I'm not that good at chess. I can hold my own for a while given a game with clear rules, equal information, and win conditions. But I'll eventually get outpaced by someone who lives for structure, memorization, or optimization. But I'll thrive given a game with fuzzy rules, incomplete information, and layers of social, technical, and strategic complexity.
That realization changed how I work, what I build, and how I choose where to invest my energy.
It's easy to think that comparative advantage is about skill. But it’s not just about being better. It’s about being better in the right environment.
The twist? Most people never stop to ask what kind of environment brings out their best.
There are people who shine in structured, rule-based settings where the rules are fixed and the winner is whoever plays most efficiently. Think accounting or operations roles. That’s not my environment. I do fine, but I don’t come alive there.
Instead, I hit my stride in systems where the rules are flexible and success requires you to navigate ambiguity. I do best when I choose to compete in the types of games where pattern recognition, synthesis, and strategic timing matter more than perfect play.
Here’s how I started mapping that out for myself:
This reflection helped me realize that my advantage isn’t visible in traditional comparisons. It emerges when the system itself is evolving.
If you feel stuck or behind, ask yourself: Am I losing because I’m bad or because I picked the wrong arena?
Try this to map your own edge:
Patterns will start to show. And with them, a deeper understanding of where you belong.
We’re taught to improve our tactics, but sometimes the real move is to switch the game entirely by choosing the right game, terrain, and leverage. When you do so, effort compounds faster, friction drops, and the path forward sharpens. Choose wisely.
I hope you are having a lovely time today. What environment and game do you do best in?