Original text:

The art of war: One is measuring, the second is measuring, the third is counting, the fourth is weighing, and the fifth is winning. Earth produces degree, degree produces quantity, quantity produces number, number produces name, and name produces victory. Therefore, if a victorious army is called a baht with yi, a defeated army is called a yi with a baht. The battle of the victor is like a battle where water accumulates in the Qianren River.

Translation:

The art of war: the first is degree, which is to estimate the area of ??land; the second is quantity, which is to estimate the capacity of material resources; the third is number, which is to count the number of troops; fourth is The fifth is victory, which is to compare the comprehensive military strength of both sides, and the fifth is victory, which is to judge the victory or defeat. The size of the land area determines the capacity of material and human resources. The capacity of resources determines the number of troops that can be invested. The number of troops determines the strength of both sides. The strength of both sides determines the probability of victory or defeat. The winning army is like using "yi" to call "baht" to the losing side. It has an absolute advantage, while the losing army is like using "baht" to call "yi" to the winning side. When the victor's side fights, it is like water rushing out of a mountain stream thousands of feet high, unstoppable. This is a manifestation of military strength.

Interpretation:

This is the last paragraph of "Sun Tzu's Art of War: Military Form", which can also be regarded as a summary of the whole article. Every victory in a war in history has various complex factors that require comprehensive and comprehensive analysis.

This is the analysis of the five dimensions of degree, quantity, number, scale, and victory in "Sun Tzu's Art of War: Military Form". In short, it is similar to the current SWOT analysis.

Through comprehensive analysis, find out your own strengths and weaknesses, use your strengths and avoid weaknesses, not only make your own advantage, but also try to maximize the advantage into an absolute advantage, so as to ensure victory at the minimum cost. Sun Tzu always believed that injuring the enemy a thousand times would cost oneself eight hundred. If he did not do such a thing, it would be useless if he did.

As for how big the advantage is, Sun Tzu used an exaggerated approach, just as he used "yi" and "baht" to describe it in the article. "Yi" and "baht" are two units of weight in ancient China. One yi is equal to 24 taels, one tael is equal to 24 baht, and one yi is equivalent to 576 times the baht.

Think about it, the winning side attacks the losing side with a 576 times advantage, which is basically the same as using a hammer to crack an egg, or an adult trying to beat a baby. Defeat the opponent with absolute superiority, while one's own side suffers almost no losses. This is also in line with the purpose of complete victory in "The Art of War".

When the victor has such an advantage, Sun Tzu described it this way, "The winner's battle is like a battle where water accumulates in a Qianren stream." This metaphor is apt. For water, don't It is said that it is an ordinary flood rushing down from a place thousands of feet high, and its destructive power can be witnessed.

Of course, in the real world, it is difficult to achieve this level of hundreds of times advantage. If it can reach several times or even ten times, it is considered a considerable advantage.

There are also many advantages that are invisible and not superficial. This is like a fat man fighting against a lean boxer. The superficial advantages are not real advantages and there is no advantage in optimizing the combination. Not really an advantage either.

The previous war between Mongolia and the Jin Kingdom was a victory of invisible advantages or partial advantages. Without a comprehensive and comprehensive analysis, we cannot see how powerful Mongolia Genghis Khan was.

Regarding the famous Battle of Yehuling (the first battle in Mongolia to destroy the Jin Dynasty), it was jokingly said at the time that "the Kingdom of Jin is like the sea, and Mongolia is like sand." Little did they know that it was this wisp of fine sand that filled up the sea. But is Mongolia really just a handful of loose sand? The answer is no, when sand condenses together, it becomes stone.

The Jin Kingdom had 800,000 troops in total, and Mongolia had less than 150,000 troops at full strength. In the end, an unexpected result occurred, and the Jin Kingdom was completely defeated.

It stands to reason that the Jin Kingdom has an absolute advantage overall and Mongolia is at a disadvantage. Why Mongolia turned its inferiority into an advantage is worth thinking about. Later generations summarized the situation at that time. The mistake of the Jin State was that the troops were dispersed. Although the total number was large, it was too dispersed. The Mongolian troops were annihilated one by one. In addition, the command was poor and the instructions were cumbersome. Many Jin generals could not figure out what the orders from above were.

Mongolia turned its inferiority into superiority because although it was at a military disadvantage as a whole, it concentrated superior forces locally, coupled with the Mongolian cavalry’s excellent riding and shooting and mobility, which continuously widened its advantage, thus the emergence of A situation that turned defeat into victory.

In fact, this is the same principle as "attacking ten of them is worse than cutting off one of them". Concentrate a small number of superior troops, tear open the hole locally, turn the disadvantages into advantages, and gradually occupy the dominant advantage.

Therefore, ancient wars cannot be summed up simply by one sword or one shot, nor are they simply compared with each other like playing cards. Comprehensive and comprehensive analysis, careful planning, how to turn disadvantage into advantage, and how to expand to absolute advantage are all worth learning.

In real life, whether we are a business or an individual, we can easily fall into the abyss of using our own disadvantages to compete with the advantages of others. For example, if a kindergarten teacher has to compete with a long-distance runner, then Aren't you looking for abuse? Some people also say that they want to be a kindergarten teacher who is good at long-distance running, but please don't forget that there is another saying that "specialization requires specialization". It is easier said than done to be an all-rounder.

Everyone has a certain talent in a certain aspect. If you try your best to explore it and make the best of what you are good at, that is "water accumulated in a thousand feet", and victory is in sight.