That made sense, but then why did they win in 1812/13?
What I was asking for was the reason for their difference in performance between Napoleonic Wars and Crimean wars, not some stereotypical judgements about the Russians.
IIRC, the Ottomans were supplied by the British and always kept a technological edge over the Russians, at least during the 1877-78 wars, which the Russians won despite their inferior firearms.
And anecdotes about some Arab auxiliaries doesn't really same much about the real Turkish fighting forces.
The things I told you are exactly the reasons for the difference in performance. The ridiculous drilling wasn't part of the Russian army of 1812/13 (at least not to the same extent). The ridiculously outdated firearms were not as outdated in 1812 as during the Crimean Wars. The same is true for most of the other issues in tactics.
While the Russia of the 1850ties was led by incompetent generals, in 1812 it had access to some of the best military minds of the world.
The infrastructure issues are a catastrophe during the Crimean War because it was fought at the fringes of the empire and Russia was unable to deploy it's troops to the front and keep them fed. In 1812/13 those same issues were a boon: True, the Russian army also suffered from them, but Napoleons army wasn't defeated by force of arms - it essencially starved itself to death.
It also weren't the Russians who marched alone up to Paris, but a coalition formed by the rest of Europe that dealt Napoleon the deathblow at Leipzig.
The problem isn't so much that the Russian army got
worse after the Napoleanic Wars, (it did, but not overly so) the problem is, however, that it didn't get
better at a time when all other armies of Europe were improving on technological and tactical levels like never seen before. The Russians remained like frozen in time, fueled solely by the bygone glory of the Napoleonic Wars, with little to no innovation.
Concerning the Ottomans: My statements were referencing loosely the 100-150 years prior to the Crimean War. It is true that after that the Ottomans modernized with British help. The Reasons the Russians won in 1877, are the modernizations of society and army made after the loss of the Crimean War. This, combined with the massive population advantage made a Russian victory possible.
You could say that only the horrors of 1854 transformed the Russian army into a formidable fighting force again.
The comments about the Arabian auxiliaries are important, because the fighting abality of the main turkish fighting force is seriously in danger when the supply lines of said force are raided by the own auxiliaries.