Since the dawn of military thinking, theorists have been trying to find the key to victory in armed conflict. theories of classic thinkers like Jomini and Carl von Clausewitz represented two positions in the debate regarding the principles of war as universally applicable rules for battle, or as a tool for planning not capable of fully overcoming the complex reality of war. In the wake of the first world war the principles of war as formulated by Fuller following his experiences of the war, found its way into doctrine. Naval theory on the principles of war developed under the influence of these thinkers through Alfred Mahan and Julian Corbett and is still found in naval doctrine.  The debate of the validity of the principles however, is still enduring. In a world of constant technological innovation and increasing complexity their relevance is questioned. Despite of this, modern theories on principles for warfare are still emerging from theorists like Geoffrey Till. The purpose of this study is to test the applicability of Till´s modern naval principles of war against historical battles, and thus, the timeless claim of the theory.  The study examines the theoretical reach of Till´stheory regarding principles of war, intended for naval warfare. This theory, much like its precursors, have adopted the Jominian school of thought, sharing the ambition of universal applicability. Geoffrey Tills Creating Decisive Victorywas tested against three historical cases of naval warfare.  The results of the study partially support the universal and timeless claim of Till´s theory by being represented, though not wholly, in every case. Additionally, the result indicates that the theory partially suffers from its modern design, impeding its timeless applicability. This claim, however, must be supported by further research.