Oh I gotcha now. Being smart doesn't make you not a douche. More broadly, being smart doesn't make you immune to not thinking stuff through and in extreme cases can lead people to think "this is a smart thing to do, because I'm a smart person" as opposed to the preferred "I have thought this thing through and it is a smart thing to do, THEREFORE I'm a smart person".
If you ever end up going into research or hang around with PhD students/professors you start to see how they develop these weird blind spots. Gambling is like the easiest one to use to snag people on. Otherwise intelligent people will start talking all about how easy card counting is and how working out probabilities is no problem at a table, but then absolutely crash and burn in practice because they just sort of assumed being good at math would translate 1:1 to being good at actually putting card counting into practice. See also philosophy majors for a somewhat more insufferable option, where a person attempts to use simple logic puzzles to disprove things like relativity on the basis that they have been taught to ask interesting questions, but lack the experience or knowledge to apply that skill to anything outside of philosophy.
As a funny and benign example I watched an extremely smart grad student, knows about four languages and passed his candidacy exam (very difficult in his field) with flying colours, spend twenty minutes trying to turn on a concrete mixer that had one engine and one switch. He just looked right at it, didn't understand what he saw, and kept dicking around with the power bar and the lab breakers.
If you ever end up going into research or hang around with PhD students/professors you start to see how they develop these weird blind spots. Gambling is like the easiest one to use to snag people on. Otherwise intelligent people will start talking all about how easy card counting is and how working out probabilities is no problem at a table, but then absolutely crash and burn in practice because they just sort of assumed being good at math would translate 1:1 to being good at actually putting card counting into practice. See also philosophy majors for a somewhat more insufferable option, where a person attempts to use simple logic puzzles to disprove things like relativity on the basis that they have been taught to ask interesting questions, but lack the experience or knowledge to apply that skill to anything outside of philosophy.
As a funny and benign example I watched an extremely smart grad student, knows about four languages and passed his candidacy exam (very difficult in his field) with flying colours, spend twenty minutes trying to turn on a concrete mixer that had one engine and one switch. He just looked right at it, didn't understand what he saw, and kept dicking around with the power bar and the lab breakers.