To truly be able to tell lies a liar needs to know the truth and intentionally evade it. In this manner they have greater abilities than those who can only tell the truth. Socrates gives an example that only someone that really knows math would be able to lie about what the product of two numbers are, without unintentionally telling the truth. In my own understanding you can compare an ignorant liara and knowledgeable liar by a broken clock and a functioning but incorrectly set clock. The first will be wrong all but one second of the day. The second will never tell the right time as it's hands keep moving at the same pace of a correctly set clock but will never intersect.

Hippias accuses Socrates of arguing unfairly, Socrates says that he only argues so dilligently as to reach the truth of a debate. He will never shy from learning and will not be too ashamed to admit when someone has teached him something.

It's clear that Hippias and Socrates are both defining "better" in different terms, the first in a manner of morality and virtue, the other in terms of ability. At the end they are both perplexed and while neither has conceded their point they do not feel sure.

Observations: I would almost expect a moral denounciation of the act of lying no matter the circumstances. Though that was not a concern in Euthydemus. Would the Socrates of the Gorgias dialogue really agree with lying?

If Hippias really is skilled in so many areas as Socrates (ironically) says it would be very impressive.

Even though it is a very short dialogue I felt it dragged out too much, Socrates repeatedly states examples of restrained ability being superior unrestrained disability to Hippias.