Meade famously predicted that Lee would attack the Union center on the 3rd day at Gettysburg, and that seems to be the basis for claiming that Meade was the one general who anticipated Lee's moves. Additionally, Meade probably "anticipated" Lee when he learned of Longstreet's Corps' departure to Tennessee in September 1863, which prompted the AotP to move against the ANV along the Rappahannock River. But I do not believe that Meade was more farsighted than Grant, and that Meade's skill and insight were superior to Grant's use of force to win. Grant was one of the greatest strategists of that war, for which he had already proven himself in the Vicksburg Campaign. Without diminishing Meade's leadership of the AotP during Gettysburg, once Union forces collected themselves after Day 1 by assuming a strong defensive position, it is highly likely that many a competent commander would have performed as admirably as did Meade. So I don't extend Meade's performance at Gettysburg by elevating his generalship to a particular level of skill and insight. After all, once Grant assumed overall command, he and Meade (having tactical control of the AotP), worked pretty much in lockstep during the Overland and Petersburg campaigns so differentiating who used force vs. skill and insight becomes much more muddled.