I’m talking about individual men/women here, not organisations or groups of people.
Things you might want to consider:
Who’s tactics have resulted in the greatest changes
How much has been gained through the “clever” usage of these tactics
*How successful the tactics were (though this does not necessarily deem a set of tactics as good, because a lot of other factors come into it e.g. luck + opportunity
*Analysis of the tactic(s) themselves to see whether they were made on sound judgement etc.
This is just an indicator list; you can really choose your own reasons.
Also, this is just a consideration - I am really very interested in people who were great tacticians but who may not really be famous for it (or even well known), but considering the tactics they used/created, were very clever.
Examples include Johnny Torrio (of mafia fame), who most don’t recognise as a “leader” in the mob, but was a pretty nifty handler of situations. Maybe even Carlos Gambino (as opposed to Al Capone or Lucky Luciano - the latter of whom was heavily influenced by Meyer Lansky).
Or Subedei, one of Genghis Khan’s generals. Although the Khan would mop up the credit for his genius, the guy really seemed to know what warcraft was really about. He devised many interesting ways for dispatching enemies (including luring them into what were effectively “death traps”, cutting them up via cavalry charge from behind).
I’m going to try with evil incarnated! Bill Gates himself. For managing to go from naught to gazillions in under two decades. For going from a market share of 0 to 96%. For controlling and successfully managing to ride the crest of arguably the most amazing technical revolution in history. For being the absolute king (tyrant) of the most cut-throat business in history and staying that way for almost two decades. For taking on dethroning and shaming all contenders in the process. For moving from nerd to one of the most powerful men in the world (money alone guarantees this). And all this with a suite of substandard products.
Putting forward the original DOS, a lousy rehash of CP/M, a product he must have know was below standard must have required a great deal of straight face’dness.
His discarding IBM’s OS/2 and going for his own Windows, betting the whole farm so to speak, was very bold and courageous. (I remember think he must be crazy to throw all that away and advancing on IBM.)
His shamelessly stealing from Apple, Netscape and who knows what else and his ruthless use of lawyers to take the flak has been beyond reproach.
He was late for the Internet revolution, but managed to turn the ship in record time, stealing Netscapes lunch with masterly use already established Windows monopoly.
To build on WintonSmith’s post, one of MS Gates’ most clever tactics was the creation of vaporware. I recall when we wanted to buy a new system from a MS competitor, and the sales reps from Microsoft would assure our upper management that they’d have something even better ready for market in just six months, that would of course be fully integrated with our existing MS base. Many a competitor was wiped out by something that didn’t even exist.
I’ve always thought that a match between Alekhine and Mikhail Tal would be the thing to see. Nowadays I’d pick Kasparov to go against either. But Alekhine probably ought to have the credit for being the first in the category. Some of his combinations are hard to imagine possible when they are started, unless you can mentally play through 20 moves of extreme complexity.
I understand that the tactics of Chief Joseph of the Nez Perce tribe are studied in the military acadamies. Where they rank next to, say, Alexeander, I can’t say. Chief Joseph had far fewer resources to draw on than did Alexander.
I guess when I think “tactician”, I would try to pick a military figure, rather than a politician or software designer… Heck, Madonna’s a pretty shrewd “tactician” but I doubt that her book will be studied alongside Sun Tzu’s any time soon.
The guy that came to mind is General Claire Chennault.
Everybody knows him as the backbone behind the Amercian Volunteer Group (AVG), better known as the Flying Tigers.
The reason I pick him is because of how precisely the overwhelming success of his group can be attributed specifically to the tactics he devised for them.
They didn’t enjoy numerical superiority-- in fact they were woefully short on equipment and always outnumbered.
They didn’t enjoy technological superiority – their planes, Curtiss P-40s, were far less manueverable than their Japanese counterparts. True, the P-40s had some qualitative advantages, such as firepower, construction ruggedness, and diving speed, and these advantages were capitalized on.
They didn’t benefit from “luck”, as outlined in the OP, as could a tactician in a given engagement, being fought as a “one-time event”, but rather had to apply and adapt their tactics day to day in an uphill struggle which they consistently won.
And, unlike some other proven battle tactics which evolved from an indistinct, “committee” approach, a recipe authored by many cooks, the tactics used by the AVG came straight and solely from Chennault. It was made clear that there would be no deviation from his tactics from the day they arrived in China, and the results were borne out in the skies.
If ever a commander swung the outcome of a battle or a campaign in his favor due overwhelmingly to the cunning use of his own resources, it was General Chennault.
For military tactics, heroism and so forth, I’d go with the great Mongol general Sabotai. I think historians mostly agree that if not for the Khan’s untimely death, which forced him by tradition to return to the homeland to select a new ruler, Sabotai would have conquered all of Western Europe (he had already smashed the East).
For tactics you can’t ignore Myamoto Musashi who wrote the book of five rings (Go rin no sho), on sword fighting tactics and their application to small scale conflicts.
Another that comes to mind is Lawrence of Arabia, for his role in helping create modern guerilla tactics.