SirBronzeFalcon

This is the problem with the modern mentality. When a character suffers a defeat he is denigrated, the rest of his curriculum no longer counts; but then warriors with embarrassing curriculums are fanaticised or chimerised by part of the fandom (because of the love they receive from part of the fandom due to a possible love story). Prince Baelor Breakspear commanded the Dornish host in the final stage of the Battle of the Redgrass Field. In The Hedge Knight the author wrote him as a puissant warrior, a warrior who should have faced the dark and the finest knight of his generation (in my interpretation, chivalrous virtues). And the duel/combat with Maekar does not invalidate his combat ability. This is a duel/combat in which many (too many) factors come into play. Two brothers who love each other are facing each other; Baelor is trying to stop Maekar (because he trusts Duncan and believes it is the right thing to do) and Maekar is trying to save his son's life. This is extremely volatile.

Perhaps it could be a possible route the author decides to take, regardless of whether or not Lyanna & Rhaegar had a possible love story. The books establish that Lyanna was close to her brothers. Lyanna practised swords with Benjen secretly in the godswood (Eddard, who rarely visited the North during his stay in the Vale, knew of this secret) and we know that he travelled from Winterfell to the Rills to ride with Brandon (perhaps it was through Brandon that Lyanna judged Robert); they were all close siblings. If Eddard had been sighted in the distance and the three Kingsguards had implied that they intended to spill blood (as they proved in Eddard's vivid dream), I can see a mentally unstable and depressed Lyanna (remember that she was 16 years old and that her whole world had been doomed) doing this at the thought of the possible death of another of her siblings. But I don't know how "Promise me, Ned" would fit into all this. In the end it will all depend on precisely how the author wants the scene outside of Eddard's vivid dream to play out.

I have not denied that the White Bull was an elite warrior (his name appears twice in line with the Dragonknight) at his prime (at his youth). All I said was that he was old. Nor have I denied that Ser Barristan the G.O.A.T. was a legendary warrior in his prime (for God's sake, among all, his name appears most often in line with the Dragonknight). All I have said is that he was in his 40s, and I didn't deny his performance at Trident. A morbidly obese man by the name of Big Belly Ben escaped from Jaime. Jaime failed. And of course that by the time of the Rebellion he was not unquestionably one of the best. Do you want Jaime's demonstrable prime point? Where Jaime was truly an elite warrior? Where Jaime forged himself in the melee (whether he won or not, as we unfortunately don't know)? His demonstrable prime point is from 290 to 299. The most misrepresented quote by the fandom. A complete fallacy. I won't even bother to refute it. You use hyperbole as an argument. Hyperbole immediately refuted by Loras ("Dead men, every one." ASOS - Jaime VIII). Eddard describes Robert as pearless and describes Arthur as the finest of the seven of the Kingsguard, not of all the knights he had ever seen. You don't believe me? Let's check the text: NOTE: And I'm not denying that Arthur is elite, I'm just making my point. Sorry if I'm being too direct, it is not my intention. This is what the author wrote. Take it or leave it, but stop misrepresenting information. And I have not denied that Arthur is an elite warrior (his name appears once in line with the Dragonknight). These were my words: And I didn't say Jon Connington was an elite warrior. He is simply not set up to be an elite warrior. All I said is that Jon Connington was a man who was already famous for his prowess with arms and who had to leave the Golden Company, after only a year's stay, because his prowess was worthy of songs.

The books establish that he was already a famous warrior and a warrior worthy of songs, not merely capable; but because of your obvious contempt or fanaticism for some characters, you choose to deny it. You use the White Bull as an example of one of the best warriors, but I must remind you that the text makes it clear that he was already old (he must have been in his 40s or 50s, if not older). You also use Barristan, but decide to forget that he was in his forties; the author is not an idiot and understands that an athlete does not have the same performance in his forties as in his twenties and thirties (if you don't believe me, you can check Barristan's chapters). You use young Jaime as an example of one of the best, a 15-year-old squire whose performance against the Kingswood Brotherhood was regrettable. He failed against an outlaw by the name of Big Belly Ben, a morbidly obese man (in other words: no stamina, no agility, no speed), and he failed against the Smiling Knight, an outlaw who had previously been mastered by Barristan in his 40s. And you use as an example the one who has achieved the least of all the elite warriors. What are Arthur's victories? He got a questionable victory. And the truth is that it can collapse with the very text of the books. All he has is the author's configuration (and that's something I'm not going to deny in a character, regardless of whether I like the character or not)... just like every character in the text. NOTE: And I have nothing against Barristan. Ser Barristan the Bold is the Greatest of All Times!; he has proved this throughout his life, and continues and will continue to prove this in the books.

This is what the author wrote in the books: I explained this in my first reply.

His performances prove it. His performance at Harrenhal proved this. And his performance at the Trident proved this. When the author sets up a character {Rhaegar} as an elite jouster, he is at the same time setting him up as an elite rider. But when he sets up a character {Robert} as an incompetent jouster, the author does not exclude him from being a great rider. I will give you an example that is established in the books themselves: Loras & Garlan. The author has the rule of rival characters better with the lance [joustist, rider (control over your horse, etc.)] and better with the sword [warrior, rider (control over your horse and arms)]. But this same configuration does not make that Loras, a warrior who is part of the warrior's cream (author's words, not mine) [he is a contender], had a better performance as a mounted warrior than Garlan, a warrior who is part of the warrior's cream [he is an elite warrior]. He was almost as glorious as Garlan in battle and the difference between the two is of one calibre (is a way of speaking), and the truth is that Loras's performance itself was worthy of songs (author's words, not mine). If Loras, a contender, could not close the skill with Garlan, an elite warrior, Rhaegar himself, a talented warrior who is simply not among the warrior's cream, simply could not close the skill gap with Robert, an elite warrior who truly is among the warrior's cream. I hope I have explained myself well.

You decide to ignore that Robert was a great rider (I said rider, not jouster) and you just make up the information.

I have made it clear that the author established this through SSM and interviews. And anyway, the author establishes in the books that it is not necessary to be a melee winner to make a name for yourself or be a famous warrior. The War for the White Cloaks had several warriors who were grand favourites and who were not among the winners, one of them was Queen Alysanne's later sworn shield and another was one of her champions; and in the following tourney for the completion of the Dragonpit, one of the biggest melees ever held, the author wrote that the queen was wise to forbid her champions from participating due to the brutality of the combat, as it witnessed a song of steel such as King’s Landing had never seen before (Ser Lucamore Strong, the winner, was a beast). And my reconstruction is on the third page.

That is not how it works. Rhaegar did both? Perfect. I have no problem with that. Rhaegar has never been described as weak, nor have I implied that. And I agree; neither Rhaegar is Oberyn, nor Robert is Gregor. All Robert shares with Gregor is that the pillar of his athleticism is strength (just as Jaime's one is speed). But isn't that the pillar of Arthur's athleticism? The difference is that the author is not writing a strongman contest, he is writing about warriors. Warriors whose athleticism is strength. Extrapolating from real life, it would be like confronting the legendary Big George Foreman against the best of the strongmen (the brutalisation would be of Biblical proportions). The author writes about the first, not the second. As I said before, is Arthur not among these men? * It is not a question to answer, it is a question to make my point and to reflect. Talent is not the result of training, skill is the result of training; in other words, skill is the development and mastering of your talent (regardless of the grade of talent of the person). Talent is the potential of a person. Rhaegar does not qualify as a prodigy, Robert does. Prior to the tourney at Harrenhal, the author has already established that Robert was making a name for himself in tournaments in his years as a knight (the more knowledgeable of the books should help me out here.... If I'm not mistaken, Robert was knighted between the ages of 16 and 17, wasn't he?) and already established him as "a strong warrior" (all of this can be seen in the author's SSM and interviews); and in the great tourney at Harrenhal, tournament that can be defended as the greatest tournament of all the books, Robert (19 years old) had a magnificent performance in the melee. Robert does qualify as a prodigy, Rhaegar does not. And with all this I'm not saying that Rhaegar was not talented (if you watch my battle reconstruction, you will see that I've said it). All I'm saying is that Robert does fulfil the requirements of a prodigy, as his career as a teenager confirms to us (16 or 17 until the age of 19). Rhaegar excelled? Perfect. Robert excelled because he was naturaly huge and had passion for it? No. Robert excelled because he developed his immense talent.

I have seen your previous answers and you don't understand the difference between Ring IQ and athleticism or between talent and prodigy... Or several of these elements at the same time. I will start with Robert's athleticism. ... You have to understand that Robert is an elite warrior and, therefore, his athleticism is also elite. The author describes his strength as freakish; he has only ever described the Mountain in this way. If we take into account all the author's information and make a reconstruction of the bull-like characters [ASOS - Jaime III], we realise that Robert is the second strongest person on the list (second only to the Mountain, whose strength is established as inhuman and is, in the words of the author, the true giant in the series). Robert has the stamina to wage three battles in a single day, slaying one of the three enemy commanders in the process and, thereafter, capturing the famous Silveraxe in a duel. The demon has the stamina to command and fight the Battle of the Trident from beginning to end, the battle that shaped his generation, the battle that shaped the main books; the Demon of the Trident commanded, opened a bloody path and doomed Prince Rhaegar... He brutalised the Trident in both mind and body, unleashing the seven hells and making the Trident his eighth hell. That's how he earned the name Demon of the Trident. But the author decides to go beyond that. Do you know why? Because Robert was fresh from his victory on the Trident and looked like an antlered god. This is how the author wrote it. ... Beyond his athleticism, there is his champion's will. Robert has the greatest demonstrable will in the text. He demonstrated this throughout his life. He proved it when the Mad King demanded his head and that of his brother Eddard. He proved it in his first battle, was the first man to cross the enemy wall and slayed the enemy commander, fighting the way a king should fight... There was a king who fought the way a king should fight, his name was Daemon Blackfyre. He proved it during the three battles at Summerhall, as I summarised earlier. He proved it during the Battle of the Bells; still wounded and without his warhammer, he almost slayed the famous Jon Connington (a man who was already famous for his prowess with arms and who had to leave the Golden Company, after only a year's stay, because his prowess was worthy of songs). He proved it at the Battle of the Trident, as I summarised earlier. In his brother's words, he overcame the odds 5 to 1. And in the words of the greatest, he smashed Pyke (and would have done the same with Sunspear, and none of the Dornish present question the claim of Ser Barristan the G.O.A.T.). He proved it at the end of his life, depressed and drunk and obese and gutted and ripped and past his prime, he slayed the boar and stayed alive longer than a man has the right to. Why? Because Robert was never a man to leave the battleground so long as a foe remained standing. Why? Because that is his nature. Because that is how the author wrote it. And I better not talk about his talent in combat or his talent as a rider (I said rider, not jouster) or of all the information that the author has truly given over the years about Robert as a warrior because it is already too long.

Thanks, @Kal-L.

To answer this question, we must first make a reconstruction of the battle. NOTE: This is a reconstruction with information prior to The Winds of Winter. Once we get The Winds of Winter, things may change. ... & & The commanders fell. First fell Ser Jonothor Darry; then fell Ser Barristan Selmy (my interpretation is that the host commanded by Ser Barristan fell to the northern host commanded by Eddard Stark); and finally Prince Lewyn Martell and the Dornish host, threatening the demon's left side, fell to the host of the Vale in a brutal charge led by young Ser Lyn Corbray. * Participation of several houses of the riverlands [Darry, Ryger & Mooton] and a Tyrell host in Prince Rhaegar's army at the Trident. * My interpretation is that Jason Mallister was taking down Rhaegar's own standard-bearers. And the duel took place. ... & & & The truth is that Robert commanded and fought in the Battle of the Trident from beginning to end. The duel was brief. Rhaegar slightly wounded Robert, and Robert struck down Rhaegar in a masterful and brutal blow; the truth is that Robert was fresh from his victory on the Trident and looked like a antlered god. All Eddard Stark did was lead Robert's vanguard; and the truth is that Robert showed up the same day that Eddard Stark arrived at King's Landing. ... What does Valyrian steel grant to the bearer? Valyrian steel doesn't grant greater skill in combat; valyrian steel offers greater destructive capability against enemy weaponry. It is also lighter than steel, which, in a certain way, improves the bearer's athleticism. All this can be seen in the books themselves and in other materials written by the author. ... Having made all this clear, I can now answer your question. If Rhaegar had been armed with Valyrian steel, could he have defeated Robert at the Trident? I'm of the opinion that in one night anything can happen... But I would not favour Rhaegar over Robert. What I can assure you is that Rhaegar would not be favoured over Robert. No competent jury would favour Rhaegar over Robert, whether or not he is armed with Valyrian steel. I'm sorry if I repeat myself or if I'm too direct. Sincerely, the author already gives us the answer on his page about King Robert's warhammer: “Rhaegar fought valiantly, Rhaegar fought nobly, Rhaegar fought honorably. And Rhaegar died.” This is the excerpt from the books with which the author decided to begin. The author could have chosen any other fragment from the books, and he chose this one. He then proceeds to tell us that Robert is a model of war, a legendary warrior, etc. Where Rhaegar is a talented warrior, Robert is a legendary warrior; where Rhaegar is an elite jouster, Robert is a great rider (I said rider, not jouster). This is how the author has configured his characters. At the Trident, Robert achieved one of the greatest feats in the books: he commanded, opened a bloody path and doomed Prince Rhaegar. This feat is surpassed only by Barristan at the Stepstones and Daemon at the Redgrass Field. The author didn't give him in vain a name of Biblical proportions.

Hello everyone. I have a question. ... The other day I saw a publication [https://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php?/topic/155236-how-did-rhaegar-get-his-reputation-as-a-warrior/page/3/#comments] in which @Ran said that George R.R. Martin confirmed outside the books that Jaime Lannister is the kind of talent that comes along once in a thousand years; he reiterated this shortly afterwards in another comment. I know that the author confirmed in a SSM that Jaime is an All Time Great; and in ADWD, through Barristan, he established him as a generational talent. But if Ran's comment is true, we would be talking about the kind of talent that is beyond generational... The kind of talent of Daemon Blackfyre. I was wondering if someone could give me a link to the interview or tell me where I could find it.