For a scientific article Krajbich's placing too much emphasis on luck in analyzing decision making. Successful sportsman have always been comfortable with a sm

For a scientific article Krajbich's placing too much emphasis on luck in analyzing decision making. Successful sportsman have always been comfortable with a small margin of advantage. Leagues and ladder tables put teams of similar ability together in match-ups, large differences are uncommon and seen as unsporting if too frequent. People build their own structures for dealing with work and life, there's no structure you can bring to a point & click symbol matching game that would help inside the rules of the test. You could escape the test environment and reverse engineer the code in real life, or accelerate the test environment with a clicking bot and data-log the patterns. You could bring knowledge and grokked intuition from another field into a complex task for an advantage, but none of that here. Exploring alternative hypothesis in real life is useful because there is infinite (though diminishing returns) in adding to a better work skill or structure. I don't know what value people are expected to get out of this article.