And how much counts as having broad scope and skill?

78 and up.

Dead. But I love these answers from Michi 🙂

I got 100s. So why don’t you listen to me?

Mr. A.,
You remind me of all those people who were shocked when they got to university (a certain program) and were amazed to discover that at the current table even the slowest and weakest one had been “the best” in his high school. Some of them clung to the old illusion, and reality kept making its point. Being the head of the cats of the Holy City, may it be rebuilt and established, and its surroundings, doesn’t interest a single self-respecting dog.

Mr. Sh.,
The answer is empty and trite. Obviously the questioner wasn’t expecting a breakdown at the level of exactly how much proficiency is required in the novellae of the great one from Minsk on matters of origami and what follows from it. But you can give general guidelines—definitions and indicators—as with any qualitative measure.

NoPoint, I agree with you about the answer being empty and trite. But as for me—what do you want?

My remark, with all due respect, was that you’re adorning yourself with old feathers. Others here have them too. They’re not relevant. And your messages will draw people near and push them away. And why are there no new feathers? I wasn’t claiming to make some particularly meaningful point.
Aside from that, I also didn’t understand what you were trying to hint at—presumably sarcastically—with the 100 on tests on one chapter of Gemara, Tosafot, and Poshim, or maybe one tractate studied for breadth with Rashi, as against 78 in skill and scope.
By the way, I really do think that one day—far off though it may be—it will be possible to formalize “skill and scope” very nicely and even invent rigid metrics, and all those various legal-style descriptions will become numbers, and cakes will grow on trees, and the bitter white inner peel around each section of a grapefruit will disappear, with God’s help.

By “invent metrics” I mean being able to break skill down into components, for example, and monitor each component separately with precision, and build a reliable “skill” function as a weighted combination of the components, all accompanied and backed by statistical predictions. Something like how people know how to analyze tiny components in an athlete’s performance, but on steroids. To me that’s a supreme science, and if God runs His world through reincarnations, then I ask Him here to bring me back into the world if and only if my level of excitement over understanding the new developments will be at least 82.