From: NE Pa, USA
Hmmmm... the reason the Americans won The Revolutionary War.... was NOT because George Washington was 'first in war'.... but because the British commanders... lol.... were closer to LAST in war.
Burgoyne, Cornwallis, etc.
Yeah, Washington managed to get himself TOTALLY OUTFLANKED defending New York in the Battle of Long Island... and then managed to DO IT AGAIN... in the battle of Brandywine Creek... attempting to defend Philadelphia.
But still....... he was better than Burgoyne and Cornwallis. He at least escaped with what was left of his army... these two... were not so adept.
And maybe you should check out Abercrombie's generalship at the Battle of Fort Carillion.
And as far as the generals you mention... they got good reps but not sure they would stack up (although there is always room for argument) to Frederick's generals. Sheesh, in the Seven Year's War, the British were wise to let Ferdinand command a mostly British army in Germany. King George, tried to take the field (lol) and almost got himself captured.
But then again, there were the Union commanders of the Army of the Potomic. Good grief.
I will say this... Lord Nelson... was one of the all-time greatest naval commanders (maybe even #1). But, that's where the British were at. Their very best officers went into their navy because that was their line of defense against another 1066. With that, they ended up with commanders like Abercrombie and Burgoyne making fools of themselves.
I had this thing about who might be the all-time WORST military commander and, I was thinking it just might be Guy DeLusignan (sp?), the commander of the crusader force at the Batttle of Jerusalem. But, Abercrombie and his handling of the British force at the Battle of Fort Carillion, would contest that.