It's possible to go a long way if you throw resources at underperforming students. Another method of going a long way is cheating. Neither affect your intelligence positively.

However, I have no reason to believe one of those two factors is at place when looking at the top ten students of a given school. With cheating you don't aim for the top, to make it easier for your cheating to remain undiscovered and there's no point to invest lots of resources into a student that isn't failing, since there's nothing to gain, at least from my perspective. Or is there a cash price tied be being in the top ten?