Board Thread:Consensus Track/@comment-1018594-20150729000741/@comment-1018594-20150906073007

So basically, what you're saying is that Itachi > Orochimaru, but Orochimaru > Jiraiya, since they fought. So, logically, Itachi > Orochimaru > Jiraiya.

But here's the thing: those events happened years before the start of the series. In Part I, Itachi himself says that the best him and Kisame could do against Jiraiya would end in a stalemate. So it's clear that Jiraiya > Orochimaru. But does than now mean Jiraiya > Itachi > Orochimaru? Also, Orochimaru's full power was never shown, so we'll never know if he truly was stronger than the other two. The entire thing is inconclusive.

I'd say that we base events on chronological order. The last mention/proof of Jiraiya's power was Pain saying that the only reason he won was because he didn't know about the Six Paths of Pain. Since that was the latest mention, that's the one we'll use to measure Jiraiya's full power. Obviously, Nagato being invincible is hyperbole, so that statement would be thrown out and his actual feats would be used to calculate his full power.

Does all of this make sense?