If it were an ABX test (which tests the ability to tell a difference, not the ability to identify the test products) I expect the pros would have succeeded. When people know what they're supposed to be comparing, they'll make up plenty of crap. And if they fail, it might just be because their assumptions about certain kinds of gear were false. It doesn't mean they didn't hear a difference that is clearly there, like between two completely different violins.
If you're attempting to use that as a defense against ABX and blind testing in general, your reasoning is flawed.
So many people try to cite that article and those similar as proof that blind testing is useless
You are projecting.
I think your context was a little unclear as well and you might have been misunderstood. I couldn't tell WTF you were implying either so I just gave the most reasonable interpretation of the experimental results. I have actually seen people make arguments as lame as, " DBT fails to identify the Stradivarius. We know the Stradivarius sounds better. Therefore DBT doesn't work." which is how your post got interpreted. I've actually seen even lamer arguments than that here on Head-fi.
I've been back here for nearly 2 years already...