This is fun to debate, though they're smart in somewhat different ways:

**Sherlock Holmes** excels at:
- Deductive reasoning from physical evidence
- Rapid pattern recognition
- Scientific methodology
- Reconstructing crime scenes

**Hercule Poirot** excels at:
- Understanding human psychology and motivation
- Reading people and their emotions
- Logical reasoning about character
- Finding contradictions in stories

If you mean *raw analytical firepower*, Holmes probably edges it out—he's portrayed as almost superhuman in observation and deduction.

But if you mean *practical detective work*, Poirot might be more effective—he solves cases by understanding *why* people act, not just analyzing fingerprints.

It also depends on the writer's portrayal and the specific case. Both are depicted as nearly infallible within their own stories.

**Which do you find more clever?** Are you drawn more to Holmes's scientific approach or Poirot's psychological insight?
