@@mysteriousguy666 well i can also call pj a fodder without any prove big guy . Full explained feats >>> semi explained feats . And you have got to answer me why sherlock is a fodder
Patrick Jane win with Very High diff. He is smart like Sherlocks BBC but he is very good at manipulation ( more than Holmes ). Holmes can be trapped by Plan of Patrick ( It is do not easy for Holmes to solve Moriarty BBC, while Patrick is surely better than Moriarty )
BBC Sherlock Holmes High Diffs + Existential Intelligense Goes To Sherlock + Abstract Thinking And Space Tginking. HE CAN VISUALISE AN ENTIRE CITY IN DIFFERENT CENTURY IN HIS HEAD.
BBC Sherlock Holmes High Diffs + Existential Intelligense Goes To Sherlock + Abstract Thinking And Space Tginking. HE CAN VISUALISE AN ENTIRE CITY IN DIFFERENT CENTURY IN HIS HEAD.
Na prática Patrick brincaria com o Sherlock. Sherlock é absurdo em inteligência espacial e lógico-matemática, mas peca na intra e interpessoal(o dos livros daria mais trabalho aliás). Já o Patrick é completo
@@jovann1237 PJ didnt even solve RJ case,if RJ really wanted,he would die many times,red john iutsmarted Patrick too many times,even like this,BBC Sherlock has better feats,showing skills in cold reading,but Patrick is showed like he is very smart.
@@justamapper14that was not about who kill whom first. PJ had nothing when he start investigating RJ, where RJ has his accomplice all over. That game was of smartness. If u watched how PJ solved other cases too, u will find out why PJ is far better than any other detective character.
@@AkshayKumar-dv6ykyou are saying pj is better than sherlock ? . As far i remember pj doesn't even explains his deductions and strategies most of the time . Wheres Sherlock breaks his strategy for the pourpose of understanding. Merely statement and saying " i predicted that " doesnt actually make anyone smart unless you have a proper reason to predict that perticular outcome . In short , pj is no way better than sherlock .
@@sike9308 it's all about visualisation. In Sherlock director shows every clue by different camera angles and what so called is cinematography. While in case of PJ there was no such thing used. PJ not only justified his hunch just by saying "I predicted that, or I guess" he explained valid reasons too.
@@Goofyahhgamer270realistically sherlock will win even tho he has some crap strategy which seems impossible to think of . On the other hand pj hardly explains his strategies and methods .
Novel moriarty solos bbc sherlock, Patrick Jane. Novel moriarty was incredible intelligent, more intelligent than bbs moriarty, even novel Sherlock admitted his intelligence and influence.
@@Damon24818 not that much . Sherlcok is not good or i would say he never showed anything regarding to eq ,manupulation , deception etc . Without discovering this there is no point in arguing . Like many ppl say that sherlock cant manupulate , but they dont think that sherlock never showed anything like this . But in terms of logical thinking, problem solving , case solving and many more thing sherlock excced everyone (imo)
![Sherlock Holmes [BBC] VS Patrick Jane](/img/logo.svg){kind=logo}
