Greatest naval victories in history

[DirtyDishSoap]

Run away everyone! Duk is trying to suck everyone in on this tournie and he will do it no matter the cost!

[Dukasaur]

Run away everyone! Duk is trying to suck everyone in on this tournie and he will do it no matter the cost!

Absolutely...

However, in this case it was Confed who laid out the lures....

[jusplay4fun]

Despite this, I still say it is NOT an important Naval Battle in bigger picture of World History.

There is more to life than trivial battles.

JP

Yes, I see how important this RIVER battle was......NOT:

"The Battle of Nahr-al-Kalek was fought in the immediate aftermath of the British recapture of Kut in February 1917 by Sir Frederick Maude, and largely destroyed the effectiveness of Turkish river forces on the Tigris River.

Having inadvertently outrun their own ground forces on 26 February 1917, the Royal Navy gunboats Mantis, Moth and Tarantula found themselves under fire some 30km north of Kut by four Turkish vessels at Nahr-al-Kalek while pursuing the retreating Turkish force from Kut."

This MUST be why I never NEVER of this battle, before now.

Wrong answer.

The reason that you've never heard of it is that you haven't been paying attention to the Great War series, in which Nahr-al-Kalek is an upcoming tournament...

https://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=207817&start=575#p4981521

[DirtyDishSoap]

Run away everyone! Duk is trying to suck everyone in on this tournie and he will do it no matter the cost!

Absolutely...

However, in this case it was Confed who laid out the lures....

I have him foed so I wouldn't know how he managed to collect enough wit to cast a lure.

[ConfederateSS]

Despite this, I still say it is NOT an important Naval Battle in bigger picture of World History.

There is more to life than trivial battles.

JP

Yes, I see how important this RIVER battle was......NOT:

"The Battle of Nahr-al-Kalek was fought in the immediate aftermath of the British recapture of Kut in February 1917 by Sir Frederick Maude, and largely destroyed the effectiveness of Turkish river forces on the Tigris River.

Having inadvertently outrun their own ground forces on 26 February 1917, the Royal Navy gunboats Mantis, Moth and Tarantula found themselves under fire some 30km north of Kut by four Turkish vessels at Nahr-al-Kalek while pursuing the retreating Turkish force from Kut."

This MUST be why I never NEVER of this battle, before now.

Wrong answer.

The reason that you've never heard of it is that you haven't been paying attention to the Great War series, in which Nahr-al-Kalek is an upcoming tournament...

https://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=207817&start=575#p4981521

-----There is no such thing as a small part of any kind of history.........I think the butterfly effect can speak for itself.....
---------Time machine....Turks win this not so important battle....With Russia out of the War...Freed up Ottoman troops relocated...Easier...Kut recaptured...The British driven out of The Middle East...The world of today has a different picture....Although, with the Muslims in full control of the Middle East...Palestine is the only state that emerges...No terror attacks coming out of the Middle East...The West is much safer...So it might have been a bigger battle than FAKE NEWS REPORTED IT AT THE TIME... ConfederateSS.out!(The Blue and Silver Rebellion)... The World is a stage...There are no small parts...only small actors... ----

[jusplay4fun]

1) Still not in the "GREATEST" category when MOST never heard of it.

2) your conjectured time line is full of speculation and no telling really where the world would be if the battle went the other way.....Ottoman Empire collapses anyways, so.....the impact if they won that RIVER battle is not that important.

3) this involved 7 River BOATS? REALLY??? = greatest?? Snall actors, small boats.

[ConfederateSS]

-----Just because it was only 7/8 boats doesn't change the fact...That the battle gave The British Empire control of THE CRADLE OF CIVILIZATION,IMPORTANCE IS IN THE EYE OF THE BEHOLDER...
-----Back to only a few...I wonder...
1-A few ships jumped,by people dressed as fake Indians...THE BOSTON TEA PARTY,SPARKED A REVOLUTION... ...
2-A gunboat meet in the dark ,a Warship of The Empire of The Rising Sun...The gunboat is sunk...The boat,PT-109...Though sunk,this PT boat would propel JOHN F. KENNEDY to become the leader of the free world...Just another hum drum battle in history...Or was it?
---------As far as no one hearing or knowing about historical facts...Schools today are run by P.C. liberals...along with them ,idiots...I saved the Det. News and Free Press newspapers from 9-12-2001...the day after 9-11...I still have them...In 2011 I asked my daughters if they were doing any reports on 9-11,for the 10th Ann. One in 9th grade the other in 4th at the time...Both told me, no ,in fact 9-11 was never even mentioned... ...Again I asked my youngest daughter last year...15th ann. She said no,nothing was mentioned...My oldest,2nd year at Cent. Mich...No one really cared about 9-11...Their history books were a joke when I went through them...They were so watered down with historical facts, it's pathetic...So I can understand why ...things are becoming lost to history....I remember in English class no less...Our teacher would let us know hey...Pearl Harbor Day...I still can't believe the not mentioning 9-11 thing....I remember having to do a report on the Sinking of the EDMUND FITZGERALD...EVERY CLASS, EVERY YEAR HAD TO FOR THAT TEACHER...YOU KNOW ANOTHER NOT SO IMPORTANT BOAT...THAT WILL LIVE FOREVER IN HISTORY,THANK YOU GORDON LIGHTFOOT... ConfederateSS.out!(The Blue and Silver Rebellion)...

[jusplay4fun]

The Boston Tea Party was not a Naval Battle.

[Arama86n]

@OP
I suppose you could define "greatest" by margin of victory.
But I mean really... the Worlds most powerful Navy sinking a few patrol boats of what the Iraqi's call a Navy is hardly worth mentioning.

[ConfederateSS]

@OP
I suppose you could define "greatest" by margin of victory.
But I mean really... the Worlds most powerful Navy sinking a few patrol boats of what the Iraqi's call a Navy is hardly worth mentioning.

------They were not Iraqi.......They were Turkish(Ottoman Empire).......But how do we know the current PRESIDENT OF TURKEY...Recep Tayyip Edrogan's......Grandfather might have fought and survived the battle...Never know ...... ConfederateSS.out!(The Blue and Silver Rebellion)...
-----Sometimes events of the past steamroll and are tied to events in the future...I.E. the current way the Middle East of today is...Thanks to that world power navy back then...The British Empire...boy!,did they screw it up, all for of course over oil...SURPRISE...The USA is doing the exact same thing right now...I guess people don't learn when history repeats itself...

[Dukasaur]

@OP
I suppose you could define "greatest" by margin of victory.
But I mean really... the Worlds most powerful Navy sinking a few patrol boats of what the Iraqi's call a Navy is hardly worth mentioning.

------They were not Iraqi.......They were Turkish(Ottoman Empire).......But how do we know the current PRESIDENT OF TURKEY...Recep Tayyip Edrogan's......Grandfather might have fought and survived the battle...Never know ...... ConfederateSS.out!(The Blue and Silver Rebellion)...
-----Sometimes events of the past steamroll and are tied to events in the future...I.E. the current way the Middle East of today is...Thanks to that world power navy back then...The British Empire...boy!,did they screw it up, all for of course over oil...SURPRISE...The USA is doing the exact same thing right now...I guess people don't learn when history repeats itself...

I think he was referring to the OP, not to your post.



But it does make a funny parallel.

[jusplay4fun]

Take your own advice, CSS. THAT WAR is over. Done. Finished.

I live in Richmond, Virginia, the CAPITAL of the (former) Confederaccy, so I think I can declare the end of the CSS.

I am shocked that you did not include the battle between the Virginia and the Monitor. NOT well done, there, CSS.


"The March 9, 1862, battle between the Monitor and the Merrimack (CSS Virginia) during the American Civil War (1861-65) was history’s first duel between ironclad warships. The engagement, known as the Battle of Hampton Roads, was part of a Confederate effort to break the Union blockade of Southern ports, including Norfolk and Richmond, Virginia, that had been imposed at the start of the war. Though the battle itself was inconclusive, it began a new era in naval warfare."


and try to have a Merry Christmas.

JP4f

@OP
I suppose you could define "greatest" by margin of victory.
But I mean really... the Worlds most powerful Navy sinking a few patrol boats of what the Iraqi's call a Navy is hardly worth mentioning.

------They were not Iraqi.......They were Turkish(Ottoman Empire).......But how do we know the current PRESIDENT OF TURKEY...Recep Tayyip Edrogan's......Grandfather might have fought and survived the battle...Never know ...... ConfederateSS.out!(The Blue and Silver Rebellion)...
-----Sometimes events of the past steamroll and are tied to events in the future...I.E. the current way the Middle East of today is...Thanks to that world power navy back then...The British Empire...boy!,did they screw it up, all for of course over oil...SURPRISE...The USA is doing the exact same thing right now...I guess people don't learn when history repeats itself...

[tzor]

I am shocked that you did not include the battle between the Virginia and the Monitor. NOT well done, there, CSS.

All in all it was a crappy naval battle.

Monitor was an unusual vessel in almost every respect and was sometimes sarcastically described by the press and other critics as "Ericsson's folly", "cheesebox on a raft"[23][24] and the "Yankee cheesebox".[25] The most prominent feature on the vessel was a large cylindrical gun turret mounted amidships above the low-freeboard upper hull, also called the "raft". This extended well past the sides of the lower, more traditionally shaped hull. A small armored pilot house was fitted on the upper deck towards the bow, however, its position prevented Monitor from firing her guns straight forward.[26][e] One of Ericsson's prime goals in designing the ship was to present the smallest possible target to enemy gunfire.[27] The ship was 179 feet (54.6 m) long overall, had a beam of 41 feet 6 inches (12.6 m) and had a maximum draft of 10 feet 6 inches (3.2 m). Monitor had a tonnage of 776 tons burthen and displaced 987 long tons (1,003 t). Her crew consisted of 49 officers and enlisted men.[28]

People often think of the vessel as an "ironclad" but the real innovation was the turret. Although the overall design had significant problems, it is the turret design that became the central feature in later vessels and not the idea of being as low to the surface of the water as possible.

[jusplay4fun]

You missed the IRONy of CSS not citing the CSS Virginia in Battle, during the War of Northern Agression.

JP

I am shocked that you did not include the battle between the Virginia and the Monitor. NOT well done, there, CSS.

All in all it was a crappy naval battle.

Monitor was an unusual vessel in almost every respect and was sometimes sarcastically described by the press and other critics as "Ericsson's folly", "cheesebox on a raft"[23][24] and the "Yankee cheesebox".[25] The most prominent feature on the vessel was a large cylindrical gun turret mounted amidships above the low-freeboard upper hull, also called the "raft". This extended well past the sides of the lower, more traditionally shaped hull. A small armored pilot house was fitted on the upper deck towards the bow, however, its position prevented Monitor from firing her guns straight forward.[26][e] One of Ericsson's prime goals in designing the ship was to present the smallest possible target to enemy gunfire.[27] The ship was 179 feet (54.6 m) long overall, had a beam of 41 feet 6 inches (12.6 m) and had a maximum draft of 10 feet 6 inches (3.2 m). Monitor had a tonnage of 776 tons burthen and displaced 987 long tons (1,003 t). Her crew consisted of 49 officers and enlisted men.[28]

People often think of the vessel as an "ironclad" but the real innovation was the turret. Although the overall design had significant problems, it is the turret design that became the central feature in later vessels and not the idea of being as low to the surface of the water as possible.

[ConfederateSS]

------I didn't mention the Merrimac...Monitor battle ,most likely because The South lost;)...ALSO, MOST AMERICANS THINK THEIR GOD'S GIFT TO THE EARTH,I LIKE TO SHED LIGHT ON THOSE FROM DIFFERENT NECKS OF THE WORLD......SINCE YOU WOULD LIKE TO GO THERE...But you left out The 1st successful sub attack...CSS H.L..Hunley.....Or the CSS David the 1st successful Torpedo boat attack in American History...The Hunley wasn't the first sub...It was THE TURTLE during the Amer.Rev...A one man sub,kind of like the Japanese had in WW2...
-----------BUT I WAS GOING TO BRING UP THE FINAL SHOT IN THE WAR.AS THE 1ST WAS A CONFEDERATE ONE,JUST AS THE LAST BATTLE OF THE WAR WAS A CONFEDERATE VICTORY...Palmito Ranch:) ...Jp4fun,I didn't want to brag...Like everything else,I have read things that I remember...But that was long ago...BUT I will try and find that for you...4fun,I think the ship was THE CSS Shenandoah...Like Lord Arioch, I also have degrees in History:,American/World/Ancient...but I use them now to cover over holes in my walls...I hate spackle...History is dying out,my degrees are only worth the paper they're printed on... ... ConfederateSS.out!(The Blue and Silver Rebellion)...
.......F.Y.I..........THE BATTLE BETWEEN THE MERRIMAC AND MONITOR...WAS VERY IMPORTANT,IT RESULTED IN MAKING EVERY OTHER NAVY IN THE WORLD ,OBSOLETE THE MOMENT THOSE 2 SHIPS FIRED ON EACH OTHER,FOR THE AGE OF WOODEN NAVIES WAS OVER...JUST GOES TO SHOW HOW MUCH,THE GOD'S GIFT TO THE WORLD KNOW EVERYTHING AMERICANS,WOULD SAY THAT BATTLE WAS CRAPPY!!! ...Once again people can't see the bigger picture of a battle...All they look for is the razzle/dazzle coating of a battle...sad........Stop the declaration!...Like Dr.Livingston,the rumors of my demise/defeat are FAKE NEWS/false...

[jusplay4fun]

Again, you miss the IRONy.

and yes, degrees in History are rather useless, as far as getting employment, unless one know how to sell it. And, based on your comments, you did not sell it well.

btw: no need to capitalize that portion you did, I knew that, and anyone with a knowledge of some history knows it too. That battle is in most history textbooks, as far as I know.

JP, still "in" the game....

[ConfederateSS]

Again, you miss the IRONy.

and yes, degrees in History are rather useless, as far as getting employment, unless one know how to sell it. And, based on your comments, you did not sell it well.

btw: no need to capitalize that portion you did, I knew that, and anyone with a knowledge of some history knows it too. That battle is in most history textbooks, as far as I know.

JP, still "in" the game....

-----I got the Iron...For I love play on words...Check out my idea of a tribute to Albert Lamorisse in the GD forum...
------Crappy wasn't for you....TZOR was the one who said,the battle was crappy...But The Real Irony is...You think a battle of 7/8 ships British/Turks is boring(which would led to the set up of today's Middle East)...The one you mentioned(a Homer battle) had only 2 ships(although a few days before The CSS Vir. did attack ,sink/damage a few Union wooden ships,before engaging THE MONITOR)...Ironyize ,bitten by your own words and choice of a battle...As for degrees, sometimes life forces paths upon us we do not want ,but will endure for the sake of others... ConfederateSS.out!(The Blue and Silver Rebellion)... ...Most textbooks yes, But in today's American schools...History is being replaced,rewritten by other venues(Thank you P.C. America)...Outside of the class room it is who can stare at their cell phones the longest...I am surprise more people are not run over crossing streets,both by the pedestrian and drivers looking at their phones seeing who likes them on facebook...

[jusplay4fun]

In the greater scheme of things, the 2 battles we are discussing are not great naval battles.

That was and still is my main point. I was merely pointing out your apparent oversight to leave out one small encounter, that has some implications for naval history, but not on outcomes of the war and on world history. Eventually someone would figure out how to put iron on ships; that was inevitable, so to put such a battle in context of "Greatest naval victories in history" is not really appropriate.

Your chosen river battle (involving, as you admit, 7-8 boats) seems to offer the same sort of significance, and thus is NOT one of the (and certainly NOT THE) Greatest naval victories in history.

The Spanish Armada has to be near the top and Trafalgar and MIdway have be close. As far as the rest of the battles, I need more evidence to be convinced of their significance.

Look at the sweep of history. And the entire Middle East has been dominated not so much by war, but instead, over oil and Islam. Wars have been fought to CONTROL those two things. AND those two factors control much of the history of the region. These areas have few boats or ships, unless you count camels.

JP4F

[Dukasaur]

There's different yardsticks one can use.

In term of historical significance, there are seven naval battles that stand head-and-shoulders above the rest:

• Salamis
• Lepanto
• Spanish Armada
• Trafalgar
• Jutland
• Hakata Bay/Imari Bay
• Yamen

In terms of largest, a lot depends on how you want to measure "large" but wikipedia offers this list of candidates:

• Salamis
• Cape Ecnomus
• Red Cliffs
• Battle of the Masts
• Yamen
• Lake Poyang
• Jutland
• Philippine Sea
• Leyte Gulf

Still, one might imagine other yardsticks than size or historical significance. Jutland appears on both lists, and yet tactically it was a snoozefest. It changed the course of history, but it was an embarrassing performance on both sides. Something like the tiny First Battle of Narvik was vastly more exciting. I know people like to gasp and moan at sheer size , but it's rarely size that makes an encounter interesting.

The OP itself is an example of a different yardstick: something like most ridiculously lopsided victory. (For that category, though, I prefer the Anglo-Zanzibar War, although one could argue that that was a combined arms operation and not strictly a naval battle.)

Given the fact that there's no universally accepted yardstick, I think Confed's choice ("this is the greatest battle because it's the subject of a tourney I'll be unveiling soon"), whilst highly subjective, is no less valid than any of the others.

Incidentally, while Midway does not make either of the primary lists, I'll agree with you that it was a hell of an upset. It was the Superbowl IV of naval battles.

[ConfederateSS]

--------Not to mention...Where one lies......JustP4fun.....You say you are from Vir...So you would look at Mon/Merri as a KOOL battle....I yes,If you read any of my posts in the past ...Am from..."SOUTH"west Detroit...So I am most likely going to like The Defeat of The British Fleet on THE GREAT LAKES by Com.PERRY...Battle of Lake Erie,War of 1812,not the Com.Perry who opened up China...THE 1st time The British Royal Navy surrendered a fleet... ...Perry to Gen. Harrison(later Pres),"WE HAVE MET THE ENEMY AND THEY ARE OURS!"...Like you said, Those Middle East battles are fought on Rivers and Canals...So to people in those areas, those are great battles...AS GREAT AS AN American would view MIDWAY...Or an Englishman would view Trafalgar of The Armada....In China a Great battle was fought on a river,in 200 a.d.ish...THE GREAT RED WALL...because a lot of boats were put next to each other...The enemy sent a raft on fire into them...IT LOOK LIKE A WALL OF FIRE ON THE RIVER....I used PT-109 ,because that was more a river boat,(was captained by JFK,itself was not a great battle,but the survival of the crew after it sank was)...Then we were discussing, than a Wooden/Iron Clad of The Civil War...Although those WW1 gunboats were very large,more like a small WW2 destroyer...I'm more of a historical strategist then one who would run up and down Dixie waving THE BATTLE FLAG...Not to mention my father's favorite movie "Gone with the Wind" and Char/Actor...Butler/Gable...So my Avatar/Name is more to Honor him... ConfederateSS.out!(The Blue and Silver Rebellion)...

[tzor]

You missed the IRONy of CSS not citing the CSS Virginia in Battle, during the War of Northern Agression.

Not exactly. If you understood the civil war you would realize that from a naval perspective, the entire war was a disaster from the start. The North had overwhelming naval power to enforce a naval blockade as well as take out the only major supply of salt (salt water pool evaporation) that made meat preservation all but impossible, leading to all sorts of civilian shortages in the war. Even those who managed to get supplies in often were in such positions of power that they were hated even more than the enemy troops. (You know, as in Rhett Butler in "Gone with the Wind?") So in general the whole naval part of the war is best forgotten.

[jusplay4fun]

Of course: the South had NO real naval presence; it was all defensive, against superior advantages in men and material. I think there were a few privateers and the like trying to beat the Naval Blockade of Southern Ports.

And I think I do understand the War of Northern Agression.

JP

You missed the IRONy of CSS not citing the CSS Virginia in Battle, during the War of Northern Agression.

Not exactly. If you understood the civil war you would realize that from a naval perspective, the entire war was a disaster from the start. The North had overwhelming naval power to enforce a naval blockade as well as take out the only major supply of salt (salt water pool evaporation) that made meat preservation all but impossible, leading to all sorts of civilian shortages in the war. Even those who managed to get supplies in often were in such positions of power that they were hated even more than the enemy troops. (You know, as in Rhett Butler in "Gone with the Wind?") So in general the whole naval part of the war is best forgotten.

[jusplay4fun]

CSS,

For someone with one or more degrees in History, you seemed fixated on the minutia of the subject rather than the sweep of the larger picture of its significant events and trends.

And there is your overuse of hyperbole, capital letters, and punctuation; overuse brings distraction and does not enhance proper emphasis nor clarification, IMO. Your grammar, spelling, and spacing needs improvement, too, while we are offering criticisms.

btw: Commodore Matthew Perry opened Japan, NOT China, as you wrote.

You are correct in this differentiation, which I did not need: "In the first unqualified defeat of a British naval squadron in history, U.S. Captain Oliver Hazard Perry leads a fleet of nine American ships to victory over a squadron of six British warships at the Battle of Lake Erie during the War of 1812." http://www.history.com/this-day-in-hist ... -lake-erie

However, Captain Oliver H. Perry was not Commodore, as you incorrectly stated: "Perry [Matthew C.] received the title of Commodore in June 1840, when the Secretary of the Navy appointed him commandant of New York Navy Yard.[3] The United States Navy did not have ranks higher than captain until 1857, so the title of commodore carried considerable importance. Officially, an officer would revert to his permanent rank after the squadron command assignment had ended, although in practice officers who received the title of commodore retained the title for life, and Perry was no exception. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matthew_C._Perry

So please be sure your facts (and minutia ) are indeed facts, and not FAKE FACTS.

JP

--------Not to mention...Where one lies......JustP4fun.....You say you are from Vir...So you would look at Mon/Merri as a KOOL battle....I yes,If you read any of my posts in the past ...Am from..."SOUTH"west Detroit...So I am most likely going to like The Defeat of The British Fleet on THE GREAT LAKES by Com.PERRY...Battle of Lake Erie,War of 1812,not the Com.Perry who opened up China...THE 1st time The British Royal Navy surrendered a fleet... ...Perry to Gen. Harrison(later Pres),"WE HAVE MET THE ENEMY AND THEY ARE OURS!"...Like you said, Those Middle East battles are fought on Rivers and Canals...So to people in those areas, those are great battles...AS GREAT AS AN American would view MIDWAY...Or an Englishman would view Trafalgar of The Armada....In China a Great battle was fought on a river,in 200 a.d.ish...THE GREAT RED WALL...because a lot of boats were put next to each other...The enemy sent a raft on fire into them...IT LOOK LIKE A WALL OF FIRE ON THE RIVER....I used PT-109 ,because that was more a river boat,(was captained by JFK,itself was not a great battle,but the survival of the crew after it sank was)...Then we were discussing, than a Wooden/Iron Clad of The Civil War...Although those WW1 gunboats were very large,more like a small WW2 destroyer...I'm more of a historical strategist then one who would run up and down Dixie waving THE BATTLE FLAG...Not to mention my father's favorite movie "Gone with the Wind" and Char/Actor...Butler/Gable...So my Avatar/Name is more to Honor him... ConfederateSS.out!(The Blue and Silver Rebellion)...

[waauw]

In terms of largest, a lot depends on how you want to measure "large" but wikipedia offers this list of candidates:

• Red Cliffs

Oh my, the Red Cliff movies are seriously great. Better than 'crouching tiger, hidden dragon' imo.

[DoomYoshi]

There's different yardsticks one can use.

In term of historical significance, there are seven naval battles that stand head-and-shoulders above the rest:

• Salamis
• Lepanto
• Spanish Armada
• Trafalgar
• Jutland
• Hakata Bay/Imari Bay
• Yamen

In terms of largest, a lot depends on how you want to measure "large" but wikipedia offers this list of candidates:

• Salamis
• Cape Ecnomus
• Red Cliffs
• Battle of the Masts
• Yamen
• Lake Poyang
• Jutland
• Philippine Sea
• Leyte Gulf

Still, one might imagine other yardsticks than size or historical significance. Jutland appears on both lists, and yet tactically it was a snoozefest. It changed the course of history, but it was an embarrassing performance on both sides. Something like the tiny First Battle of Narvik was vastly more exciting. I know people like to gasp and moan at sheer size , but it's rarely size that makes an encounter interesting.

The OP itself is an example of a different yardstick: something like most ridiculously lopsided victory. (For that category, though, I prefer the Anglo-Zanzibar War, although one could argue that that was a combined arms operation and not strictly a naval battle.)

Given the fact that there's no universally accepted yardstick, I think Confed's choice ("this is the greatest battle because it's the subject of a tourney I'll be unveiling soon"), whilst highly subjective, is no less valid than any of the others.

Incidentally, while Midway does not make either of the primary lists, I'll agree with you that it was a hell of an upset. It was the Superbowl IV of naval battles.

Jutland answered the question "why do we need tactics anyway, can't you just throw bigger and bigger guns out there?" pretty effectively.