Has anybody in history found a counter to the Hammer-and-Anvil?

[Kagemusha]

There has always been counter for single and double envelopment tactics. A concentrated strike. If the manouvering enemy is too weak at one point while stretching his forces. a concentrated attack against the weak point might cut his forces in two and into full dissarray.

[Cyclops]

Very true, Kagemusha. I guess the Finnish army demonstated the value of the surgical strike against the Soviets in 1940.

Were the Soviet forces attempting any sort of hammer-and-anvil there? or was it just hammer-hammer-hammer?

[Whacker]

The whole point of the hammer-and-anvil tactic is pinning any enemy in place then smashing the crap out of them. Don't get pinned. In any fight, be it individual vs individual up to a full scale war, mobility is always key. Guerrilla tactics work wonders. Use ambushes, fighting retreats, false retreats, but never let get yourselves pinned down.

[Kagemusha]

Very true, Kagemusha. I guess the Finnish army demonstated the value of the surgical strike against the Soviets in 1940.

Were the Soviet forces attempting any sort of hammer-and-anvil there? or was it just hammer-hammer-hammer?

Mostly just hammer, hammer, while the more mobile Finnish forces used Motti tactics which were sort of envelopment tactics.