A point I have been making for years. For a long time people have assumed that dominant athletes, for example, are far superior to their competitors when in fact, like Tiger Woods, they are only maybe a few percentage points better if that. But those few percentage points translate into dominance. Nevertheless even Woods doesn't win every tournament. If it can be measured accurately that I am five percent better than my opponent in let's say tennis, I will thrash him virtually every time. Even being just one percent better would allow me to win better than two thirds of my matches.
But by and large Tiger will win when he competes.