Wow, this is of course a classy statement full of truth. /sarcasm
"Anyways, at that time the US was always winning that exercise"
Which time? Here is some other proof:
"Mit den 3 Panzer-Typen M 48, LEOPARD 1 und 2 erreichtedie deutsche Panzertruppe in den 80er Jahren überdurchschnittliche Ausbildungsergebnisse und eine hohe Einsatzbereitschaft. Von 17 internationalen Schießwettbewerben um die Canadian Army Trophy konnte die deutsche Panzertruppe 10 Wettbewerbe gewinnen und 7 mal den zweiten Platzbelegen."
Meaning: "With the 3 tank types M48, Leopard 1 and 2 the German Tank Crews reached better than average results. Out of 17 CAT Trophys the Germans won 10 and were second in the other 7."
http://www.panzertruppe.com/I_PzTr/PzTr/pztr.html
"For example, German conscript units have won the famous Canadian army trophy in the armored vehicle competition more frequently than has any other NATO nation. The same applies to the Boeselager competition for armored reconnaissance troops. In the evaluation of the Commander, Stabilization Forces (SFOR), German units in Bosnia, also consisting of conscripts with prolonged time of service, are performing as well as the units of professional armies in the field."
http://www.ndu.edu/inss/strforum/SF164/forum164.html
I do of course admit that combat experience is VERY VERY important. Just don´t always go along and assume that Americans are best at everything. They are not. Neither are Germans.
When the US Army does "assume" we are the best then we are indeed in trouble. If the After Action Reviews (AARs)at the training centers become nice .... then I'll worry. Most of the Germans I knew would consider the lessons learned at AARs insulting and might even walk out.