> Didn't the Americans also have superior
> commanders? Most of Britain's commanders
> in the colonies were "royal appointees" or
> whatever, meaning they were politicians who
> didn't have a clue. Am I correct?

Actually, officer positions were more often than not bought by the wealthy who wanted an prestigious position for themselves or their spoiled-snuff-sniffing sons. (Though Britain did have some good generals.) As a result, there was no motivation for the lesser soldiers to work to acheive a higher rank, which didn't do a whole lot for morale.

La"George Washington lost most of his battles"Zorra