Voldemort vs. Albus Dumbledore

Originally posted by ares834
Sure, which is why I would give Dumbles the victory. But it won't me a major ass kicking.

I disagree: it would be a major ass-kicking.

Dumbledore was about equal to Grendelwald and the fight was fairly even. Ol' Grendles had the Elderwand and Dumbledore did not. He was second as a dark wizard only to Voldemort. Yet, Dumbledore still won. Let's move forward a bit: Dumbledore has no vow of "niceness" (meaning he will kill) and he does not have to protect anyone...and his CIS is turned off about the Elderwand being in his posession.*

Conclusion: smooth victory for Dumbledore.

Originally posted by ares834
In the forest, yes. But it shows that the wand can in fact injure it's owner.

Conclusion: so what I said earlier: only if the owner wills it.

Originally posted by ares834
Um, what? That doesn't answer my question at all.

Those are two things he had and used quite well.

Originally posted by ares834
Not sure why you would say this. Dumbledore's duel with Grindelwald seems to have been just a straight-up duel, an extraordinary one though, that lasted for hours.

To the hours part...wha? I think you're exaggerating a bit. That statement usually means more than just "three hours". So let's just say it lasted 3 hours.

To the extraordinary part...yes. But it was called into question. Skeeter said Grendelwald more or less surrendered. So is it possible that Dumbledore wore down Grendelwald with "sith taunts"? lol

That MAY be the case. We really do not know why the unbeatable wand was beaten in a duel. I simply suggest that it was more than a straigh up duel. We know Dumbledore had prep for it...because he was goaded into the duel by the wizarding community in the UK: Grendelwald was in Europe.

Originally posted by ares834
Doesn't mean much. This is just simply the easiest way to defeat the owner as it is a veyr powerful wand. BTW, can I have the quote that says it had been defeated hundreds of times through sneaky methods.

Oh, sure, just let me go through thousands of pages until I find it.

NOOOT!

It has had hundreds of owners and only two actual duels over it.

Contradict that if you want to but I have no interest in pouring over pages to prove a point that we both know I'm right about.

Originally posted by ares834
IIRC, Dumbledore only says that it has been beaten hundreds of times and seems to be counting both defeating it in a duel and sneakin methods.

Can I have the quote for that? dur

And can you prove that "beaten" in that context means in duels or is it just the state of ownership that is beaten? (That's a rhetorical question)

Originally posted by ares834
Considering we have two examples which have the owner being defeated in a straight up duel I would say nah. Really, the only source claiming it is undefeatable is a source that also claims it was crafted by Death.

Oh really? So you know the precise details of both of those duels?

Do tell.

I would be very happy to know those details which thousands of Harry Potters fans ALSO want to know. This had better not be fan-fic stuff...but I can't wait to see what you have.

*I remember what the vow was about: his sister being killed in that three-way duel. Apparantly, that rather stained Dumbles. (not strained...but stained him)

Edit - Just read about a reason for why Albus won the duel against Grendles...

His sister sacrificed her life, willingly, by stepping in the way. The power of "love" triumphed the power of "unbeatable" and Grindelwald could not kill Albus. Makes sense to me, now.

It's a theory...baseless. But it satisfies my frustration with Rowling's writing.

Originally posted by dadudemon
I disagree: it would be a major ass-kicking.

Dumbledore was about equal to Grendelwald and the fight was fairly even. Ol' Grendles had the Elderwand and Dumbledore did not. He was second as a dark wizard only to Voldemort. Yet, Dumbledore still won. Let's move forward a bit: Dumbledore has no vow of "niceness" (meaning he will kill) and he does not have to protect anyone...and his CIS is turned off about the Elderwand being in his posession.*

Conclusion: smooth victory for Dumbledore.

That doesn't follow. Sure, Dumbles may have bested Grendelwald when he had the Elder wand but that doesn't mean he is going to kick Voldy's ass. After all, Voldy would have defeated Grendelwald as well. All I know is that in the books, the two (Voldy and Dumbledore) were preactically dead even.

If Dumbels begins to throw around dark magic he will win, but he isn't going to be able to effortlessly defeat Voldy.

Conclusion: so what I said earlier: only if the owner wills it.

Potentially, yes. Which is why I said it was debatable.

Those are two things he had and used quite well.

Um what? Still dodging my question. Who knew that Harry was the master of the elder wand when he confronted Voldy in the forest?

To the hours part...wha? I think you're exaggerating a bit. That statement usually means more than just "three hours". So let's just say it lasted 3 hours.

Sure. I was just pointing out that the duel was quite long.

To the extraordinary part...yes. But it was called into question. Skeeter said Grendelwald more or less surrendered. So is it possible that Dumbledore wore down Grendelwald with "sith taunts"? lol

Skeeter wasn't the most reliable source. Furthermore, Dumbledore would actually have to defeat Grendelwald to become the master of the wand. If Grendelwald let himself be defeated on purpose than the wand would not switch allegiance.

That MAY be the case. We really do not know why the unbeatable wand was beaten in a duel. I simply suggest that it was more than a straigh up duel.

Potetially, yes. But it could have also just been a normal duel.

It has had hundreds of owners and only two actual duels over it.

It's in Tales of Beedle the Bard, in the section about the Three Brothers. I don't have the book with me at school right now so I was wondering if you could post the quote.

Contradict that if you want to but I have no interest in pouring over pages to prove a point that we both know I'm right about.

I don't think you are TBH. IIRC, Dumbles simply said the wand was beaten hundreds of times which could include both methods.

Oh really? So you know the precise details of both of those duels?

Do tell.

I'm not the one claiming their were traps being thrown around. All we know is the Elder Wand was defeated in a duel hence not undefetable.

Originally posted by quanchi112
yes. Voldemort was in control so he was winning though he didn't kill Albus yet.

You're bringing in books stuff which has no bearing on Voldemort vs. Dumbledore.

The wand never made anyone unbeatable. With all the deathly hallows one is only master of death as well. That unbeatable thing is a myth.

Voldemort wasn't the rightful owner of the elder wand and Draco disarmed Dumbedore. Harry was disarmed by Voldemort in ootp.

Dumbledore needs someone to sacrifice themselves for him to beat the killing curse.

Sorry man, you've already admitted that that scene ended in a stalemate, so phrases like, "he was in control", "he was winning" are rendered moot by the definition of the word, Voldy was simply countered...

also, Draco might as well have been disarming a chair as not only was Dumbly weakened, but he had no intention of fighting back, he wanted to open Draco's eyes, in fact he planned to die there, his death was premeditated, fact, again one step ahead of his enemies...

so you inadvertently made Dumbly look awesome...awesome...

and do you really consider Voldy disarming a 15 year old boy as some high end feat? that's just lame...

as the dreaded Dark lord, Harry disarming Voldy sounds way more impressive than vice versa...

but seeing as how Voldy was defeated, no, accidentally defeated by a newborn, maybe it isn't so bad at all...

Originally posted by ares834
That doesn't follow. Sure, Dumbles may have bested Grendelwald when he had the Elder wand but that doesn't mean he is going to kick Voldy's ass. After all, Voldy would have defeated Grendelwald as well. All I know is that in the books, the two (Voldy and Dumbledore) were preactically dead even.

It does follow: Rowling said that Grendles was Dumble's evil twin. Pretty much even in every way.

Even if you assume the hotly contested position that the Elder Wand is beatable in a simple straight-up duel, you still have the problem of it being the most powerful wand in existance and has at least one feat that no other wand could accomplish: repairing another wand.

You're making the case that Dumbledore would have a tough time against Voldemort.

Voldemort is more powerful than Grendles, we know that, but there's no way to prove that Voldemort is immensely more powerful than Grendles. And, based on the wording, I am more inclined to believe the comparison of Voldemort's superiority is only one of marginality.

So we have Dumbledore, no distractions, no CIS, and not protecting of anyone. He has the Elder Wand. Voldemort, marginally more powerful than Grendles, is somehow supposed to defeat Dumbledore that is now in posession of the Elderwand?

Additionally, how is Dumbledore supposed to defeat Grendles when he is using the end all be all wand when they are virtually equal across the board?

Makes little sense...Albus should have been curb stomped. So there's something else going on.

For me, I could understand if Grendles was significantly inferior to Albus. Then everything would make sense and I would not hold any of the positions that I do, actually.

This is the mistake of Rowling and why fans want her to clarify what exactly went down in that duel.

Originally posted by ares834
If Dumbels begins to throw around dark magic he will win, but he isn't going to be able to effortlessly defeat Voldy.

Obviously, he would have to use some effort...because effort is required to think and move.

But it will be a fairly easy victory.

I'll rate them in a bit.

Originally posted by ares834
Potentially, yes. Which is why I said it was debatable.

Um what? Still dodging my question. Who knew that Harry was the master of the elder wand when he confronted Voldy in the forest?

Sure. I was just pointing out that the duel was quite long.

[QUOTE=13608490]Originally posted by ares834
[B]Skeeter wasn't the most reliable source. Furthermore, Dumbledore would actually have to defeat Grendelwald to become the master of the wand. If Grendelwald let himself be defeated on purpose than the wand would not switch allegiance.

And as we found out, neither was Dumbledore.

And, no, wanting to be defeated and being talked down are not the same thing. I consider what you just did a strawman: you did not properly represent my position.

You can lose your heart and then be swiftly defeated while still holding the Elderwand: see Draco vs. Dumbledore. He was very fatigued and focused on keeping Harry hidden. His plan was for Snape to kill him (willinginly) so that the wand would not pass allegience (similar to what Harry did) and he would choose to move on at King's Crossing. Draco really destroyed Dumbledore's final life plans.

So we konw you can be defeated through inaction which is how pretty much everyone else was defeated. That can now include ol' Grendy based on me remembering Skeeter's words. The short answer: He may not have wanted to duel anymore after being talked down but that doesn't mean he wanted to lose the wand or be defeated...two separate things. It may just mean that he had no desire to continue the duel (likely, it lasted three hours) and Albus disarmed him.

Originally posted by ares834
Potetially, yes. But it could have also just been a normal duel.

Actually, no it is not debatable. I already explained why.

Harry literally had to WANT to do it in order for the wand to be able to kill him. He did so to protect his peeps AND to destroy the last horcrux (not sure on the timeline of that last one).

iirc, Voldemort lost because he did not realize Harry was the proper owner so his final spell failed.

Originally posted by ares834
It's in Tales of Beedle the Bard, in the section about the Three Brothers. I don't have the book with me at school right now so I was wondering if you could post the quote.

I do not have the books and I am not willing to go to the library, ask my sister-in-law for it, or pour over the Skeeter diatribes.

But if you have something other than "beaten hundreds of times" which we know was clarified by examples of "killing in sleep" and "stealing it by physical force" in the instance of Harry taking Draco's wand...

Basically, in order to prove your position, you'd have to find something like: "the Eldwand was won x through duels"

Substitue x for the following:

1. Many times.

2. Almost everytime.

3. The majority of the time.

4. A significant number of times.

5. Quite often.

6. Sometimes.

7. a significant number of times (significance being far greater than just two).

And so forth. Basically, just anything that means far more often than just two times.

Originally posted by ares834
I don't think you are TBH. IIRC, Dumbles simply said the wand was beaten hundreds of times which could include both methods.

I know you don't but you do, actually. IMO, you're just arguing for the sake of it. You know that I'm right: don't you remember Dumbledore explaining the reason it changed so many hands?

Well, I got you to admit that it was beaten hundreds of times. That's about 90% of the way. Now we just have to somehow meet at it either being only two duels or many many duels. I hold that only two duels were done and they were sneaky. You hold that it was many duels.

Originally posted by ares834
I'm not the one claiming their were traps being thrown around. All we know is the Elder Wand was defeated in a duel hence not undefetable.

Actually, I am certain that Dumbles won through things other than magic. It sounds as though he talked Grendles down OR Dumbles was protected due to his sister's sacrifice. I could see Rowling clarifying with: "Yup, when the sister stepped in to protect her brothers, her sacrifice protected Albus through ancient magical luuuuvs".

It seems so Rowling-ish.

Originally posted by draxx_tOfU
Sorry man, you've already admitted that that scene ended in a stalemate, so phrases like, "he was in control", "he was winning" are rendered moot by the definition of the word, Voldy was simply countered...

also, Draco might as well have been disarming a chair as not only was Dumbly weakened, but he had no intention of fighting back, he wanted to open Draco's eyes, in fact he planned to die there, his death was premeditated, fact, again one step ahead of his enemies...

so you inadvertently made Dumbly look awesome...awesome...

and do you really consider Voldy disarming a 15 year old boy as some high end feat? that's just lame...

as the dreaded Dark lord, Harry disarming Voldy sounds way more impressive than vice versa...

but seeing as how Voldy was defeated, no, accidentally defeated by a newborn, maybe it isn't so bad at all...

I'd like to point out that you can end a chess match in a stalemate even if one side is thoroughly trouncing the other.

I do this all the time: I'll be severely owning my opponent and I try to checkmate and I end up preventing them from being able to make a move which results in the game ending in a stalemate.

Despite the fact that it is a stalemate (because it has become "stale"...there's no way to continue the match), I clearly was holding the upper hand at the end.

So do you now understand Quanchi's position better? I hope it makes sense...it makes sense to me.

I do see Dumbledore controlling that fight.

Ares: here are my battle rankings.

Grendelwald: 95*

Voldemort: 96

Dumbledore: 98*

Scale is up to 100.

I have those stats broken down into 4 other categories.

Here they are:

Magical power (power of the magic): 25 points

Magical Knowledge: 25 points

Speed: 25 points

Skill with magic: 25 points

Voldemort:

Speed: 25

Knowledge: 22

Magical Power: 24

Skill With Magic: 25

Dumbledore:

Speed: 24

Knowledge: 24

Magical Power: 25

Skill With Magic: 25

Grendelwald:

Speed: 24

Knowledge: 24

Magical Power: 24

Skill With Magic: 23

*Without Elder Wand. With the Elder Wand, the user automatically jumps to 100x class...being virtually unbeatable in a straigh up duel. Only through sneaky or subversive means can you be defeated. For examples: you can be talked down from the duel and then the other party casts another spell when you no longer desire to duel, you can be killed in your sleep, you can step into a trap that is external of the duel that causes you to become vulnerable.

Edit - It can be argued that Dumbles admitted that Voldemort had more knowledge than he did. I beg to differ. Albus was being modest. Sure, Voldemort may know more bout somethings, but obviously, Albus knew more about others. I would say that, overall, Albus was more knowledgeable especially with the more mundane things concerning magic.

I think Rowlings point giving the story of the Elder wand is to kinda cementate that there is a reason to why DUmbledore is widely considered the best Wizard in the world.

Also concerning Albus dead sister, please recall that Albus explains to Harry that he still does not know to this day who actually killed her, so that whole love thing (considered how Albus was not in his youth exactly his older self) I find rather farfetched tbh.

I would like to ask you DDD, if you believe that the Elder wand would, if given to Harry, ensure him a safe win against Voldemort or Albus?

This fight is so similar to Yoda vs Palpatine for me.

I think dumbledore should win more often than not.

@DDM I understand and I agree with your point...

i just don't agree with Quan that Voldy was "winning" and that the duel ended in a stalemate just because Dumbly survived. Albus effectively countered Voldy...

what more, Voldy was trying to kill Albus, as evidenced by the dialogue before the duel. So the fight was between a Voldy out for the kill and Dumbledore who was trying to protect Harry...

Albus: it was foolish of you to come Tom, the aurors are on their way...

Voldy: which then I'll be gone, and you dead...

**Voldy and Dumbles duke it out**

**Voldy realizes he can't kill Albus, decides instead to possess Harry**

Albus: pussy...

Originally posted by draxx_tOfU
@DDM I understand and I agree with your point...

i just don't agree with Quan that Voldy was "winning" and that the duel ended in a stalemate just because Dumbly survived. Albus effectively countered Voldy...

what more, Voldy was trying to kill Albus, as evidenced by the dialogue before the duel. So the fight was between a Voldy out for the kill and Dumbledore who was trying to protect Harry...

Albus: it was foolish of you to come Tom, the aurors are on their way...

Voldy: which then I'll be gone, and you dead...

**Voldy and Dumbles duke it out**

**Voldy realizes he can't kill Albus, decides instead to possess Harry**

Albus: pussy...

I think we agree.

Dumbledore was winning that fight only because he was controlling it while protecting Harry.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Edit - It can be argued that Dumbles admitted that Voldemort had more knowledge than he did. I beg to differ. Albus was being modest. Sure, Voldemort may know more bout somethings, but obviously, Albus knew more about others. I would say that, overall, Albus was more knowledgeable especially with the more mundane things concerning magic.

Let's go to the text, shaaaall we?

Harry Potter and the Sorceror's Stone, pg 11

... Dumbledore, who was unsticking two lemon drops, seemed not to notice. "It all gets so confusing if we keep saying, 'You-Know-Who.' I have never seen any reason to be frightened of saying Voldemort's name.
"I know you haven't, said Professor McGonagall, sounding half exasperated, half admiring. "But you're different. Everybody knows you're the only one You-Know- oh, all right, Voldemort, was frightened of."
"You flatter me, said Dumbledore calmly."Voldemort had powers I will never have."
"Only because you're too - well - noble to use them."
"It's lucky it's dark. I haven't blushed so much since Madam Pomfrey told me she liked my new earmuffs."

Italics mine. Bold original italics.

Originally posted by siriuswriter
Let's go to the text, shaaaall we?

Harry Potter and the Sorceror's Stone, pg 11

... Dumbledore, who was unsticking two lemon drops, seemed not to notice. "It all gets so confusing if we keep saying, 'You-Know-Who.' I have never seen any reason to be frightened of saying Voldemort's name.
"I know you haven't, said Professor McGonagall, sounding half exasperated, half admiring. "But you're different. Everybody knows you're the only one You-Know- oh, all right, [b]Voldemort, was frightened of."
"You flatter me, said Dumbledore calmly."Voldemort had powers I will never have."
"Only because you're too - well - noble to use them."
"It's lucky it's dark. I haven't blushed so much since Madam Pomfrey told me she liked my new earmuffs."

Italics mine. [/B]

No, that's not the portion I was talking about.

I think it was on book 4 or even 6 where Dumbledore says Voldemort knows more than he does.

The powers comment is obviously to the horcrux stuff (and other ugly magic than Voldy used).

But my point is that he knows it - he would just never use it. He knew how to make a Horcrux, but he would never. So he was able to get inside Voldemort's brain much more easily, which was why he was able to keep ahead of Voldemort by a few steps throughout the series.

Originally posted by siriuswriter
But my point is that he knows it - he would just never use it. He knew how to make a Horcrux, but he would never. So he was able to get inside Voldemort's brain much more easily, which was why he was able to keep ahead of Voldemort by a few steps throughout the series.

Sure, to that stuff, yes.

But he did say Voldemort was better/knew more at one point. There's no way that I am going to go through books 4 and 6 to find it...that's too much reading. 🙁

Originally posted by draxx_tOfU
Sorry man, you've already admitted that that scene ended in a stalemate, so phrases like, "he was in control", "he was winning" are rendered moot by the definition of the word, Voldy was simply countered...

also, Draco might as well have been disarming a chair as not only was Dumbly weakened, but he had no intention of fighting back, he wanted to open Draco's eyes, in fact he planned to die there, his death was premeditated, fact, again one step ahead of his enemies...

so you inadvertently made Dumbly look awesome...awesome...

and do you really consider Voldy disarming a 15 year old boy as some high end feat? that's just lame...

as the dreaded Dark lord, Harry disarming Voldy sounds way more impressive than vice versa...

but seeing as how Voldy was defeated, no, accidentally defeated by a newborn, maybe it isn't so bad at all...

Voldemort was only disarmed due to him not being the rightful ruler but if you want to ignore context I can do the same.

I am not making Dumbledore look awesome I am making Voldemort look even more impressive since he was dominating someone of Dumbledore's caliber with the most powerful wand.

Harry did so only because Voldemort wasn't the rightful ruler of the wand and he was weakened as well every time a horcrux died. Funny how Dumbledore is weakened but you assume Voldemort isn't.

Dumbledore let someone kill him. He didn't want to face the dark lord again. Coward.

Originally posted by draxx_tOfU
@DDM I understand and I agree with your point...

i just don't agree with Quan that Voldy was "winning" and that the duel ended in a stalemate just because Dumbly survived. Albus effectively countered Voldy...

what more, Voldy was trying to kill Albus, as evidenced by the dialogue before the duel. So the fight was between a Voldy out for the kill and Dumbledore who was trying to protect Harry...

Albus: it was foolish of you to come Tom, the aurors are on their way...

Voldy: which then I'll be gone, and you dead...

**Voldy and Dumbles duke it out**

**Voldy realizes he can't kill Albus, decides instead to possess Harry**

Albus: pussy...

you ignored this Quan, which contained some movie cannon...

and...

in Goblet of fire, Harry countered Voldemort's avada kedavra with a simple expelliarmus...

that's twice now that Voldemort's killing curse failed, that's like a record...

and that was after Voldemort inflicted the cruciatus curse on Harry...

Bellatrix Lestrange's cruciatus curse left two people permanently brain damaged, whereas when Voldemort inflicted it on Harry, Harry got up and countered a killing curse...

Lol, that must have been damaging to the ego...

I'll find the text, dadude. I've read this books at least thirty times over each. I'll find the dish on the Elder Wand from Beedle the Bard as well.

*goes searching.*

Ok, in HBP when Voldemort comes to ask for a position as a teacher at Hogwarts, there's some dialogue -

"You call it 'greatness,' then, what you have been doing, do you?" asked Dumbledore delicately.
"Certainly," said Voldemort and his eyes seemed to burn red. "I have experimented; I have pushed the boundaries of magic further, perhaps, than they have ever been pushed -"
"Of some kinds of magic," Dumbledore corrected him quietly. "Of some. Of others, you remain... forgive me... woefully ignorant."
For the first time, Voldemort smiled. It was a taut leer, an evil thing, more threatening than a look of rage.
"The old argument," he siad softly. "But nothing I have seen in the world has supported your famous pronouncements that love is more powerful than my kind of magic, Dumbledore."
"Perhaps you have been looking in the wrong places," suggested Dumbledore.

So here's a passage for "Dumbles knows more."
He does talk about to Harry that he didn't know exactly what had happened in the ten years since he had last seen Tom Riddle, that there were rumors, and many of them Dumbles discusses with Voldemort elsewhere in the above passage, and it turns out that Dumbles knows what he's talking about; he makes "Tom Riddle" uncomfortable with his knowledge.

There's also a bit in the chapter "The Secret Riddle," wherein Dumbledore shows Harry the memory of going to see Tom at the orphanage, straight after Harry and he return from the memory.

pg 276
"He believed it much quicker than I did - I mean, when you told him he was a wizard," said Harry. "I didn't believe Hagrid at first, when he told me."
"Yes, Riddle was perfectly ready to believe that he was - to use his word - 'special,'" said Dumbledore.
"Did you know - then?" asked Harry.
"Did I know that I had just met the most dangerous Dark Wizard of all time [NOTE : more powerful than Grendlewald]?
No, I had no idea that he was to grow up to be what he is. However, I was certainly intrigued by him. I returned to Gogwarts intending to keep an eye upon him, something I should have done in any case, given that he was alone and friendless, but which, already, I felt I ought to do for others' sake as much as his.
"His powers, as you heard, were surprisingly well-developed for such a youn wizard and - most interestingly and ominously of all - he had already discovered that he had some measure of control over them, and begun to use them consciously. And as you saw, they were not the random experiments typical of young wizards: He was already using magic against other people, to frighten, to punish, to control. The little stories of the strangled rabbit and the young boy and girl he lured into a cave were most suggestive..."

Lots of far-seeing sort of things for Dumbles...

Okay dadude, what you're talking about is in Order of the Phoenix, pg 834.

"It is time," he said, "for me to tell you what I should have told you five years ago, Harry. Please sit down. I am going to tell youe everything. I ask only a little patience. You will have your chance to rage at me - to do whatever you li ke - when I have finished. I will not stop you." .....

.... "Five years ago you arrived at Hogwarts, Harry, safe and whole, as I had planned and intended. Well - not quite whole. You had suffcered. I knew you would when I left you on your aunt and uncle's doorstep. I knew I was condemning you to ten dark and difficult years." ....

.... Did I believe Voldemort was gone forever? No, I knew not whether it would be ten, twenty, or fifty years before he returned, but I was sure he would do so, and I was sure too, knowing him as I have done, that he would not rest until he killed you.
"I knew that Voldemort's knowledge of magic is perhaps more extensive than any wizard alive. I knew that even my most complex and powerful protective spells and charms were unlikely to be invincible if he ever returned to full power.
But I knew too where Voldemort was weak. And so I made my decision. You would protected by an ancient magic of which he knows, which he despises, and which he has always, therefore, underestimated, to his cost. I am speaking of course.... [of the power of luuuurve.]

*yay*

Originally posted by draxx_tOfU
you ignored this Quan, which contained some movie cannon...

and...

in Goblet of fire, Harry countered Voldemort's avada kedavra with a simple expelliarmus...

that's twice now that Voldemort's killing curse failed, that's like a record...

and that was after Voldemort inflicted the cruciatus curse on Harry...

Bellatrix Lestrange's cruciatus curse left two people permanently brain damaged, whereas when Voldemort inflicted it on Harry, Harry got up and countered a killing curse...

Lol, that must have been damaging to the ego...

You're ignoring the context behind every single event.

Voldemort wasn't intending on killing him with the crucio curse just letting him experience pain for a moment.

Voldemort's energy blast broke the Hogwarts enchantment by himself showing himself to be more powerful than the rest of the deatheaters.

There's a reason why the deatheaters followed him and no one would dare stand up against him. Fear.

Dumbledore let Snape kill him out of fear of facing the dark lord again.

Originally posted by siriuswriter
Ok, in HBP when Voldemort comes to ask for a position as a teacher at Hogwarts, there's some dialogue -

"You call it 'greatness,' then, what you have been doing, do you?" asked Dumbledore delicately.
"Certainly," said Voldemort and his eyes seemed to burn red. "I have experimented; I have pushed the boundaries of magic further, perhaps, than they have ever been pushed -"
"Of some kinds of magic," Dumbledore corrected him quietly. "Of some. Of others, you remain... forgive me... woefully ignorant."
For the first time, Voldemort smiled. It was a taut leer, an evil thing, more threatening than a look of rage.
"The old argument," he siad softly. "But nothing I have seen in the world has supported your famous pronouncements that love is more powerful than my kind of magic, Dumbledore."
"Perhaps you have been looking in the wrong places," suggested Dumbledore.

So here's a passage for "Dumbles knows more."
He does talk about to Harry that he didn't know exactly what had happened in the ten years since he had last seen Tom Riddle, that there were rumors, and many of them Dumbles discusses with Voldemort elsewhere in the above passage, and it turns out that Dumbles knows what he's talking about; he makes "Tom Riddle" uncomfortable with his knowledge.

There's also a bit in the chapter "The Secret Riddle," wherein Dumbledore shows Harry the memory of going to see Tom at the orphanage, straight after Harry and he return from the memory.

pg 276
"He believed it much quicker than I did - I mean, when you told him he was a wizard," said Harry. "I didn't believe Hagrid at first, when he told me."
"Yes, Riddle was perfectly ready to believe that he was - to use his word - 'special,'" said Dumbledore.
"Did you know - then?" asked Harry.
"Did I know that I had just met the most dangerous Dark Wizard of all time [b][NOTE : more powerful than Grendlewald]?
No, I had no idea that he was to grow up to be what he is. However, I was certainly intrigued by him. I returned to Gogwarts intending to keep an eye upon him, something I should have done in any case, given that he was alone and friendless, but which, already, I felt I ought to do for others' sake as much as his.
"His powers, as you heard, were surprisingly well-developed for such a youn wizard and - most interestingly and ominously of all - he had already discovered that he had some measure of control over them, and begun to use them consciously. And as you saw, they were not the random experiments typical of young wizards: He was already using magic against other people, to frighten, to punish, to control. The little stories of the strangled rabbit and the young boy and girl he lured into a cave were most suggestive..."

Lots of far-seeing sort of things for Dumbles...

Okay dadude, what you're talking about is in Order of the Phoenix, pg 834.

"It is time," he said, "for me to tell you what I should have told you five years ago, Harry. Please sit down. I am going to tell youe everything. I ask only a little patience. You will have your chance to rage at me - to do whatever you li ke - when I have finished. I will not stop you." .....

.... "Five years ago you arrived at Hogwarts, Harry, safe and whole, as I had planned and intended. Well - not quite whole. You had suffcered. I knew you would when I left you on your aunt and uncle's doorstep. I knew I was condemning you to ten dark and difficult years." ....

.... Did I believe Voldemort was gone forever? No, I knew not whether it would be ten, twenty, or fifty years before he returned, but I was sure he would do so, and I was sure too, knowing him as I have done, that he would not rest until he killed you.
"I knew that Voldemort's knowledge of magic is perhaps more extensive than any wizard alive. I knew that even my most complex and powerful protective spells and charms were unlikely to be invincible if he ever returned to full power.
But I knew too where Voldemort was weak. And so I made my decision. You would protected by an ancient magic of which he knows, which he despises, and which he has always, therefore, underestimated, to his cost. I am speaking of course.... [of the power of luuuurve.]

*yay* [/B]

PERFECT! You got both portions of what I was talking about: that Voldemort is more powerful than Dumbles, overall, but that Dumbles knows about magic that Voldemort doesn't (he considers them mundane...the love things and others).

So, yes, book 5, not 4.

I have read all the books only once. 😄

I bow to your awesomeness. hug