Decades ago, when the GMAT was first designed (before it was even called the GMAT), the scores for the Q and V sections were designed so that 30 would be average, and so that 10 would be the standard deviation for each section (so if you graphed test taker Quant scores or Verbal scores fifty years ago, you'd get a bell curve, with a peak at 30 and a substantial majority scoring between 20 and 40). So Q and V scores were, a long long time ago, equal, on average. But that was back when people didn't take prep very seriously (even 25 or 30 years ago, it was extremely common for people to not prepare at all). Subsequent tests were all calibrated against earlier tests, to ensure scores would be comparable from one year to the next, and since Quant is easier to improve at with prep, Quant scores have climbed a lot in recent years as test takers take preparation more seriously, while Verbal scores haven't changed much at all.
So that's why a high Verbal score is so much rarer than a high Quant score these days - the test-taking population is much better at Quant now than it was many years ago. You're in a great position to do very well on the GMAT. It's a lot better to be naturally good at Verbal, but weaker at Quant, than the reverse, since it's much easier to improve at Quant. And I normally find people who have great natural Verbal skills can always become good at Quant with work, because they have the logical ability for it, and just need to learn how to apply that ability in a mathematical context. Good luck!
_________________
http://www.ianstewartgmat.com