Well, I think the theory of flanking like that requires a numerical superiority that both Grant and Sherman had. You are exposing part of your force to defeat in detail when you flank. That part has got to be big enough to defend if the guy on overall defense counterattacks.
Davis was frustrated because Johnston kept falling back towards Atlanta when Sherman flanked him out of successive positions. But you have to give Sherman some credit too. Every one of his flanking maneuvers had to be done just right, or he could get a bad bloody nose.
I don't think you can say that Hood should have done that sort of thing, when the army in front of his is larger than his.
Walt
Well, I think the theory of flanking like that requires a numerical superiority that both Grant and Sherman had.
Not necessarily. Lee did not have numerical superiority at Chancellorsville when Jackson did the left flank maneuver. It was a rout.
I don't think you can say that Hood should have done that sort of thing, when the army in front of his is larger than his.
In the Valley campaign Jackson was outnumbered by all three armies pursuing him. He whipped them all one at a time and used maneuver to surprise them. Hood could have done the same thing. If a superior army attempts to trap you, you do not have to fall into the trap if you know what you are doing. Forrest was constantly outnumbered, yet won almost every battle. Tactics are always the number one deciding factor, not numbers.
you have to give Sherman some credit too. Every one of his flanking maneuvers had to be done just right, or he could get a bad bloody nose.
I give Sherman alot of credit. It was brilliant...except for that burp at Kennesaw Mtn.