[charlieflowers]

> but he knew how people behave and act, and so he was able to dictate the entire engagement

This sounds super interesting, but it's so generic I can't get anything concrete from it. Could you elaborate a bit on how he dictated the engagement?

[hosh]

He didn’t give me details, and even if it were, it would be highly situational. There is nothing concrete here. If you understand the underlying principles, you would be able to broadly and deeply apply it in many contexts.

It is better to draw examples from your own experience in adversarial games, even perfect information games with fixed turns like Chess or Go. Take the game you are most skilled at, and see if you remember playing against someone who was so unskilled, that you can see their moves and mistake a long way coming. And if you weren’t teaching them, you can close off avenues long before they are even aware of it. If you pay attention, you might even know the minute they realize something, only it is far too late. There is a sense as if you are inside their head, knowing what they are going to do — must do — before they are even aware of it themselves.

It’s like that, only perhaps with a peer adversary.