I'm very confused by this logic. Why should I care about his output compared to what I observe from the larger group if he's not an outlier, and if he is an outlier, why would the second one be unlikely? The only way I can make sense of this is if you're claiming that he's both an exceptional coder and that skill in coding by hand is completely uncorrelated to skill in using LLMs to code, and it's not clear to me why that would be more likely than either or both of those being false.