Yeah, both books (which I have).
It helped of course that the two aircraft were in fact very evenly matched. From my gajillion hours flying ww2 combat sims, I actually prefer the F4F-3 to the folding-wing -4, because the -3 has about the same ammo load, but only 4 guns (the later Eastern built (the aircraft name for General Motors) Wildcats were also 4 guns)—leaving it with substantially more firing time. On the -4 I actually don't use the outer 2 guns and save them just in case I go Winchester on the other 4. Sims are not real life, obviously, but the accounts of battles (Lundstrom is awesome), do show the incredible advantage of survivability.
I actually think from a doctrinal POV, the IJN had it exactly wrong given the highly selective and rigorous nature of their pilot training (Sakai's book, Samurai!, among others details this). They worked hard to create fantastic pilots, then put them in an aircraft absolutely focused on "offensive" capability to a fault. They rejected so many candidates, their stable of up and coming pilots was not high enough to meet the demands of a total war. In combat units, their radios were sort of marginal, so many pilots removed them to save weight—for more maneuverability! Pilot armor? LOL—heavy! Self-sealing gas tanks? Those are also heavy! Many pilots also elected not to take the parachutes they were issued. The next result was great, but completely irreplaceable pilots. As fresh pilots came to the front, this was exacerbated, because the vets had the early war combat experience when they dominated to fall back on, but the new guys had to learn on the job, where literally any mistake was often deadly. The USN (USMC/USAAF as well) had by Japanese measures, an effectively endless stream of new pilots—"good enough" as the training was not nearly as selective. These good enough pilots could improve in combat because they could actually make mistakes and still get home—then learn from those mistakes.
"Good judgment comes from experience; experience comes from bad judgment"
Hard to get the former when bad judgement is fatal.
The US could have afforded (in terms of pilots) to make an especially capable, but more vulnerable aircraft—the Japanese really didn't have that luxury, IMHO. They would have done better preserving their pilots, even if it was against their offensive... spirit.
They really did the same with ASW doctrine. Unpopular posting because considered "defensive." So the US submarine service absolutely wrecks their merchant marine. USN SS force killed way less tonnage than the U-boats—but the U-boats had ~0 impact on tonnage shipped (only 1-2% of ships in convoys sunk over the whole war), and the US Fleet Boats sank nearly all the Japanese Merchant Marine.