Suggested By Tau43
Here we have a battle of intelligence between 3 great detectives.
For this battle There is a serial killer(intelligence level is that of Red Jack, Moriarty combined) is on the loose in a large city. First to find him wins.
And the version of Sherlock Holmes that will be used is Basil Rathbone.
Who wins?
Loading ...
Initial bets says this is gonna take a while before any resolution comes in.
I’ll say Monk, cause he’s my favorite on the list. Though in all honesty, I don’t know much about the Mentalist, and Holmes always pissed me off.
Sherlock and Patrick(the Mentalist) are pretty even in wits and observation ability, though somewhat in different fields it will still cause for some interesting interactions potentially leading to them either having a heated rivalry or teaming up to get rid of the third wheel and make this one on one to the villain, but I know little of Monk so that may be understating his manipulative abilities but considering his opponents, it’s like having two famous psychiatrists in the same room that have opposing theories, minus the opposing theories I suppose.
I don’t really think of the Mentalist as a detective. I just thought he was good at manipulating people’s heads.
However, my gut tells me to go with Mr. Holmes. (Still would’ve preferred Downey’s version…)
Patrick has shown some decent deductive skill, getting into the perps head is his specialty though, I said he’s similar to Holmes not a copy.
I don’t think Monk really has the chance of keeping up with these two though.
Just had a great idea! Why in heck are we using the movie version of Holmes? Now I can’t get out my full book set. Not whining, just seriously, why? They may have to work together, as if the others are about equal to Holmes, then none of them can catch the killer, as Holmes barely caught Moriarty, it took all his wits.
I think I would agree here that Monk wouldn’t follow through with the goods in this scenario. The serial killer as described has an intelligence somewhat level to that of Professor Moriarty who was/is seen as a super-mind, circa-equal to that of Sherlock Holmes. If you couple this with the onset of Monk’s active OCD in the storyline you will see the possible exploitation-game that could be procured by the killer on Monk. Remember that this is the guy who breaks a sweat over ‘unbalanced’ items over crime scenes, takes obsession over not stepping on cracks in the pavement and holds onto poles for self-assuredness. Situations like these, if not able to be sidestepped or avoided render Monk into a personal psychological nightmare where he breaks down in every sense of the word. This is where Monk would lose the game based on the serial killer’s keen intellect to use such things to deceive and confuse Monk and then most probably kill him. I place my stakes on either Patrick Jane or Sherlock Holmes in this bet only leaning towards Jane on the fact that when comparing a TV show detective from the 21st century to one in the Golden Age of Cinema the feats for the former should, in some ways, logically out-perform the feats of the latter. Other than my first thoughts on this matter I’m not totally sure who would find the serial killer first. The views from others here would be helpful.
That makes it seem like Monk isn’t worth the trouble, and in that case, Patrick and Sherlock may have to team up, get rid of him, trap the killer, then I don’t know what happens. Pity Mycroft isn’t here, he seems like he has a much bigger chance of catching the killer by himself than his little brother. Actually, he stands no chance as he’s a walking mass of CIS (he never moves, just thinks, never tries to check his reasoning or actively does anything.)
I could see Patrick and Sherlock saying lets ditch captain OCD and make this a one one one race to catch him. Hell after a while they may trick Monk onto a goose hunt while they go after the Killer. Neither are morons, they’ll use each other to get as close as possible to the guy and whoever outsmarts the other first and gets the cleanest advantage will win. Patrick is great at the psychological manipulation aspect. I could see things getting tricky.
They all lose to Columbo.
“And the version of Sherlock Holmes that will be used is Basil Rathbone.”
-
Sorry about the version guys, that is what I was asked to use!
If the killer is that smart, he would kill all 3 of them.
There is nothing wrong with Basil Rathbone guys. If anything is way more calm and collected than R.D. Jr. Sherlock, while still being rather physically fit. But anyway I’m rooting for Patrick.
Considering basic skills of Sherlock are the same throughout incarnation does it really matter what incarnation is used?
Honestly Monk is just a dead weight in this match it’s between Patrick and Sherlock Monk won’t last that long or get that far with this guy. Honestly I’d love to see the manipulation combat between Patrick and any version of Sherlock,
You know Sherlock Holmes is a book, right………. Also, they definitely need to team up, otherwise they will all die. Unless, Holms and Mentalist team up and arrest him together…
I know, I’ve read a few of the books. I’m just saying does it matter what incarnation is used.
I see Patrick and Sherlock teaming up but in the end it’s the one who finds him first that wins. Arresting doesn’t matter, it just states that only the first to [b]find[/b] him will win. So whoever finds him wins.
But they never will. He’s too smart. How can they work together (they would have to be with each other, as the villain might tap the lines), but not arrive at the same time? The thing is, they’re smart enough to fool each other, nut smart enough to not fall for each other’s tricks.
“I see Patrick and Sherlock teaming up but in the end it’s the one who finds him first that wins. Arresting doesn’t matter, it just states that only the first to [b]find[/b] him will win. So whoever finds him wins.”
-By find I meant catch. However I could see them fight fighting to get to him first.
Do they get there partners or they going solo?
true but if they team up to arrest him then neither actually wins. So it’s a matter of that too.
“true but if they team up to arrest him then neither actually wins. So it’s a matter of that too.”
-I could see them catching him, then fighting over who gives him to the Police.
“Do they get there partners or they going solo?”
-Solo.
Feel like Monk should have been replaced with someone else like Shawn Spencer from Psych… Though he would probably have a bit of an advantage since he’s be working with and against characters from shows and books he’s watched.
True though Shawn is like a light version of Patrick, Patrick used to do the fake psychic bit, so that would be a good and entertaining interaction
Fighting? What martial arts does Patrick know?
“Fighting? What martial arts does Patrick know?”
-
lol, Patrick fighting. This is why I asked if the partners were here because if Lisbon is basically his shield in physical matters…. He can take a punch to the face pretty well.
The best he’s got in self defense is either using his ability to manipulate people to stall for help and I think he owns a gun now.
“There is nothing wrong with Basil Rathbone guys. If anything is way more calm and collected than R.D. Jr. Sherlock, while still being rather physically fit.”
-
I was actually wanting to see Sherlock Holmes from the BBC series Sherlock.
Wait, the movies don’t cover everything, but does Holmes still know everything he does in the books, even if it’s not said in the movies?
I… I’m for Monk.
“Wait, the movies don’t cover everything, but does Holmes still know everything he does in the books, even if it’s not said in the movies?”
-
Ins’t pretty much every incarnation of Holmes’ soruce of fame based on those solved cases(even 22 century Holmes)?
Mostly, but there’s lots of important stuff not in the movies. Unless they covered around 2,000 pages of writing. Like how many martial arts Holmes knows, and his other forms of self defense (or defence.)
Honestly even though Patrick doesn’t have the best self defense training I can think of to beat Sherlock’s multiple forms. But he does have a gun, and is a pragmatist if he can’t screw with Sherlock’s head, he’ll probably just shoot him.
“But he does have a gun, and is a pragmatist if he can’t screw with Sherlock’s head, he’ll probably just shoot him.”
-
I though they were going after the serial killer rather then facing each other in a physically hostile means like a to death match.
Like I would suspect Jane would probably set them up to get hassled by law enforcement or arrested to distract or delay them.
Do they have to catch the serial killer or just find him, like it says in the description?
@Lowk
they are competing to get him though.
@Captain Epic
asked the same basic thing earlier They do have to catch him though.
“they are competing to get him though.”
-
True but it doesn’t seem to be traditional match that’s to the death between character. Besides I don’t think any of them is willing to risk the trouble killing someone would bring… okay except for Jane but that’s only because of who he though he shot.
True, Jane will probably use them then toss them into CBI custody while he goes after the killer in some overly psychologically convoluted but awesome way.
Sherlock is the man.
Props to the mentalist, but Sherlock is more rounded and posseses many more skills.
Sherlock has a gun, too. Plus, he’s already evaded several men with dangerous and technologically advanced guns. And we know it’s not a fight, but they may fight over who gives the killer over.
[I could see Patrick and Sherlock saying lets ditch captain OCD and make this a one one one race to catch him. Hell after a while they may trick Monk onto a goose hunt while they go after the Killer. Neither are morons, they’ll use each other to get as close as possible to the guy and whoever outsmarts the other first and gets the cleanest advantage will win. Patrick is great at the psychological manipulation aspect. I could see things getting tricky.] [[GuardianAngel1911]]
———-
I like this. It sounds like a probable set of events.
———-
[If the killer is that smart, he would kill all 3 of them.] [[jamesisawesome]]
———-
Hmmm. Think about it man; a super-mind contending with three other super-minds.
———-
[The thing is, they’re smart enough to fool each other, nut smart enough to not fall for each other’s tricks.] [[epicazeroth]]
———-
It’s a paradox but I believe you’re right. The onus of work/time-consumption is really on the person having to look out for the traps.
———-
Just as a last note, the match here would begin with the individuals all knowing that it is a competition to find the killer. This thread is in “Duels” so even if the headliner is somewhat mild on the uptake some kind of battle still exists. You might have some of these guys team-up but one would have to pull a texas switch right before the killer is caught to take bragging rights. On the other side of the coin if you look at it as a team-up then 1) no-one wins this match and 2) three super minds against one circa-equal super mind would seem ultimately unfair and the duel wouldn’t be deserving the FPA.
I would like to point out that Sherlock Holmes is able to un-bend a solid iron poker with his bare hands (some really strong guy bent it in the first place), so he has a strength advantage if it comes down to it.
-
From what I’ve seen of the Mentalist and Sherlock, they’re pretty close, but I think Sherlock may be better, as in the story “The Colored Band” he was able to deduce that a woman’s last words “The colored band” and whistling from the next room meant snake-training was occurring.
monk misses a lot of details. in all my time watching mentalist patrick has messed up once. same number as holmes:once. monk isntt in thier league. I want holmes and patrick to team up just for the one liners that would come from each. I tihnk this would be more fair if monk was replaced with neal caphrey or nate ford.
knowing patrick he’ll manipulate another serial killer to kill his target. done it before.
Oh. I was just re-reading the headliner and it seems that the serial killer has an intelligence somewhere as powerful as Jack the Ripper and Professor Moriarty combined. Judging from this I would have to say that a short-term team-up would be essential; Adrian Monk included. =/
“knowing patrick he’ll manipulate another serial killer to kill his target. done it before.” Loved that episode
He’ll need to find another ultra-mind, in which case, I highly doubt he can manipulate him. That’s like saying to kill Captain America, I’d have to force Kharn to do it for me.
jeremy brett is an infinitely superior holmes to rathbone; it makes me feel bad that no one ever realises this.
-
anyway; a killer with the combined (aggregate?) intelligence of red jack and moriarty is by default going to be more than any one of them can deal with, surely?
Yeah, that’s why they team up.
yeah. so no one can win. so theres no point in this debate, essentially.
There is. They team up, then who can get rid of whom, or just beat the others and get to the Police first?
Off-topic.
Shinichi Kudo/Conan Edogawa vs these three vs Batman (in detective skills).
-
That is all.
Basil? Nice choice. Not the best Sherlock (I was wrong there, the best would be Jeremy Brett), but possibly the most Iconic, RDJ be damned).
—
You know what… I think Monk is actually the most likable. Jane is fantastic at manipulating people, but not at getting them to like him, and Sherlock was always portrayed as a bit of a misanthrope. Monk may not be a huge fan of people, but he is liked by them, if only because his mannerisms breed sympathy.
—
But this isn’t about the most likable, its the most proficient at catching killers. Do we have a Killer in mind? I assume it’d be a Neutral party (Possibly the Ice Truck Killer from Dexter, or someone more supernaturally skilled.)
Red Jack and Moriarty combined?
That’s like pitting them against a psychopathic Ozymandias with average physical abilities (but makes up for it with his wit…).
-
-quote the match description
“Here we have a battle of intelligence between 3 great detectives.
For this battle There is a serial killer(intelligence level is that of Red Jack, Moriarty combined) is on the loose in a large city. First to find him wins.”
The three will never find him if they work together and they will all die..
Well, they definitely need to team-up but I’m thinking that whilst these three ultra-minds could find this serial killer, although with difficulty I might add, before they catch him they would have to compete against each other and then one would be left to get the bad guy. The scary thing here is that the good guy who is left has probably a lesser intelligence than that of the serial killer. This means he is chicken meat. So I do disagree with the three guys not being able to catch him but I don’t think how the duel will play out will prove a winner for the ‘versus’ detectives as a winner is required of the find.
i think this debate can’t have any satisfying outcome. we can’t quantify intelligence (saying person A is “twice as intelligent” as person B is meaningless), therefore we can’t know what
“intelligence level is that of Red Jack [it's red JOHN, damnit!!], Moriarty combined”
means. also, the outcome of this depends on soooooo many other factors than the intelligence of the persons involved.
This was a great idea but I think the creator made the villain too good. Red JOHN and Moriarty combined is freaking ridiculous.
Well, Sherlock Holmes, is superior, The mentalist is so good and excelente behavior manipulator, he does very well, but the serie helps so much, his His reasoning is not deductive, in the first, and second season, He uses his intuition, and thinks the body language of the people is all, when this is ambiguous, if someone reasoning, can see, that Chances are it’s another thing, and not discard them, Suddenly, in tha lasts seasons, his reasoning is so much better, the diference is that ine these seasons his reasoning is deductive and abductive, like Sherlock Holmes, S. Holmes never guees he says: “The assumption is a harmful habit that ruins deductive reasoning”. Monk is good but not brillant or genius like Patrick or Sherlock.