Expert predictions are wrong?

Similar to some other books I've read, the review of this new book argues that in general, formulas do a better of job of predicting things than experts do. Formulas tend to be better "foxes," taking into account more of the nuances that go into real life changes. Experts tend to be "hedgehogs" who focus on one "big idea." That "big idea" is wrong more often than not, but when it's right, it's spectacularly right, which leads to people paying attention to it in all kinds of matters. The author gives the example of Churchill's view of Hitler being spectacularly right in contrast to the more nuanced views of the time, but that Churchill was frequently wrong about other matters, such as independence in India. Sounds like a good read.

http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2005/12/05/051205crbo_books1