I was avoiding posting on Les Valiant's EATCS award and the obvious question about the somewhat odd fact that he hasn't yet been given his Turing Award yet because of the amazingly obvious bias I would have (such as being on the same faculty with him). But now that it's shown up on the complexity blog, I feel unrestricted.
From my standpoint, Les is an "old-school" scientist. He spends a long time thinking very deeply about difficult problems, trying to come up with results or frameworks that will fundamentally change how we think about something. And as the list of his results show (see the complexity blog post and comments; whatever you think Les has done, he's done even more than that), he's been amazingly successful at it; he's had several once-in-a-lifetime results. As part of his style, he doesn't care about his paper count or h-index. This type of science is incredibly risky, and not for everyone. But it's a remarkable example of what's possible.