And then he said, “I’m not allowed to eat watermelon,” while sipping chilled non-alcoholic beer.

I was not sure if he was serious or if it was some kind of lame joke.

He was dead serious.

It was one of those sweaty, sticky days when high temperature is perfectly combined with high humidity.

Exhausting.

Until you pull a chilled watermelon from the cooler. Perfectly ripe. Pre-cut into small bites.

Even writing this, my mouth fills with saliva.

But he was adamant.

No watermelon.

I was almost ready to respect that willpower.

Almost.

Then my curious mind, which keeps damaging my social life, started looking for the causal relationship behind this weird situation.

“Because of sugar?” I asked.

“Yeah, it’s fructose,” his wife added.

This was a new addition to their food restrictions.

In the past, they had mentioned they were not allowed to keep certain things in the house: nuts, honey, cakes, pastries, ice cream.

I did not write it down, so I am going from memory. Which means I probably forgot a couple dozen other forbidden objects.

This time, watermelon joined the list.

Interesting.

What’s going on?

They are gaining weight. Mostly her. Which is their personal decision.

I am totally fine with that.

But being curious does not allow me to be polite in many moments.

In all moments, if we are being honest.

So I asked, “Hey, if you restrict yourself and watch what you consume, how come you are gaining more weight?”

Crickets.

Then they explained it with my crazy workout routine.

Which is not crazy.

The average is about 45 minutes.

But consistency creates perception. So they decided I am wearing myself out.

Nah. Lame excuse.

I am not sure if my question got them thinking in the right direction.

Or any direction.

But it got me thinking for sure.

The way they see it: it is easier to consume 400 calories less than to burn 400 calories.

Fair.

Way easier.

I’ve tried both. So many times. Still trying.

I am always hungry.

Not metaphorically.

Just hungry.

But the real problem is noticing where those sneaky calories are coming from.

After about a year of observing my own suspicious behavior, I came down to two items:

As a huge fan of lattes, I accidentally learned that one latte can carry about 190 calories. If you like smoothies - horrible news for you too!

So I adopted a simple rule #1: I don’t drink calories.

Coffee is black during workdays.

Cappuccino or latte occasionally over the weekend.

Yup, life is one nonstop compromise.

I thought the quality of life would drop significantly.

It did not.

It took me only two days to get used to it.

But with beer, and then non-alcoholic beer, it was harder and longer because I had some inventory stocked.

My life principles are against wasting money, so obviously I had to finish everything first.

It took a few weeks.

A handful of nuts: about 180 calories.

A handful of dried fruit: about 130.

An apple or banana: about 100 each.

The problem is not only that snacks compound.

They do. This is disgusting.

The bigger problem is that random food consumption messes with blood glucose, which then messes with my energy level and mood.

And my mood does not need extra help.

Thus a simple rule #2: I don’t eat snacks.

This habit was harder to adopt.

It took about three or four days of conscious restriction and fighting the automatic urge to grab something just because it was there.

But now it is easier.

Breakfast done? Wait until lunch. Eat everything together.

After lunch, wait until dinner.

Very advanced system.

Some people call it normal eating.

I had to rediscover it.

Dinner is the most dangerous one.

Breakfast and lunch have deadlines because of the normal rush of a busy day.

Dinner is more relaxed. Wider time window. More opportunity to catch up on the snacks I was considering during the day.

And cakes.

I love them and eat them about 3-4 times a week.

So yes, I am also a very serious nutrition analyst.

As you can see, I try to be cautious with dinner, but usually it does not help much.

Still, there is one positive trade-off.

At least it becomes one glucose spike instead of seven.

And it is controlled a bit because of fiber: salads, greens, vegetables.

Not perfect.

But better than banning watermelon and calling it a system.

Which is exactly what they were doing.

No watermelon.

Because this is control.

This is discipline.

This is the plan.

Meanwhile: beverages, snacks, tiny bites here and there.

And the weight keeps going up.

Till next time.

Go Out and Do Something Difficult and Challenging - 5 min read.

Remember when renting a movie meant traffic, checkout lines, talking to people, and finding out your first choice was already gone? This article makes a simple point: small disappointments used to force us to adapt. Streaming, GPS, delivery apps, and AI fixes are useful. But they also remove a lot of everyday practice in patience.

The Zeigarnik Effect Is Running Your Life - 5 min read.

I like this because it questions the comforting idea that another productivity trick will fix your life. Sometimes the real problem is simpler: you started too many things and finished too few.

Instead of Being Cynical, Try Becoming Skeptical - 5 min read.

Worth reading if you sometimes confuse cynicism with clear thinking. The article explains why skepticism is usually more useful.

A practical book about using constraints to think better. Not more brainstorming. Not more sticky notes. Just a clear way to make your thinking more focused and useful.

I am not sure how convenient it is, but this setup is a minimalism masterpiece. It feels made for work, not for playing.

Assignment-to-Market Test: At Stanford, Knight wrote a paper asking whether Japanese running shoes could challenge German brands. Then wrote to Japanese shoemakers to test the idea. That simple.

Trunk Sale Test: Knight sold imported running shoes from the trunk of his lime green Plymouth Valiant and grossed about $8,000 in his first year, which kept him talking to runners and seeing demand directly. Test again.

Product Obsessive Partner Rule: Knight partnered with Bill Bowerman, his former track coach, because Bowerman was already modifying and testing shoes on athletes. Pick the person who is already doing the work.

Good-Enough Logo Decision: In 1971, Knight approved Carolyn Davidson’s Swoosh even though he said he did not love it, because production needed a logo. Well, good “enough can” be correct. Now the Swoosh is iconic.

Emotion Plus Performance Test: Knight said Nike wanted athletes who could win and “stir up emotion”. Which is a sharper partnership filter than fame alone: choose people who perform and make customers care. Emotions! Such an underrated asset.

Mistake Disclosure Rule: Knight said mistakes were allowed at Nike. Hiding mistakes was not. Say what went wrong early, while it is still fixable and yet not expensive.

No Standing Meeting Rule: Knight said he did not have regular scheduled meetings with Mark Parker (President and CEO) and instead talked when needed while walking around the company.

Post-Nike Approval Rule: After Nike, Knight backed Laika, the Oregon stop-motion studio. He had no office there, visited once or twice a month, stayed in touch by phone, but personally greenlit movies. Impressive delegation style: skip daily control, keep the biggest yes-or-no decisions.

Known Operator Rule: At the same studio, Knight put former Nike executive Dale Wahl in charge even though Wahl admitted he knew nothing about movies. The logic: in unfamiliar territory, Knight preferred a trusted operator over a category expert.

A simple brain dump layout: two pages, a timer, and a few categories to help you get thoughts out of your head. I tried it a little differently, and it felt like a refreshing shower after a sweaty day.

Enjoying the newsletter? Please forward this issue to a friend who might enjoy it too 😊🙏🏻

It only takes 10 seconds. Making this one took us 9 hours…