I don't deny this at all. There might be a lot of people who are as hardworking and ready with something to give them a multiplier. But they might have somebody like Mary Gates as their mother.
My problem is people taking that as a reason to not do the base work at the first place.
I know of people who hunt 'luck' stories whole day to prove why they being lazy is OK. And not just that, now they expect to get equally 'lucky'. And when they don't they call it 'injustice', 'unfair' and things like that.
But it was the main reason you or I even discuss him right now, which implies that it was one hell of a multiplier.
My problem is that the ratios are very distorted: 1% work vs. 99% luck. Work is necessary but not sufficient is all I'm saying.
Hence how would one optimise the multiplier (whilst obviously working on being just plain good), if that is at all possible.