How did Dumbledore beat Grindelwald?

[masteroc]

Just wondering how Dumbledore could have beaten Grindewald if Grindwald had the unbeatable Elder Wand?

Sorry if this question has been answered before, i did a quick search and came up with nothing.

[kala_way]

That's a good question. In the 3 Bro's story, the Elder Wand brother got surprised in his sleep and killed IIRC. I imagine it was some sort of battle of wits in which he was able to convince him to set it aside, or distract him into losing/dropping it or something.

Obviously, Grindelwald felt remorse for his actions in later life, given his response to Voldemort, so I don't imagine him being as "focused" in his attack as Voldemort was. But that's just my impression.

[TJReich]

I was going to put this in my post also, knew I forgot something (not sure if my post even went up yet though). I was quite stumped by this as well, since their duel was legendary. If their duel is legendary it definitely sounds like a real battle, in which case you'd expect Grindelwald would win. Dumbledore even admits that he is maybe a sliver more skilled. Being so closely matched and having the Elder Wand would put Grindelwald in the winners seat, I'd imagine.

[ravclawprefec]

It is a good question. I can only assume Dumbledore outwitted him in some way. Since he is an accomplished legilimens (sp?) maybe he was able to get inside Grindy's head and use what he found to his advantage.

[owlpostgirl]

I was confused by this also. DD is a great wizard and all but...Grindelwald was mighty talented. DD might have used something to throw Grindelwald off - some form of wandless magic.

[Calitranx]

There is something we dont know about the wand because Ollivander says "the owner must always fear attack." Which is ironic considering its unbeatable why would the owner fear/worry about attack.

[Thatz]

I think that the battle would've been absolutely spectacular, but that Dumbledore didn't win through pure force. He probably won due to his intellect, though I'm sure they had an amazing duel beforehand.

[bertzie]

Grindelwald wasnt the true master of the wand. He stole it, just like Voldemort did. That is why the wand passed down through murders, because the wand could not be defeated, one had to kill the previous master while he was unable to defend himself.

Dumbledore got it from Grindelwald because Grindelwald wasnt the master. Dumbledore then became the master.

Draco got it from Dumbledore because Dumbledore was protecting Harry, not attempting to defend himself.

Harry got it from Draco because Draco did not have the wand in his possession.

[Calitranx]

The problem with that is, does beating the person that just has possession of the wand make you the owner of the wand? He killed Snape because he wanted to defeat the owner not necessarily anyone in possession of the wand.

[Chupacabra]

i always thought that the wand being unbeatable was just an exaggeration in the kids story and i thought in reality it was just a very powerful wand but not unbeatable

[Thatz]

Originally Posted by Chupacabra

i always thought that the wand being unbeatable was just an exaggeration in the kids story and i thought in reality it was just a very powerful wand but not unbeatable

Yeah, that could be true. I mean, it obviously can't be unbeatable, I'm just guessing that it amplifies the user's magic to the point where it's almost impossible to beat them.

[bertzie]

Originally Posted by Calitranx

The problem with that is, does beating the person that just has possession of the wand make you the owner of the wand? He killed Snape because he wanted to defeat the owner not necessarily anyone in possession of the wand.

Gince after the wand was stolen, the original master of the wand probably relinquished the mastery of it, allowing the wand to be passed to annother. One can safely assume that the master before Grindelwald had given up mastery of the wand after Grindelwalds defeat, thereby allowing the wand to choose Albus as its new master.

This is of course all theory and guesswork.

[desertfox]

I too believe the wand is not invincible, just really powerful. just like the resurrection stone cant totally revive a person back from death, and the cloak cant make its wearer totally disappear.

[evitagen]

Originally Posted by Chupacabra

i always thought that the wand being unbeatable was just an exaggeration in the kids story and i thought in reality it was just a very powerful wand but not unbeatable

yeah i was kinda thinking that too, because it's the wand that finds the wizard, so many some people are more talented with their wand then any random person with the elder wand.

[TnK]

Originally Posted by bertzie

Grindelwald wasnt the true master of the wand. He stole it, just like Voldemort did. That is why the wand passed down through murders, because the wand could not be defeated, one had to kill the previous master while he was unable to defend himself.

Dumbledore got it from Grindelwald because Grindelwald wasnt the master. Dumbledore then became the master.

Draco got it from Dumbledore because Dumbledore was protecting Harry, not attempting to defend himself.

Harry got it from Draco because Draco did not have the wand in his possession.

That doesn't make sense to me. If Dumbledore became the master of the wand after NOT killing the person who wasn't the master of the want to begin with... How does that make Dumbledore the master of the wand?

That's like saying Voldemort became the master of the wand after killing Snape, who wasn't the master of the wand either.

I always figured, like a few people have already said, that it was just a very powerful wand, and in the hands of a powerful wizard makes them pretty close to untouchable. At least, until they let their guard down.

[SKasparRollins]

This was brought up in MuggleCast too. Their explanation was that as Grindelwald was not the worthy possessor of the wand (just like Dumbledore and Voldemort weren't either) it truly wasn't the unbeatable wand.

[bertzie]

Originally Posted by TnK

That doesn't make sense to me. If Dumbledore became the master of the wand after NOT killing the person who wasn't the master of the want to begin with... How does that make Dumbledore the master of the wand?

That's like saying Voldemort became the master of the wand after killing Snape, who wasn't the master of the wand either.

I always figured, like a few people have already said, that it was just a very powerful wand, and in the hands of a powerful wizard makes them pretty close to untouchable. At least, until they let their guard down.

we can only assume that the original master of the wand died after Dumbledore took control of the wand. The reason Voldemort never became master of the wand is because mastery passed from Dumbledor to Draco.

[persian85033]

Well, Grindewald didn't defeat Gregorovitch, exactly, did he? Maybe that's why the wand failed for him. I hope we get some answers about the wand in the encyclopedia, because JK HAS to write it!!! What are we going to do if she doesn't!

[SKasparRollins]

Originally Posted by bertzie

we can only assume that the original master of the wand died after Dumbledore took control of the wand. The reason Voldemort never became master of the wand is because mastery passed from Dumbledor to Draco.

Wait, now this makes no sense whatsoever...so if we assume Grindelwald was in fact the true master of the Elder Wand (which he shouldn't have been, considering he stole it, yet Dumbledore says he actually was), and Dumbledore beat him anyway, and became the new master of the wand, even though neither he, Grindelwald nor Voldemort were worthy possessors of the Hallows, then how...?

My only explanation is this: the Elder Wand is not truly unbeatable unless the master is worthy of possessing it. Otherwise it's just a normal wand, and can be won in battle just like Harry won Draco's wand (and apparently, Bellatrix's and Wormtail's as well.) The only thing I wonder is why Grindelwald stole the wand when he knew perfectly well he could not be the master if he stole it...

[sickoftv]

Well... back to the subject of the post, rather than the unanswerable quagmire of Elder Wand sucession, I'd imagine that there is an intrensic flaw in the wand. In HBP Slughorn mentioned that "recklessness" was a side effect of Felix Felicis, and I can see overconfidance being a side effect of posessing the Elder Wand.

Even more importantly, the wand itself might NEED to change hands in order to maintain its power. Since it is so very powerful, everyone tries to take it, right? Well what if it works the other way? Maybe it is so very powerful because of the long history of conflict for its ownership.