This only works where the number of moves is finite, and you can only iterate in lockstep with your opponent: tennis and chess are good examples.
If you are a startup, you don't have to wait for your competitors to play before making a move, you can (and must, to survive) make as many moves as you possibly can, to get ahead.
A blunder is not as bad as not making enough great moves.
I agree with your counter-point. The finiteness and lock-step are interesting characteristics; I wonder what the set of characteristics are, for when this "rule" is especially applicable.
And then we could ask: Is a startup like that? Are some kinds of businesses like that, but some are not? (e.g. a one-person accounting service vs a "change the world" startup?)
I do agree that often with startups it's whether you find the 1-2 things that REALLY matter, and execute those REALLY well.
> you can (and must, to survive) make as many moves as you possibly can, to get ahead.
The tricky part is not getting ahead in the wrong direction, because that could be a blunder if the strategy behind that move is not well thought through.
If you are a startup, you don't have to wait for your competitors to play before making a move, you can (and must, to survive) make as many moves as you possibly can, to get ahead.
A blunder is not as bad as not making enough great moves.