IQ/Poker/David Sklansky

[MMMMMM]

Well I'm not sure if I'm completely convinced, but that does help, and thanks for the information, Parachute.

[skp]

[ QUOTE ]
it is extremely obvious that they can't think like I once could.

[/ QUOTE ]

We would consider it rude if Bill Gates told someone on this board that "it's extremely obvious that I make more money in a day than you will in your lifetime"

We would consider it boorish if Mike Tyson told someone on this board that "it's extremely obvious that I can beat the sh*t out of you and plan on doing it next week"

We would consider it unbecoming (although we may enjoy the view) if Beyonce bent over and cooed "don't I have the prettiest ass you have ever seen?"

Somehow, we think nothing about Sklansky continually thumping his own chest about the wonder that is his brain.

You sir are just way too high on yourself.

[disjunction]

All 3 choices address motivation, but not "IQ", as it is typically defined.

[J.A.Sucker]

You are correct on all counts, skp, except for one: Beyonce really does have the sweetest ass I've ever seen. Her stating it wouldn't be unbecoming at all, especially if she were standing naked in front of me. [img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img]

[JohnG]

Not everyone judges success in life by the school attended, profession, or money made.

[georgesimpson]

""many factors go into why a person attends one university over another money, family, location, and admissions."

That's just nonsense. Its true for mediocre undergraduates. But if you have a chance to be one of the best in the country with a prestigious Phd under your belt your not going to blow that by considering graduate schools below a certain threshold. Perhaps UCLA meets that threshold in certain fields.
"--Sklansky

I just lost respect for a good author. Not everyone is a pride driven prick.

[Sredni Vashtar]

skp, "You sir are just way too high on yourself."

skp, after all these years you just picked up on that? [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] But in his defense I've noticed it seems to come out of frustration when he perceives that posters aren't accepting what to him must seem irrefutable. I dunno, that's how it seems to me. I do wish he would realize that most of us do recognize how smart he is, and just let deeds speak. As to where to rate him vis a vis the poker list, I only know (via many poker strategy emails) one person on that list well enough to say, and I am very certain Sklansky is smarter in this context than that person, and that person would agree with that. (I really don't like to reveal my email freinds unless they give me express permission.)

Unrelated, for some reason I do find it amusing that Sklansky's posts at the time of the writing sit at the number six hundred threescore and six (666).

SV,
who is always happy to see a skp post

[Poolgod32]

What I always find interesting about debates by people trying to determine who is smart and who is not is that they only tend to define intelligence in terms applicable to fields that are apparent to them. Its a sort of intellectual superiority that makes them very unattractive as people to the rest of society. Besides while its great to be smart I would rather have power any day. The most powerful people in the world run it and basically have the smartest at their beck and call.

[SDA004]

When the hell did poker players become such intellectual snobs???? Furthermore, what gives anybody, especially someone who decided to pursue poker as their life's passion, the right to be a snob, intellectual or otherwise.

This is one of the most incredibly arrogant, and irrelevant threads I've read on 2+2. I regard 2+2 in the highest esteem as far as poker forums go, but this thread is disgusting. People argueing about who's smarter, and trying to equate intelligence by where someone decided to go to school.

The fact of the matter is everyone who is a great poker player is smart in one way or another. You don't need to be a rocket scientist to be a great no-limit poker player, you may need to be smarter to be a limit player, but even then I think you can teach anyone who is very smart to be a very good limit poker player.

The bottom line is you're very smart, Chris Ferguson is very smart, but who cares about who is smarter? How are you going to measure something like that? Success? Money?? Status? Occupation? College?? IQ?? The fact is it doesn't matter, and there is no need to argue about it.

[David Sklansky]

It seems that some of my critics didn't read or forgot how this thread started. Namely:

"He's very smart -- but he is several levels below a first-rate talent such as Chris Ferguson. Poker is a game that allows people like David---"

I chose not to let that go. Unfortunately to defend myself I have to bring up things that might put me in a bad light. I guess if I completed my education I wouldn't have to do that as I could let academic accomplishments I believe I would have achieved, speak for themselves. Then again if I had finished school no one would have written the above quote, not to mention this forum wouldn't be here to read it on.