It's almost frightening to me that the Hardy of the Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium could be writing this. It's part of a healthy understanding of genetics at all!
(I do not say that to diminish its importance, which is an entirely separate matter. And something can be mathematically trivial but still an important discovery -- the cleverness may e.g. reside in noticing that it's a thing that might be true at all. Be all that as it may, I can't imagine Hardy, given his general dismissive attitude to applications of mathematics, seeing it as a discovery rather than a triviality that happened to be useful to biologists.)
Despite all that, I consider myself horrible at math. I am aware that I know only a small portion, and even that portion, poorly.
So maybe Hardy spent more time focusing on what he didn't know, and measured his achievements based on that rather than on what he did know.
As an added bonus, he cites Karl Pearson