You've probably heard the promise: "Learn thousands of briefs and you'll write faster than anyone."

It sounds logical. Fewer strokes per word should equal higher speeds, right?

But what happens when you actually do the math?

The Combinatorial Explosion

Let's start small. Imagine you want to create briefs for just 10 common words.

Individual word briefs: 10 briefs to memorize

But wait - if you're serious about "writing short," you also need briefs for every phrase combination:

2-word phrases: 9 possible combinations 3-word phrases: 8 possible combinations
4-word phrases: 7 possible combinations And so on...

Total briefs needed for 10 words: 55 different outlines

For just 10 words, you need to memorize 55 different outlines.

Scaling to Reality

Now let's get realistic. Let’s say a typical deposition involves roughly 1,000 unique words. In reality, it’s probably much more than that, but let’s use easy numbers.

If you tried to brief "everything" including common phrase combinations:

• Individual words: 1,000 briefs

• 2-word phrases: ~1,000 combinations

• 3-word phrases: ~1,000 combinations

• 4-word phrases: ~1,000 combinations

You'd need to memorize over 4,000 different outlines.

And that's being conservative - many advocate for even more comprehensive brief libraries.

The Decision-Making Nightmare

Here's where the math gets truly impossible.

Every single word in testimony triggers multiple decisions:

• Do I have a brief for this word?

• Should I wait to see if this becomes a phrase I know?

• Which of my possible briefs should I choose?

• Did the speaker change direction mid-sentence?

Research shows each mental decision takes about 200-300 milliseconds.

At 300 words per minute (that’s how fast the system says you can write), you have 200 milliseconds per word total.

The decision-making time alone exceeds your available time window.

The High-Speed Death Spiral

As testimony speeds increase, the system becomes exponentially worse:

More words per second = more brief choices per second Less thinking time = harder to make complex decisions Higher pressure = worse decision-making ability More mistakes = more mental recovery needed

The faster you need to go, the more the system works against itself.

It's like designing a race car that gets heavier the faster you try to drive it.

The Cruel Irony

Methods promoting "thousands of briefs" claim to optimize for speed, but they require:

• Extensive memorization (inherently slow process)

• Pattern recognition under time pressure (error-prone)

• Split-second decision-making between multiple options (cognitively expensive)

• Recovery from wrong choices (time-consuming)

Every component becomes LESS reliable as speed increases.

The Real-World Evidence

If "briefs for everything" actually worked for high-speed writing, you'd expect to see:

• Multiple students achieving 300+ WPM using these methods

• Testimonials showcasing speed achievements, not just "feelings"

• Consistent success rates among practitioners

• Evidence that more briefs correlate with higher speeds

The absence of such evidence isn't an accident - it's mathematics.

What the Numbers Actually Show

Simple math reveals the fatal flaw:

• 4,000+ briefs to memorize × split-second recognition required = cognitive overload

• Multiple decision points per word × 300+ words per minute = impossible timing

• Complex memorization × high-pressure performance = systematic failure

The Logical Conclusion

You can't solve a speed problem by creating a decision-making problem.

You can't optimize for quick execution by requiring extensive memorization.

You can't build high-speed systems on cognitive complexity.

The mathematics of "briefs for everything" proves it's impossible before you even try.

What This Means for You

If you've struggled with extensive brief systems, the math was against you from the start.

If memorizing thousands of outlines felt overwhelming, that's because it literally exceeds human cognitive capacity.

If your complex briefs failed during fast testimony, that's the predictable result of impossible timing demands.

You weren't failing the system - the system was mathematically designed to fail.

The Choice

You can keep trying to defy mathematics, memorizing more and more outlines in pursuit of theoretical efficiency.

Or you can recognize that sustainable speed comes from methods that work with human limitations, not against them.

Simple systems that require minimal decision-making will always outperform complex systems that exceed cognitive capacity.

The math doesn't lie, even when the marketing does.