In Response to Gen: Part 2

For me, Cuff almost seems to be kind of like a dissapointment, just becuase he falls short of the standards set by Holmes. His methods don't seem as effective or i guess sleuthy enough to me now after reading abut Holmes, as if he just completly falls short of what i wanted.

Yes, Cuff is a bit of a disappointment in The Moonstone simply because the story does not revolve around him and his methods. For starters, Cuff is not even the protagonist of the story, severely hurting any chances of him being as good as Holmes. Secondly, Cuff is not even present for the majority of the story, let a lone heard from. Holmes has also been known to disappear from the story for extended periods of time (as is evidenced by his absensure for the majority of Hound of the Baskervilles), having said that, Holmes still appears in the story to grab the bull by the horns and illuminate the unsuspecting Watson. On the other hand, Cuff disappears from the story and does not return, ever. Not even when the final big reveal is being made does Cuff make a belated appearance. And third and most important, Cuff breaks the most valuable rule of sleuthing: he actually makes a mistake. I do not mean misinterpreting a clue only to get it right later on, no, i'm talking blatantly stating "The Moonstone was never stolen from the house, and i shall soon prove this", yet bey the end we discover that it was really stolen. Cuff does not even return to redeem himself later on, thus dashing any hopes of him being as good or even close to as good as Homes.