Vizzini glared at the man who had dared to think he could ruin the infallible plans of a Sicilian. The man in black was smart, no doubt, but comparatively he might as well have been Fezzik.

Why else would he have challenged the smartest man in the criminal world to a battle of wits?

He was also very quick and surprisingly strong, based on how he got past both Inigo and Fezzik. The thought of his two ex-mooks almost brought a scowl to his face, but instead he stared intently at the two goblets in front of him. It wouldn't do to show the man just how close to ruining everything he had gotten. Speaking of... his two lackeys were undoubtedly dead by now. Well, that's what they got for trying to be fair.

Fair. Ha. What a ridiculous notion.

The rest of the world viewed fairness as giving up all of your tactical advantages to face your enemy. But, was that really fair? No, because fair is if you have it, you can use it.

The swordsman must have waited for the man to reach the top of the cliffs, when really, the fair thing to do would have been taking advantage of his obvious upper hand and letting the idiot fall to his death. The man in black obviously thought so too; he could never have beaten Inigo fairly; probably asked for a moment of rest (which the gullible and trusting swordsman would afford him) and then shoved him off the cliff. That would take stamina and stealth, two things that wouldn't help him now.

The giant... well, he was a different story. One could never be sure if he intentionally decided to "play fair" or if he had just missed smashing this masked stranger's head all over the rock outcroppings on the first try and then didn't know what to do. Either way it would have devolved into the intellectually-decaying fist-flying that lower primates like the man across from him used to solve problems, and no one could beat Fezzik in a fight.

Therefore, the man in black was a cheat.

A cheat who wore a stupid cloth over his face and claimed it comfortable.

That wasn't just petty thinking (the most intelligent man in the world didn't do petty, only logic) there was obviously a reason for the cloth. It probably had to do with the silent girl to his left. He probably wanted to ransom her, and make sure she didn't see him.

Like he, the great Vizzini, would believe some half-baked excuse for a reason as that.

But back to the matter at hand.

The poisoned goblets. Which to choose... a normal man would have obviously poisoned the one in front of his enemy, but the man in black had already shown himself to be wise to the ways of creative reasoning (read: cheating) so he couldn't pick the one in front of the man. Of course, he would know of Vizzini's intelligence and could have counted on his plan being figured out. So obviously, the goblet in front of Vizzini was out as well.

Then there was strength- most people would have placed the poison as far away from themselves as possible which ruled out his goblet. But the man in black was undoubtedly an overconfident fool, ego bolstered by his victories over Vizzini's henchmen, so he would trust in his strength to save him from the poison. Both goblets were unsafe. But, like it or not, the man in black was not a genius who would take into account all of these factors; no, his primitive brain would force him to place the poison far away.

Either he could plainly take the unpoisoned goblet, or make the man believe he had won.

Decisions, decisions.

Well, he couldn't resist. Switch the goblets, both drink their own, oh, he looked so smug. If only the man knew; and he would. Eventually.

But it would be too late by then, and the last thing he would see would be Vizzini, laughing at him.

Oh, it was perfect. Absolutely beautiful. His finest work, and he didn't even have to do the poisoning! The high and mighty man in black had practically committed suicide when he sat down!

So... Why wasn't he panicking?

And then the world went black.

My sister tells me I'm a bit messed up. Aw well.