[cryptica]

The global playing field is extremely competitive. It's so competitive in fact, that the best people rarely win. Nowadays, the winners are usually selected among those who are good in a conventional way and not among those who are exceptional. The winners are 'selected' top-down because it's usually rich and powerful people who decide who the winners are going to be.

You think Pablo Picasso was the best artist of his time? Probably not. He was picked by a bunch of rich, powerful people... Had they chosen to spend millions of dollars on the works of a different artist, that other artist would now be famous and nobody would know who Picasso is. It's also why almost all famous artists knew each other or had some social connection; it's mostly about social networking with rich, powerful people - Talent is secondary. It's the same in every industry where the quality of output cannot be easily or objectively measured.

Unfortunately, software development ability is very hard to measure. It can take years to properly evaluate someone's ability. Also, to rub salt into the wound, coders who are good at solving puzzles and other short-term problems are often regarded as better than those who are able to solve long-term problems (e.g. through good software architecture)... Even though the second one is far more valuable economically. It just takes a lot more time to prove that someone is a good coder in the long run so this leaves more room for choosing winners arbitrarily (for example; arbitrarily using 'short-term puzzle-solving ability under time pressure' as the criteria for deciding who should get jobs).

So basically, don't beat yourself up if you're not 'chosen'. It could mean that you're mediocre but it could also mean that you're exceptional beyond the grasp of powerful incumbents. Think Galileo and the Catholic Church.