ZeeJustin made an interesting post on 2+2 like six months back, and he had an interesting perspective on the people who learn only from experience: Only the ones who are "lucky" actually become experts.
Luck, here, has nothing to do with catching great cards or outdrawing your opponents, but sometimes rather the opposite. See, poker is a game where playing perfectly often means you lose, and playing awfully often means you still win. Check the Bad Beat Board for examples.
So someone who plays only by experience and gut feeling only has past hands to go on and may therefore develop incorrect attitudes towards the game. "never call with an inside straight draw," "don't chase the flush when the board is paired" or "I don't raise with AK, since it's not a made hand." The "natural talents" or the ones who simply come out great despite never studying the game in any detail are the ones who are lucky enough to early on get a correct distribution of hands. The ones who early on actually catch their flushes one time in five rather than too often or too rarely. Or the ones who win big with AK early on, enough to convince them that it's a winning hand. The ones who are unlucky get either unlucky with good cards or lucky with bad cards and then develop really bad habits because of this.
Someone who has never read a book or made mathematical analysis of the game, will usually not raise with AK when it's the 10th time he gets it and he lost his entire stack the first 9 times.
Pavlov's dogs and all of that.