Why Geniuses Don't Make Money

[Lucky]

Well, of course they do, but proportionally they don't. Nobel Prize winners average 140+ IQs, CEO's about 120.

Harvard professors are very smart, the biggest used car dealership owner in your area is probably less intelligent.

Why the disparity and how does this apply to poker????
Well, you could argue geniuses veer away from the marketplace, enter an altruistic world of ideas, etc. where they can do the most good...Ok, there's some merit there, but i really think people move toward what they're good at.

I think, bottom line, people get rich because they understand the marketplace/consumer. Often, this is just a matter of understanding poor people. Whether you invest in small income rentals, own a chain of fast food restaurants, strip clubs, money store, mortgage co, or move up the chain in a discount retailer, you need to understand poor people and why they do what they do.

Moving on to poker, you need to be able to deal with tough players. often this means avoiding them when possible. But the live ones pay the bills. How to extract the most money from them??? You need to understand their thought processes.
I believe this is what creates the much greater earn for the hustlers than the geniuses.

[toots]

Hustlers do a better job of learning to manipulate people. Geniuses spend their time instead learning how to better manipulate the physical world.

I think there's more money to be made in manipulating people.

[Grisgra]

[ QUOTE ]
Well, of course they do, but proportionally they don't. Nobel Prize winners average 140+ IQs, CEO's about 120.

[/ QUOTE ]

Nothing in this statement suggests that there aren't more genius CEOs than Nobel Prize winners. You'd have a tough time convincing me that the average 120IQ schlob makes more money than the average guy with an IQ of 140 or 150.

[felson]

There is evidence that the very smartest folks (as measured by the SAT) tend to become physicists while the folks a notch or two down go into law and business.

http://tinyurl.com/55tgw

Edit: and of course these are only generalities, so that nothing is to be inferred about any particular individual.

[Bodhi]

Remember that historically, being a "money-changer" was a negative thing. All the way back to Aristotle the good life is a life of knowledge and political participation; having to work and make money was shameful.
We've laregly abandonned this outlook in "modern times," but I think the preference of the very, very smart remains a life of knowledge and learning, with a little politics on the side.

There are exceptions of course. Look at Bill Gates. Is he a genious? I don't know, but he is certainly a very smart man who has more money than he knows what to do with.

[miajag81]

a lot of geniuses are pretty lazy and/or don't give a [censored] about money

[Stu Pidasso]

[ QUOTE ]
a lot of geniuses are pretty lazy and/or don't give a [censored] about money

[/ QUOTE ]

I think a lot of geniuses realize there really isn't much difference in the life styles of the superwealthy like Bill Gates and the average Joe Shmoo.

Stu

[poker-penguin]

You're right - I'm a genius or close to it (see I'm modest too [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]), and I realised that lifestyle is more important than money (and I'm pretty lazy).

[mosquito]

An interesting point is that success in business is
driven more by hard work and luck, though intelligence
plays a role.

Comparing business to poker, both require certian people
skills. Poker requires less luck, and about the same
amount of intelligence/skill/hard work.

Of course, the elite in any field will tend to be more
intelligent (IMO).

[slickpoppa]

Geniuses are smart enough to realize that money is not the source of true happiness.