Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

Takes place on Geonosis.

ROTS Kenobi.

Originally posted by vader11
ROTS Kenobi.

Why?

He's better than Luke in sabers, perhaps in force too.

he contended with and beat (although luckily) ROTS Vader, who would decimate OT Vader in sabers, who could have beaten Luke. Not using this as an ABC, just that it demonstrates skill level with a saber and that Kenobi is just on another level.

Yes, but to be fair Luke beat Vader, who beat ANH Kenobi, who was superior to ROTS Kenobi...

And just because you say that you're not using an ABC argument doesn't mean that you're not.

That's exactly what it means, because I'm not basing the win off that alone. It was my way of showing their different skill levels.
Vader was holding back against Luke, so that kind of negates that feat, as Luke himself knew that VAder could have taken him out at anytime.
We all know that ROTS Vader was superior to Kenobi, however he got lucky and won, but still contended with him for almost 12 minutes. And i believe that ROTS Kenobi would beat ANH Ben.

This is just going to turn into a big thing about more formal training and bad choreography, so why even get into it. Why are the Kenobi supporters being asked why he'd win? Why don't you all tell us why Luke would win...and bring up something other than he beat his father who was holding back.

There is no doubt that ROTS Kenobi is better than ROTJ Luke.

Yeah, Kenobi wins this. Luke could probably give him a hard time, but it's a solid victory for Obi-wan.

I am one of the people here who rank Luke the most highly. However, even I say he loses here, and it isn't very close, either (though no curbstomp). Luke did get past ROTJ Vader's defenses, however, if Vader had used the Force on Luke Luke would have been dead, and Luke might not have beaten Vader had it not been for his rage. Kenobi managed to beat ROTS Vader, who is above ROTJ Vader, though he was somewhat lucky - still, he was close to ROTS Vader. He has defeated General Grievous and it wasn't super close. He was one of the two biggest hero's in the Clone Wars. He has more speed than Luke, more skill, is smarter, has accomplished greater feats. Force is a lot closer (Luke seemingly used the Force to hide himself from Vader, for a while, at least, and deflected some of the objects that Vader tossed at him in ESB off of him using the Force) but Kenobi still likely takes him in that category, as his Force Push was equal to Anakin's in their ROTS duel, and Anakin collapsed a football stadium sized room just by yelling.

Originally posted by jollyjim311
Yes, but to be fair Luke beat Vader, who beat ANH Kenobi, who was superior to ROTS Kenobi...

And just because you say that you're not using an ABC argument doesn't mean that you're not.
I seriously doubt that ANH Kenobi > ROTS Kenobi. Kenobi says this, but it's in the same context that he says he will become more powerful if Vader strikes him down. It's not really true. Luke beat Vader when enraged and Vader wasn't using the Force, it was just a saber duel.

RotS Kenobi takes this with ease. It is highly improbable that someone who hasn't had a year of using a lightsaber and mastering the Force is more skilled than someone who has had lots of years in practicing with a saber and Force mastery, plus, Kenobi is a fairly powerful Jedi after all.

I'm 93.1412% sure that Obi-Wan would win this one.

Originally posted by jollyjim311
Yes, but to be fair Luke beat Vader, who beat ANH Kenobi, who was superior to ROTS Kenobi...

And just because you say that you're not using an ABC argument doesn't mean that you're not. Vader definitely didn't "beat" ANH obi, the fact is that obi smiled and sacrificed himself. that really doesn't even count as a win because thier lightsabers were locked when obi let go.

Well, Obi wouldn't have won the duel, Vader would've eventually, as evidence points to. So he is better at least.

Originally posted by darthsith19
I seriously doubt that ANH Kenobi > ROTS Kenobi. Kenobi says this, but it's in the same context that he says he will become more powerful if Vader strikes him down.

We have the quote and the fact that Kenobi kept up with his skills and went on missions, plus he continued to study with Qui Gon, and was still a few decades younger than Dooku, meaning age couldn't have been a huge factor.

Originally posted by jollyjim311
We have the quote and the fact that Kenobi kept up with his skills and went on missions, plus he continued to study with Qui Gon, and was still a few decades younger than Dooku, meaning age couldn't have been a huge factor.
Kenobi went on a couple of missions, besides the few missions he went on (and a few missions in 19 years isn't enough to keep his skills up very much) what proof do we have that he kept his skills up? Yes, he studied how to become a Force Ghost, but that doesn't make him a better fighter at all.

I m glad you said that, then why were you so adamant in the vs, AOTC OB1 thread that he kept his skills up?

I said he likely practiced a little to stay in shape. Here I say that he didn't keep them up very much. Not much of a contradiction, I still think he likely practiced a little, just nowhere near enough to make him ahead of ROTS Kenobi and not enough to say level with his ROTS self, either.

ROTS Kenobi wins here.

Originally posted by darthsith19
I said he likely practiced a little to stay in shape. Here I say that he didn't keep them up very much. Not much of a contradiction, I still think he likely practiced a little, just nowhere near enough to make him ahead of ROTS Kenobi and not enough to say level with his ROTS self, either.

We know that he did, weather he even needs to would be a better question. Yoda rarely used his lightsaber, but when the situation called for it, he had all the skills. Sidious didn't use his for 10 years and then he killed three of the best swordsmen ever. Yaddle hadn't used hers for a long period of time as I understand, too.

It's like riding a bike, and I s'pose. Plus Kenobi did exercise and stay up with his skills.

I am with obi-wan. He is better a better duelist. By the way, ROTS Obi>ANH Obi. Vader himself said that obi-wan was weak in that time. "Your powers are weak old man".

Originally posted by jollyjim311
We know that he did, weather he even needs to would be a better question. Yoda rarely used his lightsaber, but when the situation called for it, he had all the skills. Sidious didn't use his for 10 years and then he killed three of the best swordsmen ever. Yaddle hadn't used hers for a long period of time as I understand, too.

It's like riding a bike, and I s'pose. Plus Kenobi did exercise and stay up with his skills.
Proof that Kenobi kept up his skills? Going on a few missions in 19 years doesn't keep your skills up. Proof that Yoda didn't spar with other Jedi to keep his skills up? In The Defense of Kamino Mace asks Yoda if he'd care to spar, but Yoda declines, saying that he got sufficient practice with Dooku, so that proves that Yoda does spar sometimes. Ye,s Sidious was still good after 10 years, but maybe at the time of TPM when he did practice he was a lot better, for all we know then he was like as good as he is in DE. What the hell does Yaddle have to do with this?

Really I want to see proof that Kenobi exercised and stayed up with his skills.


Have you ever heard of something called a taunt? That's what Vader is doing, ANH Kenobi really is quite strong.

Proof?

Kenobi would pwns Luke's as hard.

Originally posted by kamhal
Proof?
As if matching Vader in the film isn't proof enough, this is from the script:
The two powerful warriors stand motionless for a few moments with laser swords locked in mid-air, creating a low buzzing sound.

lool. Is that your magnific prrof that shows that obi-wan was more powerful then in ROTS? Just lol...

Originally posted by darthsith19
In The Defense of Kamino Mace asks Yoda if he'd care to spar, but Yoda declines, saying that he got sufficient practice with Dooku

Not only that, but it shows that even though the duel with Dooku occurred like a month previous, Yoda still felt that he had practiced enough.

Your a fvcking moron, you know that? I NEVER stated that ANH Kenobi > ROTS Kenobi, as a matter of fact, I stated in this very thread:



You asked for proof that "ANH Kenobi really is quite strong." I provided proof that he was strong, just as you asked. I NEVER stated that he was more powerful than ROTS Kenobi. Damn!


True, but did ANH Kenobi spar like once a month? With whom? Training Droids would help him keep up but it's take several horus of training with one of those to equal sparring someone that's near your strength.

It seems people here have trouble in education, really. Again, i say, is THIS your proof? You are talking about the first plot ever made about the first seen jedi master and sith lord, what would you expect the narrator would say? But you can't counter vader's statement, in fact nothing showed it wrong and in fact obi-wan seems quite weak, so i have no reason to think that luke>obi because he beat a vader who beat ANH obi-wan, this is the logic i want to denie.

LOL Obi-Wan destroys Luke.

Originally posted by kamhal
It seems people here have trouble in education, really. Again, i say, is THIS your proof? You are talking about the first plot ever made about the first seen jedi master and sith lord, what would you expect the narrator would say? But you can't counter vader's statement, in fact nothing showed it wrong and in fact obi-wan seems quite weak, so i have no reason to think that luke>obi because he beat a vader who beat ANH obi-wan, this is the logic i want to denie.

First off, Obi-Wan wasn't defeated by Vader in the traditional sense. He surrendered to Vader before Vader could overwhelm him, and we therefore do not have any idea of who would've won that fight.

Secondly, it seems like you're saying that ANH Obi-Wan was a superior duelist to the ROTS Obi-Wan. Do you have any proof to support this statement? I say that before you start insinuating the fact that other people are idiots, you first take a look at your argument.

My God... I am saying exactly the countrary, that ROTS Obi-Wan>ANH Obi-Wan...

Originally posted by kamhal
It seems people here have trouble in education, really. Again, i say, is THIS your proof? You are talking about the first plot ever made about the first seen jedi master and sith lord, what would you expect the narrator would say? But you can't counter vader's statement, in fact nothing showed it wrong and in fact obi-wan seems quite weak, so i have no reason to think that luke>obi because he beat a vader who beat ANH obi-wan, this is the logic i want to denie.
Vader's statement counts for nothing as he was taunting Kenobi. Lucas is the writer, and he says it so it goes. GL's word > Vader's word. Plus kenobi matched Vader in ANH, are you saying that Vader is weak? That's abc, plus Vader > Luke, he ony lost because he didn't use the Force, in some post-ROTJ book it says that Vader could have owned Luke with the Force.

Yes, actually vader is not that strong, his lightsaber technique lacks a lot of speed amd he lacks much mobility, that's why Darth Maul almost killed him for example... Vader was much stronger before Mustafar then in a ANH

Originally posted by kamhal
Yes, actually vader is not that strong, his lightsaber technique lacks a lot of speed amd he lacks much mobility, that's why Darth Maul almost killed him for example... Vader was much stronger before Mustafar then in a ANH
Except Darth Maul is really strong. He is referred to in The Ultimate Visual Guide as 'one of the deadliest Sith apprentices in history'. And I'm afraid you'll makr yourself quite unpopular here if you start going around and saying that Vader is weak.

And I never said that Vader didn't get weaker after ROTS.

Originally posted by kamhal
My God... I am saying exactly the countrary, that ROTS Obi-Wan>ANH Obi-Wan...

Didn't look much like it.

First,i really don't care if I will be "unpopular" because i say what i see, which means a vader who, even though may be stronger with the force then much of their prequels foes, he is not that good with lightsaber. Maul almost make him to dust and he couldn't keep up with a not so strong luke skywalker in ROTJ. Also, the speed of his lightsaber is so low in the movies that makes you think how he can beat anyone.

And who said Maul was bad? But as far as i know, he was not the best and here are several jedis or siths who could beat him, from windu to dooku, from yoda to sidious, even obi-wan at his prime or anakin in ROTS pre-Mustafar could do it. And these are all movie characters, i am not even try to arg about EU characters.
So, if an anakin skywalker could blast to pieces Darth Maul before Mustafar and Vader barely beat him (and as far as i saw he beat him the same way obi-wan beat maul, with some luck and using his lack of attention), i think it's quite clear that he lost power, potential and lightsaber skill. Also, GL himself said anakin's potential was reduced to less then half so, if there are touchy people about him is not my problem, really.

Anyway, Obi>Luke to me.

Why not? Because he isn't flashy?

But Luke was fighting with the dark side and, as I already stated, Maul is one of the deadliest Sith apprentices in history. Anoon Bondara lost to Maul and is he not a good swordsman? How about Qui-Gon?

It isn't that slow, and your entire proof as to why Vader isn't strong is because he isn't fast? Since when did fast = good?

Yup, however, all of the fore mentioned are in the top 20 list of strongest force users ever.

No, because he is not that fast, lacks a lot mobility and he actually lost in lightsaber to Luke even though he had much training or almost lost to Maul. By the way, Maul can be one of the best ever, so what? I am not saying vader is in the top 20 or even in the top 10 of the greatest siths or force users, but am i saying is that he is not as good as the really elite ones like the ones i mentioned, and so this can't be used to show that Obi-Wan didn't get weaker, because in that case Luke wold beat obi, and i really don't think this could happen against ROTS Obi-Wan, the one who beat Anakin Skywalker.

By the way, weren't Agen Kolar, Kit Fisto and Saesee Tiin considered some of the finest, greatest duelists the Jedi Order ever produced? Even them, any of them are far from the top force users. I could just apply the same logic to Maul.

Anyway, let's stop with this for now.

I say Kenobi wins. His lightsaber skill was greater then Luke's one in my opinion and even in force powers he could have some advantage.

Originally posted by kamhal

By the way, weren't Agen Kolar, Kit Fisto and Saesee Tiin considered some of the finest, greatest duelists the Jedi Order ever produced?

According to the novelization, yes they were. And I was a super big Tiin fan. Fisto was cool, also. Kolar.... eh, he's alright. I'll be forever angry and disappointed at Lucas for letting them get owned without putting up a fight.

I would say Obi Wan Beats luke because to me ROTJ luke is around the same Skill lvl of Obi Wan in AOTC or at the most AOTC Anakin