Author Topic: Napoleon was the Best General Ever, and the Math Proves it.  (Read 1946 times)

Valmy

  • Neil
  • ***************
  • Posts: 40780
  • Franglophile
Re: Napoleon was the Best General Ever, and the Math Proves it.
« Reply #30 on: December 07, 2017, 11:02:13 pm »
I would think the top scorer would be somebody like Subutai or El Cid or Tamerlane. One of those guys who just always seemed to demolish his enemies regardless of the odds and never lost. Granted those are all medieval people but if Caesar gets to be in there why not?

I mean Napoleon was a revolutionary and brilliant military figure but he made his share of tactical and strategic errors and was ultimately defeated.
« Last Edit: December 07, 2017, 11:05:29 pm by Valmy »
If we can hit that bull's-eye, the rest of the dominoes will fall like a house of cards. Checkmate!

Valmy is practically french. :frog:

Honorary gay award from Martinus

Valmy

  • Neil
  • ***************
  • Posts: 40780
  • Franglophile
Re: Napoleon was the Best General Ever, and the Math Proves it.
« Reply #31 on: December 07, 2017, 11:07:47 pm »
Do you get to use highlander rules? Does Wellington get all his power by winning?

Blücher is who won it :pickelhaube:

And the answer is yes. Unfortunately, he used all his super powers on drinking.
If we can hit that bull's-eye, the rest of the dominoes will fall like a house of cards. Checkmate!

Valmy is practically french. :frog:

Honorary gay award from Martinus

jimmy olsen

  • Blessed by Valmy
  • **************
  • Posts: 24835
Re: Napoleon was the Best General Ever, and the Math Proves it.
« Reply #32 on: December 08, 2017, 12:10:26 am »
I would think the top scorer would be somebody like Subutai or El Cid or Tamerlane. One of those guys who just always seemed to demolish his enemies regardless of the odds and never lost. Granted those are all medieval people but if Caesar gets to be in there why not?

I mean Napoleon was a revolutionary and brilliant military figure but he made his share of tactical and strategic errors and was ultimately defeated.
English wikipedia is biased against them because it posts more battles for European leaders.

The guy mentions he plans to update it with his own research in the footnotes.
It is far better for the truth to tear my flesh to pieces, then for my soul to wander through darkness in eternal damnation.

Jet: So what kind of woman is she? What's Julia like?
Faye: Ordinary. The kind of beautiful, dangerous ordinary that you just can't leave alone.
Jet: I see.
Faye: Like an angel from the underworld. Or a devil from Paradise.
--------------------------------------------
1 Karma Chameleon point

The Brain

  • Blessed by Valmy
  • **************
  • Posts: 25167
  • All man
Re: Napoleon was the Best General Ever, and the Math Proves it.
« Reply #33 on: December 08, 2017, 02:32:28 am »
A metric that makes the Russian campaign a positive for Napoleon might not be 100% awesome.
You are gay.

Jacob

  • Global Moderator
  • Blessed by Valmy
  • *****
  • Posts: 16172
    • My smashwords page
Re: Napoleon was the Best General Ever, and the Math Proves it.
« Reply #34 on: December 08, 2017, 02:34:06 am »
A metric that makes the Russian campaign a positive for Napoleon might not be 100% awesome.

:lol:

Yeah, that's a pretty good point.
...

The Brain

  • Blessed by Valmy
  • **************
  • Posts: 25167
  • All man
Re: Napoleon was the Best General Ever, and the Math Proves it.
« Reply #35 on: December 08, 2017, 02:37:17 am »
What about that Swedish king, the one with a hole in his head?  Didn't he do well until then?

He was: godlike.
You are gay.

The Brain

  • Blessed by Valmy
  • **************
  • Posts: 25167
  • All man
Re: Napoleon was the Best General Ever, and the Math Proves it.
« Reply #36 on: December 08, 2017, 02:50:53 am »
General (gettit?) comment: I know this one is just for fun, and that the metric has... issues. I do however fully support doing the numbers on history, I think it's very important if we actually want to understand and learn from history. As long as you keep in mind exactly what you're doing and the uncertainties you have any piece of the puzzle is valuable.
You are gay.

grumbler

  • Blessed by Valmy
  • **************
  • Posts: 17971
  • I'll sleep when I'm dead
Re: Napoleon was the Best General Ever, and the Math Proves it.
« Reply #37 on: December 08, 2017, 05:18:41 am »
The metric is about battles, not campaigns.  Arguably, Napoleon was as crappy at economics as he was good at tactics, and THAT's why he lost in the end.

Subutai would probably win this if the numbers were normalized for battles fought.
The future is all around us, waiting, in moments of transition, to be born in moments of revelation. No one knows the shape of that future or where it will take us. We know only that it is always born in pain.   -G'Kar

The Larch

  • Can I Be: Ottoman Empire
  • ***********
  • Posts: 6977
  • I picked the wrong day to stop sniffing glue
Re: Napoleon was the Best General Ever, and the Math Proves it.
« Reply #38 on: December 08, 2017, 05:31:21 am »
I would think the top scorer would be somebody like Subutai or El Cid or Tamerlane.
English wikipedia is biased against them because it posts more battles for European leaders.

Because El Cid was from Central Asia, right?  :P

But yeah, it's a problem of sourcing and using English language wiki. In El Cid's case, he has no single battle listed in his English language wiki page, you have to dig to find references for a couple of them, while the Spanish language one has 9 battles listed in an easily reachable way. For the mongol generals I guess that there's a general lack of information about their earlier campaigns, as I guess that intra nomadic battles didn't leave much in the way of written records afterwards.

garbon

  • Neil
  • ***************
  • Posts: 48539
  • let's play bullets and bracelets
Re: Napoleon was the Best General Ever, and the Math Proves it.
« Reply #39 on: December 08, 2017, 06:29:36 am »
General (gettit?) comment: I know this one is just for fun, and that the metric has... issues. I do however fully support doing the numbers on history, I think it's very important if we actually want to understand and learn from history. As long as you keep in mind exactly what you're doing and the uncertainties you have any piece of the puzzle is valuable.

Though in this instance, is it really important to establish a ranking of generals?
"I've never been quite sure what the point of a eunuch is, if truth be told. It seems to me they're only men with the useful bits cut off."

I drank because I wanted to drown my sorrows, but now the damned things have learned to swim.

The Brain

  • Blessed by Valmy
  • **************
  • Posts: 25167
  • All man
Re: Napoleon was the Best General Ever, and the Math Proves it.
« Reply #40 on: December 08, 2017, 06:31:46 am »
General (gettit?) comment: I know this one is just for fun, and that the metric has... issues. I do however fully support doing the numbers on history, I think it's very important if we actually want to understand and learn from history. As long as you keep in mind exactly what you're doing and the uncertainties you have any piece of the puzzle is valuable.

Though in this instance, is it really important to establish a ranking of generals?

Elaborate.
You are gay.

The Minsky Moment

  • Octogon Champion
  • *************
  • Posts: 10222
  • Requiem for a Scheme
Re: Napoleon was the Best General Ever, and the Math Proves it.
« Reply #41 on: December 08, 2017, 09:43:56 am »
Seems to be a phenomenally stupid method of analysis. The quality of troops and of supply is ignored. If wikipedia ever got around to including all the colonial and indian wars in the database, some of the related leaders could come out extremely well. Rorke's Drift would apparently rank better than any battle Napoleon, Hannibal, or Arthur Wellesley ever won.

it's more akin to football rating systems than baseball.  E.g. a QB rating system is really not rating "Tom Brady" but "Tom Brady, with the NE offensive line, receivers and running game, playing within the NE system". 

What would make this more interesting is if you did a WOWY (with or without you) kind of analysis.  I.e. compare the performance of the French army during this period when Napoleon was leading them vs. when other generals were leading them, on a per engagement basis, and normalizing for the size of the battle.
The purpose of studying economics is not to acquire a set of ready-made answers to economic questions, but to learn how to avoid being deceived by economists.
--Joan Robinson

derspiess

  • Blessed by Valmy
  • **************
  • Posts: 25553
  • we must ignite this couch
Re: Napoleon was the Best General Ever, and the Math Proves it.
« Reply #42 on: December 08, 2017, 09:51:08 am »
He was so good he was crushed twice.

Who do you think the best was?  :hmm:

MARSE ROBERT
"If you can play a guitar and harmonica at the same time, like Bob Dylan or Neil Young, you're a genius. But make that extra bit of effort and strap some cymbals to your knees, suddenly people want to get the hell away from you."  --Rich Hall

alfred russel

  • Octogon Champion
  • *************
  • Posts: 12063
Re: Napoleon was the Best General Ever, and the Math Proves it.
« Reply #43 on: December 08, 2017, 12:55:54 pm »
My friend's brother wrote this article. It got a few polite likes on Facebook. I didn't expect to see it here.  :lol:

Seems about right...Your friend's brother puts together utterly horseshit analysis, using data from a woefully inadequate and incomplete source.

Tim takes something that isn't worthy of a passing grade in an undergrad history class and posts it here. For some reason CC finds it "interesting".

God Damn America. God Damn Tim.
There's a fine line between salvation and drinking poison in the jungle.

I'm embarrassed. I've been making the mistake of associating with you. It won't happen again. :)
-garbon, February 23, 2014

The Minsky Moment

  • Octogon Champion
  • *************
  • Posts: 10222
  • Requiem for a Scheme
Re: Napoleon was the Best General Ever, and the Math Proves it.
« Reply #44 on: December 08, 2017, 01:01:52 pm »
Wikipedia may not be the most reliable source, but it's presumably not a biased source in connection with this kind of information (i.e. its not more likely to get troop numbers wrong for Lee than for Winfield Scott). 

The analysis has its shortcomings but it is using relevant criteria and providing some quantitative grounding for what usually is an entirely qualitative bullshit analysis.  Its not like it's a PhD thesis.  If you added on a WOWY analysis it could deal with a lot of the analytical concerns raised in this thread.
The purpose of studying economics is not to acquire a set of ready-made answers to economic questions, but to learn how to avoid being deceived by economists.
--Joan Robinson