Well, I have no reason to doubt Phil's intellect. If his IQ is up in the 140/150+ range (genius) then I have little doubt that his ability to win tournaments is a question of skill rather than "volume" of playing (facilitated by his wealth). Being a great poker player can come through learning and dedication - or simply being a lot smarter than others at the table. I have an IQ well above the range I just provided, and while I have only played occasionally with friends, I tend to win (and I similarly always win at casino tables). I wouldn't expect to win at tournaments (necessarily)... I am simply not experienced enough yet. Besides, many of the top players (I suspect) have very high IQs. Heck, James Woods, recognized for having an IQ above 160 (I believe estimated based on SAT scores) went from not knowing the game, to being a very, very capable player at major tournies. Any of you that doubt Phil (assuming his credentials of working on A.I. projects and starting his own company are accurate) are really missing the point... and just because you can't "see" his strategy (or why he is effective), doesn't mean that it doesn't exist. In fact, the more opaque it is to all of you, the more opaque it probably is to his competition - certainly a good thing in the long-run.