Wherever I look, I see the same two traits in consistent winners. Their methods look different on the surface, but something common runs underneath. 1) They accept the game’s probabilistic nature and willingly submit to it. Randomness sways individual outcomes, but over a large enough sample its noise recedes and a well-built edge prevails. So they optimize for positive expected value, size positions to survive variance, and let the long run surface their skill. 2) They love the game enough that the pitfalls randomness creates don’t feel like pushing through; they feel like puzzles worth solving. That passion makes reviewing losses, iterating, and returning the next day feel natural, not forced. From the outside it looks like grit; from the inside it’s immersion that lasts long enough for the edge to compound. Taken together: cold probabilistic discipline paired with genuine love for the game. The first keeps you making +EV choices and surviving the swings; the second keeps you engaged long enough for the edge to emerge.