So there are a few orthogonal discussions here (largely due to lack of focus in my original comment, I&#x27;m afraid - haven&#x27;t had my Sunday morning coffee yet).<p>Firstly, luck is a label for a subset of all factors on the outcome of a particular endeavor: specifically the subset that we aren&#x27;t consciously aware of. I wanted to refute it as a singular reason for success (being, by definition, multiple reasons).<p>Secondly, I think an attitude that mostly dismisses the importance of luck (by emphasizing the importance of factors you can control) can help inspire confidence, an often-necessary and entirely-insufficient factor in successful human endeavors.<p>Thirdly, I make no claims as to knowing the single most heavily-weighted factor for success, or even the absolute weight of any given factors. I have lightly-held opinions about relative weights of various factors, based on my own experience and things I&#x27;ve read on the Internet.