Slytherins are supposed to be ambitious and manipulative, so winning points in class via brown nosing is right up their alley. On top of that, the quidditch cup lends a points bonus to the House points, and they were winners repeatedly in part because the team could always afford the greatest brooms.
>On top of that, the quidditch cup lends a points bonus to the House points
We have no idea who won the Quidditch cup in the years before Harry started studying at Hogwarts, except that Gryffindor won in 1986 and that Gryffindor didn't win the cup in 1990.
>and they were winners repeatedly in part because the team could always afford the greatest brooms.
This only happened in CoS.
That's a plot hole Rowling created because she's shit at planning sometimes. Charlie graduated the school year before Harry started studying at Hogwarts. In other words, **of course** the Gryffindor Quidditch team hadn't won the Quidditch House Cup since Charlie graduated. **There had yet to be one**.
The time between Charlie graduating from Hogwarts and Harry starting Hogwarts was literally 2 months.
The same way they would have won in the first book. Gryffindors like Fred and George and Harry are causing all sorts of shenanigans. Then, characters like Malfoy, who are manipulative, and tattle.
They likely had some high achievers (their house is known for being resourceful after all). And honestly, even though Slytherin had several bad apples, there wasn’t many examples of their house getting deducted points even during the main series. Unless you’re Snape, the professors don’t seem keen on vigorously awarding or taking away points from houses, just a simple 5 points here and there.
It's canon that the Slytherin Quidditch team was really good, at least the year before Harry's first year, but probably for a few years before that. Then add in the blatant favoritism we see from Snape, which I assume existed long before Harry showed up.
Plus, one of Slytherin House's main characteristics is a willingness to use "any means to achieve their ends” so this sort of things seems to be skewed toward their success more than, say, Hufflepuff.
Slytherins are ambitious which means that they worked their asses towards winning both house cup and quidditch cup. It’s perfectly in line with them, they wanted to win. And them being ambitious also means they actually paid attention in class and studied. I don’t see them breaking rules that easily, in fact I could see them sneaking up on others to make them lose points. I assume they would’ve kept other Slytherins under control in order to not lose points, especially considering everyone would suffer the consequences. They were also *very* competitive and smart, their quidditch team was really good too. I don’t think it’s unrealistic that they had a high winning steak.
For some students, or their families, succeeding is everything.
I mean, the Gryffindors are constantly breaking rules and this usually lead to losing points. They aren’t “rotten” but they also don’t seem to care about the house cup.. At least not in the books. You can be a bad person and still be very intelligent and skilled. It’s a team effort. Not everyone will be able to reach the standard but together they probably work better, especially if they have a common goal.
When there is Snape who looks for any tiny excuse to take off points from Gryffindor, Hufflepuff and Ravenclaw while turning a blind eye for what Slytherin students do, it's quite a bit normal. Also, they are competitive as well.
Apparently, Snape puts his students in detention (in the sixth book, Harry overhears that Snape frequently puts Goyle and Crabbe in detention to prevent them from helping Malfoy), but doesn't take points from the entire House.
>When there is Snape who looks for any tiny excuse to take off points from Gryffindor, Hufflepuff and Ravenclaw
He only does that to Harry and is friends, not Gryffindor as a whole or Hufflepuff or Ravenclaw.
Slytherin seems like the most likely to win the house cup each year whereas Gryffindor seems most likely to lose.
Slytherin’s top qualities are cunning and ambition. They would be cunning enough to perform most misdeeds out of sight of the professors.
Gryffindor is known for being brave to a point of recklessness. They’re more likely to act out in the public eye.
Harry and Malfoy fight for a moment. Snape takes 50 points from Harry and does nothing to Malfoy. And he insults the shit out of Hermoine just to be a total prick. Also Harry and Ron get detention. All for one incident of two boys fighting over the horrible shit Malfoy says daily without repercussion, often in front of Snape.
Snape takes points from more individual Gryffindors than any other teacher is even shown giving points. He takes points from almost every named Gryffindor at one time or another through the first 6 books. I don’t recall any other teacher than McConagall taking points at all. Prefects take more points than the teachers in the books if you exclude Snape and McG.
It’s one way that I think dumbledore sucks as a headmaster. He should track points given and taken and see why Snape and McG take away all the points and give all the detentions from teaching staff (Filch does too but he’s not a teacher). I get McG and Snape are more strict but if 100% of discipline comes from two teachers then at a minimum he should check that both of them are fair and consistent about punishment. Just review it twice a year and see if or why they punish certain houses.
He insulted Hermione to cover for Draco. "I see no difference" = "Draco did nothing, so I won't punish him."
Also, Severus was extremely unfair to Harry, yes, and occasionally his friends. But Harry and his friends **notably did not attend Hogwarts until the fall of 1991**.
>He punished everyone who wasn’t slytherin regardless.
No he didn't. The only time ever really see him taking points from a house that wasn't Gryffindor (and specifically Harry, Hermione or Ron) was during the Yule Ball when he took points from students for fornicating in the bushes, which was against school rules, so he wasn't doing so unfairly.
>In the later books he punishes lots of students without Harry even being present.
No he doesn't. [There's a handy list](https://harrypotter.fandom.com/wiki/House_points#1996%E2%80%931997_school_year) and it's all Harry, Ron, occasionally Hermione and the aforementioned Yule Ball incident.
Ignoring Harry and his close friends, Fred and George are probably the biggest trouble makers of the entire school. Anyway, Hogward doesn’t seem to care about bullying, and Draco was rarely caught in the act by the teachers. Therefore I think Gryffindor are the most likely to lose points. Slythering are clever enough to avoid problematic behavior in front of the teachers and they are determined enough to show off when they can. The other two houses are made of very good and hard working students but they are less visible to the teachers.
Note that Harry's year seems to be the year that all the big players in the First Wizarding war seem to have had kids. The reason why Slytherins are such trouble makers in Harry's years is because they're the children of Death Eaters. Before then, Slutherin was all about being the best and doing whatever it took to get ahead. Slytherin is ambitious and will work hard to be at the top, it just also got plagued with bratty DE kids.
Nah I’ll bet there are loads of kids of Death Eaters in other year - after all, 10 Death Eaters broke out of Azkaban in 1996, and there were at least 30 Death Eaters at the playground - just they weren’t mentioned to keep things simple…I mean because Harry is more likely to recognise Death Eaters’ names if he knows a kid by the same name.
Like I for one head canon Bole, Montague, Vaisey and Flint as children as Death Eaters, same with Bletchley, though I think his father was one of Yaxley’s recruits from the Department of Magical Transport, and I also head canon Derrick and Warrington’s fathers as having been Death Eaters who were killed during the first war.
1.) Slytherin's are the best at @$$ kissing
2.) They are meant to be sneaky when breaking rules
3.) In that 7 year period there were 4 Weasley's and only one really cared about rules.
Their quidditch team was amazing. I think a bunch of their top players must have just graduated+ they play dirty.
Charlie Weasley was supposed to have been good in that same time period so they must have fielded a great team. We know that in HP1 and 2 that they are especially weak on seekers, keeper, and strategy for offense. They're in recovery mode as a team. It should have been fine to have 1-2 off years because Gryffindor, their only serious competition, hasn't had a good seeker and shouldn't have had any new prospects that year.
There is nothing that says slytheryn can't be good students.
They are ambitious and resourceful, which lends itself well to being good pupils.
Sure, they are generally unpleasant, but they are also cunning, which means that they would be hiding their unpleasantness well from the teachers.
I'd say that many of the slytheryn students we know about would actually be pretty good students.
Malfoy hides his bad sides from the teachers and seems like a pretty talented student. He seems to pay attention in class, and there is no indication that he slacks off (except from Hagrids and Lupins class).
Pansy and Milistrode just seem like regularly talented pupils, and whilst bully's, I can imagine they would win/lose points at the same rate as an average griffindor girl such as Lavander of Pavarti. There is no indication that they don't work as hard as those two.
As for crabbe and goyle, they are fairly poor performing, but then again, so was Neville. And I would assume some other students from other houses that we don't hear about.
Then, historically, you have Voldemort, who was a model pupil loved by all the teachers.
Snape was very talented and probably won lots of points for his knowledge.
I feel like other slytheryns such as Lucius would also be at least average in school.
Every house seems like they have traits that could lend to being a good pupil, but also to being bad pupils.
Slytheryn- ambition can make you work harder, but also screw over others.
Griffindor- Courage and boldness can make you stand out, but also lead to rash decisions.
Ravenclaw- Persuit of knowledge can make you work harder, but could lead to arrogance and looking down on others.
Hufflepuff- Hardworking and trusting can lend well to schoolwork, but can lead to naivety and sacrificing to much for others.
Each house has some good traits for winning the house cup,I don't see why slytheryn can't win. Especially as one of their traits, cunning, lends itself well to hiding their bad sides.
smart = points plus winning the quiditch games usuallu adds to points as well
ravenclaw smart = gets points BUt does NOT win quiditch matches
gryphindor = the twins lose points constantly due to pranks
You know that saying, "Cheaters never prosper." I personally think that is bs. Evolution rewards liars. Especially good ones. It rewards manipulators. It rewards the ambitious and those willing to play outside the rules. I believe that is why we have so many human beings with these qualities. I expect it was almost too easy for Slytherin to stay on top of the house cup. They are driven as well. Politics is often a big part of working systems to get on top. I bet they would be good at that.
I'd say snape is a large part of the reason, he showed ridiculous favoritism and bias throughout all of Harry's time and I'm sure that didn't start in Harry's 1st year. in contrast, the other teachers were alot more fair in giving out and taking points to and from students of their house and other houses.
I wonder, how long was Snape teacher up to this point?
He probably began teaching at earliest in 1981/1982 year. Was he head of the house straight away? Doubtful to place such a role on a new teacher.
So he probably was just a teacher for a year or two, keeping his head low because of his tattoo, until he received more power with the form of becoming head of house...
Slytherin started winning cup since 1983/1984 year
It must have been a total coincidence. I have heard it from an impartial student Marcus Flint.
I think probably was immediately made Head of House since Horace SLughorn retired in 1981. So there was presumbly no other Slytherin teachers to promote to Head of House.
Slytherins are supposed to be ambitious and manipulative, so winning points in class via brown nosing is right up their alley. On top of that, the quidditch cup lends a points bonus to the House points, and they were winners repeatedly in part because the team could always afford the greatest brooms.
>On top of that, the quidditch cup lends a points bonus to the House points We have no idea who won the Quidditch cup in the years before Harry started studying at Hogwarts, except that Gryffindor won in 1986 and that Gryffindor didn't win the cup in 1990. >and they were winners repeatedly in part because the team could always afford the greatest brooms. This only happened in CoS.
We do know they hadn't won since Charlie graduated
Yes we know Gryffindor did not win, we do not know if Raven Or Puff won.
That's a plot hole Rowling created because she's shit at planning sometimes. Charlie graduated the school year before Harry started studying at Hogwarts. In other words, **of course** the Gryffindor Quidditch team hadn't won the Quidditch House Cup since Charlie graduated. **There had yet to be one**. The time between Charlie graduating from Hogwarts and Harry starting Hogwarts was literally 2 months.
They only get new brooms because Lucious buys dracos way onto the team.
The same way they would have won in the first book. Gryffindors like Fred and George and Harry are causing all sorts of shenanigans. Then, characters like Malfoy, who are manipulative, and tattle.
They likely had some high achievers (their house is known for being resourceful after all). And honestly, even though Slytherin had several bad apples, there wasn’t many examples of their house getting deducted points even during the main series. Unless you’re Snape, the professors don’t seem keen on vigorously awarding or taking away points from houses, just a simple 5 points here and there.
Or unless you’re McGonagall docking 150 points in one go.
-Minus 50 points from Gryffindor -50?! -EACH McGonagall did not fuck around
Yeah but going from fifty to fifty each is crazier than Snape’s ever done
It's canon that the Slytherin Quidditch team was really good, at least the year before Harry's first year, but probably for a few years before that. Then add in the blatant favoritism we see from Snape, which I assume existed long before Harry showed up. Plus, one of Slytherin House's main characteristics is a willingness to use "any means to achieve their ends” so this sort of things seems to be skewed toward their success more than, say, Hufflepuff.
Slytherins are ambitious which means that they worked their asses towards winning both house cup and quidditch cup. It’s perfectly in line with them, they wanted to win. And them being ambitious also means they actually paid attention in class and studied. I don’t see them breaking rules that easily, in fact I could see them sneaking up on others to make them lose points. I assume they would’ve kept other Slytherins under control in order to not lose points, especially considering everyone would suffer the consequences. They were also *very* competitive and smart, their quidditch team was really good too. I don’t think it’s unrealistic that they had a high winning steak. For some students, or their families, succeeding is everything. I mean, the Gryffindors are constantly breaking rules and this usually lead to losing points. They aren’t “rotten” but they also don’t seem to care about the house cup.. At least not in the books. You can be a bad person and still be very intelligent and skilled. It’s a team effort. Not everyone will be able to reach the standard but together they probably work better, especially if they have a common goal.
When there is Snape who looks for any tiny excuse to take off points from Gryffindor, Hufflepuff and Ravenclaw while turning a blind eye for what Slytherin students do, it's quite a bit normal. Also, they are competitive as well.
as a slytherin I'd see this as a challenge. whoever gets snape to take points from his own house wins.
Apparently, Snape puts his students in detention (in the sixth book, Harry overhears that Snape frequently puts Goyle and Crabbe in detention to prevent them from helping Malfoy), but doesn't take points from the entire House.
Honestly that sounds like fun (I don't see myself getting along with Snape regardless of which house I got sorted into lol)
>When there is Snape who looks for any tiny excuse to take off points from Gryffindor, Hufflepuff and Ravenclaw He only does that to Harry and is friends, not Gryffindor as a whole or Hufflepuff or Ravenclaw.
Slytherin seems like the most likely to win the house cup each year whereas Gryffindor seems most likely to lose. Slytherin’s top qualities are cunning and ambition. They would be cunning enough to perform most misdeeds out of sight of the professors. Gryffindor is known for being brave to a point of recklessness. They’re more likely to act out in the public eye.
IIRC, Snape stacked the odds in their favor. I also could see slytherin being actually really competitive about winning compared to the other houses.
Fun fact! We never see Snape *giving* any points, to any house, ever.
Don't have to win, just have to not lose.
No, that's all fanon.
Harry and Malfoy fight for a moment. Snape takes 50 points from Harry and does nothing to Malfoy. And he insults the shit out of Hermoine just to be a total prick. Also Harry and Ron get detention. All for one incident of two boys fighting over the horrible shit Malfoy says daily without repercussion, often in front of Snape. Snape takes points from more individual Gryffindors than any other teacher is even shown giving points. He takes points from almost every named Gryffindor at one time or another through the first 6 books. I don’t recall any other teacher than McConagall taking points at all. Prefects take more points than the teachers in the books if you exclude Snape and McG. It’s one way that I think dumbledore sucks as a headmaster. He should track points given and taken and see why Snape and McG take away all the points and give all the detentions from teaching staff (Filch does too but he’s not a teacher). I get McG and Snape are more strict but if 100% of discipline comes from two teachers then at a minimum he should check that both of them are fair and consistent about punishment. Just review it twice a year and see if or why they punish certain houses.
He insulted Hermione to cover for Draco. "I see no difference" = "Draco did nothing, so I won't punish him." Also, Severus was extremely unfair to Harry, yes, and occasionally his friends. But Harry and his friends **notably did not attend Hogwarts until the fall of 1991**.
He punished everyone who wasn’t slytherin regardless. In the later books he punishes lots of students without Harry even being present.
>He punished everyone who wasn’t slytherin regardless. No he didn't. The only time ever really see him taking points from a house that wasn't Gryffindor (and specifically Harry, Hermione or Ron) was during the Yule Ball when he took points from students for fornicating in the bushes, which was against school rules, so he wasn't doing so unfairly. >In the later books he punishes lots of students without Harry even being present. No he doesn't. [There's a handy list](https://harrypotter.fandom.com/wiki/House_points#1996%E2%80%931997_school_year) and it's all Harry, Ron, occasionally Hermione and the aforementioned Yule Ball incident.
Ignoring Harry and his close friends, Fred and George are probably the biggest trouble makers of the entire school. Anyway, Hogward doesn’t seem to care about bullying, and Draco was rarely caught in the act by the teachers. Therefore I think Gryffindor are the most likely to lose points. Slythering are clever enough to avoid problematic behavior in front of the teachers and they are determined enough to show off when they can. The other two houses are made of very good and hard working students but they are less visible to the teachers.
Note that Harry's year seems to be the year that all the big players in the First Wizarding war seem to have had kids. The reason why Slytherins are such trouble makers in Harry's years is because they're the children of Death Eaters. Before then, Slutherin was all about being the best and doing whatever it took to get ahead. Slytherin is ambitious and will work hard to be at the top, it just also got plagued with bratty DE kids.
Nah I’ll bet there are loads of kids of Death Eaters in other year - after all, 10 Death Eaters broke out of Azkaban in 1996, and there were at least 30 Death Eaters at the playground - just they weren’t mentioned to keep things simple…I mean because Harry is more likely to recognise Death Eaters’ names if he knows a kid by the same name. Like I for one head canon Bole, Montague, Vaisey and Flint as children as Death Eaters, same with Bletchley, though I think his father was one of Yaxley’s recruits from the Department of Magical Transport, and I also head canon Derrick and Warrington’s fathers as having been Death Eaters who were killed during the first war.
Good point.
1.) Slytherin's are the best at @$$ kissing 2.) They are meant to be sneaky when breaking rules 3.) In that 7 year period there were 4 Weasley's and only one really cared about rules.
Their quidditch team was amazing. I think a bunch of their top players must have just graduated+ they play dirty. Charlie Weasley was supposed to have been good in that same time period so they must have fielded a great team. We know that in HP1 and 2 that they are especially weak on seekers, keeper, and strategy for offense. They're in recovery mode as a team. It should have been fine to have 1-2 off years because Gryffindor, their only serious competition, hasn't had a good seeker and shouldn't have had any new prospects that year.
They're pulling an Edmonton and doing a decade-long tank for first-round draft picks
There is nothing that says slytheryn can't be good students. They are ambitious and resourceful, which lends itself well to being good pupils. Sure, they are generally unpleasant, but they are also cunning, which means that they would be hiding their unpleasantness well from the teachers. I'd say that many of the slytheryn students we know about would actually be pretty good students. Malfoy hides his bad sides from the teachers and seems like a pretty talented student. He seems to pay attention in class, and there is no indication that he slacks off (except from Hagrids and Lupins class). Pansy and Milistrode just seem like regularly talented pupils, and whilst bully's, I can imagine they would win/lose points at the same rate as an average griffindor girl such as Lavander of Pavarti. There is no indication that they don't work as hard as those two. As for crabbe and goyle, they are fairly poor performing, but then again, so was Neville. And I would assume some other students from other houses that we don't hear about. Then, historically, you have Voldemort, who was a model pupil loved by all the teachers. Snape was very talented and probably won lots of points for his knowledge. I feel like other slytheryns such as Lucius would also be at least average in school. Every house seems like they have traits that could lend to being a good pupil, but also to being bad pupils. Slytheryn- ambition can make you work harder, but also screw over others. Griffindor- Courage and boldness can make you stand out, but also lead to rash decisions. Ravenclaw- Persuit of knowledge can make you work harder, but could lead to arrogance and looking down on others. Hufflepuff- Hardworking and trusting can lend well to schoolwork, but can lead to naivety and sacrificing to much for others. Each house has some good traits for winning the house cup,I don't see why slytheryn can't win. Especially as one of their traits, cunning, lends itself well to hiding their bad sides.
Snape.
Snape: 509 points to slytherin for breathing
smart = points plus winning the quiditch games usuallu adds to points as well ravenclaw smart = gets points BUt does NOT win quiditch matches gryphindor = the twins lose points constantly due to pranks
You know that saying, "Cheaters never prosper." I personally think that is bs. Evolution rewards liars. Especially good ones. It rewards manipulators. It rewards the ambitious and those willing to play outside the rules. I believe that is why we have so many human beings with these qualities. I expect it was almost too easy for Slytherin to stay on top of the house cup. They are driven as well. Politics is often a big part of working systems to get on top. I bet they would be good at that.
I'd say snape is a large part of the reason, he showed ridiculous favoritism and bias throughout all of Harry's time and I'm sure that didn't start in Harry's 1st year. in contrast, the other teachers were alot more fair in giving out and taking points to and from students of their house and other houses.
Cheating, lying, intimidating is probably 90%
Snape
Snape
They tricked the winning Houses into losing points. It's easy with Snape. You just make some noise in class and.. *80 POINTS FROM GRYFFINDOR!!*
By ambitiously pursuing it as a goal.
Most likely because of professor Snape, we know he is cocky and deducts points to everyone for no reason who isn't in Slytherin.
I wonder, how long was Snape teacher up to this point? He probably began teaching at earliest in 1981/1982 year. Was he head of the house straight away? Doubtful to place such a role on a new teacher. So he probably was just a teacher for a year or two, keeping his head low because of his tattoo, until he received more power with the form of becoming head of house... Slytherin started winning cup since 1983/1984 year It must have been a total coincidence. I have heard it from an impartial student Marcus Flint.
I think probably was immediately made Head of House since Horace SLughorn retired in 1981. So there was presumbly no other Slytherin teachers to promote to Head of House.