Of course James Bond was the best poker player in Casino Royale.

The guy can do everything: win fistfights, survive gunshot wounds, woo an otherwise engaged woman to bed.

But The Economist has dared to report how realistic talent can be, when playing poker. Don’t burst my bubble. I want to believe that talent is associated with Poker players. I want to know that James Bond’s exploits in Casino Royale were believable—at least with the cards

Fortunately, according to the Economist’s findings, they are: Past performance indicates future performance, when related to this sort of gambling. But The Economist suggests that the same can’t be said for mutual fund managers.

That, however, doesn’t surprise me.

Besides, wouldn’t you rather see Bond fight a cagey poker player than a mutual fund manager who can’t fight his way past an index?