A World Class Player, indeed!

[SossMan]

[ QUOTE ]
This decision making extends over several days and hundreds of hands.

[/ QUOTE ]

hundreds of hands? I had no idea it was such a statistically significant number!! I stand corrected

[jakethebake]

[ QUOTE ]
he came off extremely well spoken

[/ QUOTE ]
He's an actor! Of course he's well spoken. That doesn't make him intelligent. Of course the fact that he can't seem to close his mouth and stands around like he's trying to catch flies doesn't necessarily make him unintelligent, but it sure makes him look dumb. And let's not forget about the jewel encrusted toilet seats he bought Jennifer...lol. Doesn't "seem intelligent" to me.

[jakethebake]

[ QUOTE ]
However winning a poker tournament is inherently more skillful than just being the best performer in a given week.

[/ QUOTE ]Actually I'd say it's less so.

[adanthar]

I'd like to point out that both Affleck and Maguire are professional actors who basically get paid to convincingly project emotions to millions of people. (Yes, Affleck comparatively sucks at it. He's still better than I am or you are.)

Given an average run of cards and a decent amount of brainpower there's no reason any actor couldn't do well in a game that's half about reading the opponent.

[Paul Phillips]

[ QUOTE ]
He's an actor! Of course he's well spoken. That doesn't make him intelligent.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actors have to be good at reading prepared lines. That doesn't automatically render them good at speaking extemporaneously, and indeed, some actors are visibly poor at this.

Affleck IS very intelligent.

[jakethebake]

I don't know him personally. I have not played with him. I missed the Democratic Convention (well I wouldn't say I MISSED it). But the times I've seen him speak (ie. talk shows, awards, etc.) when he didn't have lines to read, he sounded like a complete idiot. Just the impression I have.

[nsj]

Eloquence is not the only measure of intellect...

...but considering Affleck is a hugely successful celebrity who happened to co-author one of the smartest screenplays of the last 20 years, it's safe to say that while his acting and choice of scripts is pretty poor, he's still a smart guy.

As for poker, any idiot can win, any time, ONCE.

[Daliman]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
he came off extremely well spoken

[/ QUOTE ]
He's an actor! Of course he's well spoken. That doesn't make him intelligent. Of course the fact that he can't seem to close his mouth and stands around like he's trying to catch flies doesn't necessarily make him unintelligent, but it sure makes him look dumb. And let's not forget about the jewel encrusted toilet seats he bought Jennifer...lol. Doesn't "seem intelligent" to me.

[/ QUOTE ]


PLEASE tell me you're not holding what a man did for a woman as evidence of intelligence. If that were the case, we'd ALL be idiots.

P.S. Affleck is pretty smart. Isn't he Ivy League? (course, so is GWB...)

[CrisBrown]

Hi SossMan,

This is a classic application of the Fundamental Attribution Error:

* If I win, I deserved it.
* If I lose, I got screwed.
* If you win, you either got lucky or cheated.
* If you lose, you deserved it.

That basic concept underpins this entire thread, and indeed much of this forum. Afleck and Maguire, as well as Hansen, Duke, et. al., are talented people whose talent -- applied diligently when opportunities presented themselves -- has given both of them a lot of attention and a lot of money. This is not true for most of the people posting here. The system must be flawed, or else these posters would have to admit that either: (a) they lack talent; or, (b) they lacked diligence when opportunity knocked.

Much easier to just ridicule those who succeed.

Cris

[alittle]

There are a lot of things that contribute to winning a poker tournament. There are a lot of things that contribute to success in anything.

Intelligence
Experience
Bankroll
Dedication
Fortitude
Luck

It's funny that when discussion of any kind of success ensues, there always seems to be a focus on just one of these things. In reality, it is a highly variable mix of all kinds of things, and any two successful people will have a different mix.

Sorry to use you as an example Paul, but was Paul Phillips' business success due to intellect or being at the right place at the right time (luck)? Some of both, I imagine.

And his poker success? Could it be his intelligence combined with a bankroll allowing him to be dedicated to the game, giving him the experience needed to capitalize on luck?

Let's be realistic - luck does not win the WSOP and neither does intelligence. People win the WSOP and people are an imperfect lot.