As a slight tangent, I might point out the danger of believe in natural ability.
In high school many students find they excel at mathematics (or any subject for that matter). As such they don't often have to put out a lot of skull sweat to do well in the subject. I would argue that the reason for this, is that yes there is perhaps some sort of innate ability, but likely their skills are exercised in particular activities such as extra reading, problem solving in extra-cirricular activities or games, exercising critical thinking skills among peers, etc.
In high school, ultimately the cirriculum is aimed at the general population. Even "advanced placement" courses are still essentially high school courses and essentially aimed at educating the general population. Students with any kind of advantage at all, will naturally excel in such environments.
Bottleneck into undergraduate univeristy - first year. Now the majority of students in the class have enough motivation to be there that they are willing to pay however many thousands of dollars just for a seat. Those people who have had an easy ride through high school and all of a sudden find it isn't so easy. However many of them can cram still come out somewhat close to the top. They cling to the notion they have a "natural ability."
Then comes the trap. Usually it's around second year. You go through a second bottleneck at this point. First year is for many, a "sampler" year. Some find out they don't like math and don't pursue it further. Some only need first year credit so they can apply to medical school. Those that remain, are highly motivated, and usually the ones the excelled in the first year class. Now your "innate" ability can't carry you and very quickly you have to develop some effective study habits, or suffer the steamroller of higher education.
That's my $0.02.