The real issue here is whether the "less skilled" (and i assume it to mean not technically, but lets just say for simplicity sake "esthetically") will be able to recognize that "decent shot" in post if they are unable to see it in real life in the first place. And since I am already in animal metaphors, it is more like "pearls before swine" type of thing.
I'm surprised at the confusion on this issue. Even Slobodan is confused, as evidenced by his above comment.
Surely it is obvious that what constitutes a 'good' photo is always in the eye of the beholder. I'm sure there will be some folks who think HCB's shot of a man jumping a puddle is rather banal.
Now, you might criticise such people for having a lack of taste and a lack of discernment, but that is a different issue to whether or not a burst of images will allow one to capture what,
in one's own opinion, is a better shot than the single, first shot.
Why does Slobodan imagine that anyone would bother to take a photo, whether a single shot, a full-resolution burst or a short video, if he is unable to recognise a 'decent shot' in the first place? Surely it is always the recognition of a potentially interesting shot,
in the eye of the person with the camera, that motivates the person with the camera to take the trouble to shoot the scene.
Whether or not Slobodan or Russ happens to agree with the photographer, that his shot was worth taking, or that his selection from a dozen shots is the best one, is a separate issue.
There might be exceptions of course, to this motivation to shoot a scene which one genuinely thinks is interesting, meaningful and/or beautiful. I can imagine that sometimes a photographer might think "there's nothing particularly interesting here, but I might as well take a shot just for the record", in which case, if he were to shoot a short video, there's at least a possibility that some unforeseen event might occur which would make the shot interesting, such as an unnoticed falcon suddenly swooping down to catch a squirrel that was hidden on the other side of a tree trunk.
I can also imagine that certain professional photographers, in the interests of earning a living, might be in the habit of capturing images which they personally think are ordinary or uninteresting, but know that their clients will like them.
But generally, whether one is a novice with little artistic nous, or an experienced photographer with an artist's background, one points the camera at scenes that one finds interesting. If the scene involves movement, as most street scenes do, then something as simple as the main subject deciding to blink at the precise moment the photographer presses the shutter, can spoil the shot.