Strategy and Tactics III

 

Sometimes When We Touch

Romance and all its strategy leaves me battling with my pride
But through the insecurity some tenderness survives
I'm just another writer, still trapped within my truths
A hesitant prize fighter still trapped within my youth

Is it better to have winning tactics or a winning strategy?

Tactics often gets more praise and attention than strategy.  Failure in tactical battles does not mean that a field general is a poor tactician. That field general might have a tactical disadvantage, or be using a  strategy that is suboptimal for winning that tactical battle, but is optimal for winning the war. George Washington lost more battles than he won, but he won the Revolutionary War.  Napoleon won some impressive tactical battles, but his strategy ultimately ended in failure. In sports, great players (tacticians) often make bad coaches (strategists), e.g. Ted Williams; while poor players may be great coaches, e.g. Tommy Lasorda. It is extraordinarily rare to find a great player who is also a great coach, e.g. Bill Russell, Joe Torre.  What is more often successful is pairing a great coach with a great player, e.g. Bill Belichick AND Tom Brady.

Arcs of Triumph are often erected for great tacticians.  Monuments are erected less often for great strategists.  But it takes both to be winners.  Good tactics may win a  battle, but lose the war. Losing every battle is probably not a successful strategy for winning a war. Winning the war ultimately is what endures.