I have been very critical of Chris Ballard in the past, as I believe no-one is beyond questioning, and it is by questioning Ballard’s approach that I had plenty of very productive debates with a lot of you guys in the comment section. Those debates made me grow a lot as a writer, and made me realize that I was wrong in plenty of aspects about my analysis. Clearly, debating and questioning each other is a great way to improve our way of thinking, so when someone uses the most biased number possible to try and paint a picture that could not be further away from the truth, I just have to answer.
Was Grigson better than Ballard? (Spoiler alert: No). Responding to @MikeSilver
