, by thinking in bets, we can slow down and become more objective decision makers. Whether you're a poker player, investor, or just a person looking to improve their decision making, you'll collect some great insights that you can apply to decisions both large and small. I'd highly recommend it.

Mediocre book, if you have read anything by Khaneman, Nassim Taleb or anything in the topics of cognitive biases, game theory, simple probabilities this is definitely NOT the book for you. I found this book to be full of hot air, nothing to learn and nothing to even think about. Her basis for most of her arguments were "make a google search to debunk false beliefs" this is ridiculous coming from someone that allegedly is a consultant to companies and people on decisions making and strategy.
Her betting experience just make for little stories of what a poker player would do, but these are so basic they provide no insight or new information to anyone that has some sort of idea of the topics.
Over all spend your time and money on anything else. Not worth it.

Annie Duke writes well. Not like Annie Dillard, the Pulitzer Prize-winning author of Pilgrim at Tinker Creek whose name Annie Duke always evokes in my mind. Not almost poetic like her. Annie Duke writes well like Susan Cain does in Quiet, and Charles Duhigg does in Smarter Faster Better.

Annie Duke tells a story well, catching your interest, and draws a lesson from that story. And she explains a research study well, and draws a lesson from that study. Just like Cain and Duhigg.

That’s a problem. Because readers might get caught up in the entertainment and the information and not realize what Annie Duke is doing. She is doing what psychologists almost always do. Using inductive reasoning and reductionism to support her ideas when those ideas have no scientific support.

That’s what happens when you become a motivational author and speaker, like Duke, Cain and Duhigg. You have to give people the idea that just by reading your book or listening to your talk they can change their lives. You have to make the complex simple. That’s the way to make money.

Trouble is, life is not simple. It never will be. And making life simple misleads.

Take one example. On page 36 Annie Duke has the following chain of reasoning: Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky won the Nobel Prize in Economics in part by showing that losses in general feel about two times as bad as wins feel good. So winning $100 in blackjack feels as good to us as losing $50 feels bad to us. Being right in our lives feels like winning and being wrong feels like losing. That means we need two favorable results in our lives for every one unfavorable result just to break even emotionally.

If that kind of logic makes sense to you, then you may well like this book. If it doesn’t, you probably won’t. To me, it doesn’t, and I don’t. The promotional material for this book says that Annie Duke draws on the science of decision making in writing this book. I don't think so. That's not science.

Annie Duke's book is based on the idea that life is like a poker game (not like chess -- oh no, like poker, never chess), and that making decisions in life is like placing bets in poker. But that's more a gimmick, a shtick than a solid foundation for a book. The idea is facile on its face. The trope is tripe. (I got a little carried away with my verbiage there. Sorry.)

There is some truth to that basic idea, sure. Just like there is some truth in comparing life to a box of chocolates. But Annie Duke's approach is like saying the key to losing weight is to eat a certain diet or do a certain exercise, or both. You can sell a lot of books that way, and make a lot of money from people desperate to lose weight. But buyers of the book will read it and still be fat.

Just downloaded the sample of this fascinating book and couldn't put it down and I can't wait to read the whole thing. I know who Annie Duke is but, had never read anything she had written. She seems brilliant but in such an easy and simple way, not showy at all. This looks to be for anyone that's interested in why we do the things we do. Can't wait to keep reading.