I'm saying that it took incredible reflexes for Harry to fight so many Death Eaters at once, while not taking any damage, and also defeating several them. He did this in the air, at night, while surrounded and in a disadvantageous situation.

His incredible reflexes were clearly shown.

 

HE'S NEVER SHOWN TO BE A SUPERSTAR ATHLETE!

And besides, it takes more than good reflexes to be a great wizard. There was much more to Dumbledore and Voldemort than simply reflexes. In fact, they out classed him in almost all regards of intelligence.

I can easily read what you wrote, but half of what you wrote in your last few posts didn't happen in the manner you described in the books. So its quite obvious that your opinions are largely based on your headcanon, not actual canon.

 

He was not a superstar athlete. He was (arguably) the best of five students (Malfoy, Chang, Higgs, Diggory), at a particular position in a school league.

They really weren't. Go have a read of the chapter again. It was a frantic skirmish against several broom mounted opponents, at least one of which was likely under the Imperius, assisted by a half trained wizard and a heavily enchanted vehicle. Harry was not effortlessly slinging spells and getting headshots each time.

 

I think he's right about Harry's reflexes, he just didn't described them well. When it comes to facts, Harry showed very fast reflexes, more notably it helped him two times against Lord Voldemort. So the logic structure should be this: If Harry is fast enough to force a priori incantatem on Voldemort, impact an Expelliarmus at the same time Voldemort's rebounded Killing Course in that final confrontation, then he's as fast with a wand as him. That's impressive. Voldemort is faster than Dumbledore, a guy who always surprised Harry when he was showing his wand from nowhere.

But obviously that's not enough. This guy just used a bad analogy, Harry has very fast reflexes, period. He’s not Aaron Rodgers, nor is he in the same league as Voldemort.

 

No, his problem was that he kept shifting the goal posts every time his points were rebutted.

 

He outflew a dragon.

And yes, his battle against those Death Eaters required impressive reflexes. No, the battle was not pristine, it was a mess, but it still required impressive reflexes.

 

My point, about Harry having impressive reflexes, has not been rebutted. It is clearly shown in the text, time and time again.

 

Shifting. Goalposts.

And because I only just saw this bit:

Harry is blind as fuck yo.

 

Harry had a very good eye for the snitch.

 

HE WAS BLIND AS FUCK YO. Don't make me pull quotes from the books. I'll fucking do it; I'm a man on the edge.


(shifting goalposts: the post shifts again)

 

In my opinion there's at least two parts to this question: does Harry have the "genetic" prerequisites to become a "Voldemort-level" wizard, and is it plausible that Harry could find the motivation and will to do so, while still being recognizable as Harry Potter. For the first part I'd say yes, for the second a qualified no.

I could see Harry becoming a fighter who can go toe-to-toe against Voldemort and have non-zero chances of winning (mainly because I see magical fighting as something fairly simplistic, given the sheer number of insta-win spells we see), but he definitely doesn't have any interest in delving deep into esoteric magics to gain the knowledge base and experience that makes Voldemort and Dumbledore stand so much above the others.

 

As much as I'm tempted to literally repost what I wrote (which, by the way, is actually trolling, unlike wize's stuff), I can't help but wonder where the actual fuck people get off on that hype train for Harry being the best there ever was.

That's kinda the point - that sometimes being able to make decisions that are right and not easy makes you better off than people who are insane, powerful prodigies with twisted ideals.

Yes, he's an above average Quidditch player. Does he compare to someone like Krum in that regard? Absolutely not?

Yes, he's got a decent mind and depending on his motivation, a good work ethic. Is he brilliant enough to come up with Sectumsempra or make a Horcrux in his sixth year? Absolutely not?

Like, I understand you want Harry to be awesome. That's what fanfiction's for and about. What's not awesome is mischaracterizing and exaggerating what's actually presented, then accusing people of trolling when literally everyone disagrees with you.

Because yeah maybe we all have reading comprehension problems or whatever but saying that literally doesn't mean anything when you respond to people with wahhhhh you're trolling when they're citing passages and line by line answering throwaway points you shit out like a monkey on a typewriter.

 

I was under the impression that 'acceptable' was average for OWLs and therefore anyone who took the NEWT in a subject was above average. Doing well in the NEWT was considered far above average. Even then that's academically which doesn't necessarily translate to 'skill', 'goodness' or 'talent'.

I think something that needs more investigation is Hermione's speech in the first book just before Harry goes to face Quirrel. The stuff about there being more to being a wizard than books and cleverness. I'm not sure how I take being a wizard to being good at magic but I approve of the idea that there needs to be more than simply studying to be great. She talks about friendship and bravery. We know that the Love room in the department of Mysteries is looked and we know the Patronus charm has an emotional aspect to it. How much magic requires more than academic application?

 

If you think Harry was average then you are truly without hope. Anyone with even juvenile reading comprehension can see that he is far above average.

Saying that all of his achievements and skills were just "luck" is a copout.
--- Post automerged ---

Harry having phenomenal reflexes is not an opinion, it is something that is showcased, quite clearly, throughout the entire series.

 

He only said that one achievement was luck (the troll incident), but fabricating things seems to be your M.O. so I doubt that it will get through your head.

Can you please, for once, cite a passage from the books?

 

It's just another case of a person lacking reading comprehension. I never mentioned Harry winning against the troll, but I did, however, mention Harry having the athleticism needed to jump on top of it.

As for Harry's reflexes? Please don't:t tell me that you actually need your hand to be held? Do you actually expect the author to say "Harry has amazing reflexes"? Because if you do... Then don't ever respond to me again.

It is a case of showing, not telling. Harry is the only character in the series, aside from Dumbledore, to possesses the reflexes needed to react to Voldemort's spellcasting - an accomplishment that is repeated quite frequently. That is proof of Harry's impressive reflexes.

 

But the passage I provided you showed that he never jumped off the troll, but fell, quite unathletically at that.

 

Wow, you are an idiot.

A comparable allegory would be Harry's parents being killed by the leader of an underground criminal organization with some of the most powerful and influential people in the country supporting it.

Not a goddamn crackhead you goddamn moron.

He then becomes a member of the Wizarding version of the FBI, becomes head of the department at 26, then becomes the Head of the Department of Law Enforcement which oversees the FBI, Swat, CIA, etc.

You lack reading comprehension