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

Obi-Wan takes a big majority in each scenario.

Obi-Wan dominates all scenarios.

He dominates all but two. He still wins somewhat comfortably however.

Originally posted by NewGuy01
He dominates all but two. He still wins somewhat comfortably however.
Savage has no feats suggesting he is good with two sabers.

Kenobi didn't either though, did he?

Originally posted by Jedi Mom
Kenobi didn't either though, did he?
He stalemated Ventress early in the clone wars after days of grueling torture with two sabers. Besides, Opress was a total noob with one saber as seen during his training with Dooku. If you arent competent with one saber, you aint going to be competent with two considering the difficulty it takes to do so (Ahsoka didnt start off with two sabers until later in TCW).Now that he's dead, he'll never have any feats with two sabers.

I forgot he was dead, lol.

Opress has 2 advantages over Kenobi. Physical strength and Raw TK Power . The second is not available here so he loses a vast majority.

But we shouldn't say Opress can't take even 1 win Imo, simply because he has beaten him in the past.

By two blades, I was referring to the staff

Also, Savage improved a lot, as seen in his fight with Sidious from season 5.

Originally posted by Sybrael
Also, Savage improved a lot, as seen in his fight with Sidious from season 5.
Kenobi had Savage dead to rights in Revival after he kicked him down. If Maul hadn't blocked Kenobi He'd be dead. And when Savage first beat Kenobi, the Jedi was distracted by Maul somehow coming back to life. It was a surprise intimidation fear advantage for the brothers.

And the fight with Sidious is not the best example of his skill. One on one, Sidious was trolling Savage, even not using his lightsabers for a while. As MY said, Kenobi dominates all scenarios.

He lasted longer against Sidious alone than the Saesee Tinn, Agen Kolar and Kit Fisto did

Originally posted by Sybrael
He lasted longer against Sidious alone than the Saesee Tinn, Agen Kolar and Kit Fisto did

True. Dave Filoni even outright confirms he performed better than them.

But Kenobi's still better than him.

Obi-wan should take all these matches handily.

Kenobi in every match.....

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
But we shouldn't say Opress can't take even 1 win Imo, simply because he has beaten him in the past.
Past is irrelevant. Because in present time Kenobi has learned from his mistakes from the past.

This is really a no contest. If Opress has any chance of beating Kenobi, he needs the force. Without the force, Kenobi takes all departments handily.

In no category does Kenobi beat Opress handily.

Originally posted by Intrepid37
In no category does Kenobi beat Opress handily. Why

They have comparable feats.

Originally posted by Intrepid37
They have comparable feats.

Kenobi broke his leg and sliced his hand off with Maul as backup. In what dimension do they have comparable feats?

How 'bout beating Ventress and fighting as an equal with Koon?

Obi-Wan takes this handily.

Originally posted by Intrepid37
How 'bout beating Ventress and fighting as an equal with Koon?

Ventress's fighting style is with the use of dual sabers so was at a slight disadvantage in that fight.

Still Ventress and Opress are probably pretty equal. But Kenobi is clearly above them both.

Opress actually beat Koon down in Sith Hunters. But what does that prove in relation to Kenobi?

Originally posted by Intrepid37
How 'bout beating Ventress and fighting as an equal with Koon? Seriously. Do you really see Obi Wan losing any of these scenarios?

Savage fended off Anakin and Obi-Wan in season 3 and has grown in power since those days according to the Clone Wars episode guide.

Obi-Wan fending off Maul and Savage is as much an outlier as the aforementioned feat.

Otherwise, Savage (and Ventress as well) has proven himself to be Council level material. And contrary to the baseless Obi-Wan fanwank, I've seen no evidence to conclude he's inherently better than the likes of Koon, Fisto, Gallia, et al.

If Obi-Wan has an advantage, it's slight. He will not be owning Savage by an means in a general scenario.

Originally posted by mnat801
Seriously. Do you really see Obi Wan losing any of these scenarios?

Well he has lost scenario 1 in TCW Season 4 finale. Opress also seemed to overpower Kenobi (who was fighting alongside Anakin) in season 3.

So let's not pretend it's not even possible for Kenobi to ever lose to Opress in any scenario.

Originally posted by The_Tempest
Savage fended off Anakin and Obi-Wan in season 3 and has grown in power since those days according to the Clone Wars episode guide.

Obi-Wan fending off Maul and Savage is as much an outlier as the aforementioned feat.

Otherwise, Savage (and Ventress as well) has proven himself to be Council level material. And contrary to the baseless Obi-Wan fanwank, I've seen no evidence to conclude he's inherently better than the likes of Koon, Fisto, Gallia, et al.

If Obi-Wan has an advantage, it's slight. He will not be owning Savage by an means in a general scenario.

I think this might be under rating Kenobi a bit personally. He did seem to be stalemating Maul in their one on one in "Revival" even before his 2 on 1 performance. He wasn't exactly getting stomped by Maul in the season 4 finale either.

I'd personally put Maul and Kenobi approx on par in a sword fight. Putting them both above Opress, Ventress and most council members, based on TCW Season 4 finale and Season 5 showings.

Originally posted by The_Tempest
Savage fended off Anakin and Obi-Wan in season 3 and has grown in power since those days according to the Clone Wars episode guide.

Obi-Wan fending off Maul and Savage is as much an outlier as the aforementioned feat.

Otherwise, Savage (and Ventress as well) has proven himself to be Council level material. And contrary to the baseless Obi-Wan fanwank, I've seen no evidence to conclude he's inherently better than the likes of Koon, Fisto, Gallia, et al.

If Obi-Wan has an advantage, it's slight. He will not be owning Savage by an means in a general scenario.
Spot on.

The only reason I give Kenobi a slight advantage over the council-members you mentioned is because of his rank as a level-8 duelist and his performances against Maul.

Originally posted by Intrepid37
How 'bout beating Ventress and fighting as an equal with Koon?

Kenobi has bested Ventress as well, and is considered by Windu to be a superior duelist than himself.

Originally posted by The_Tempest
Savage fended off Anakin and Obi-Wan in season 3 and has grown in power since those days according to the Clone Wars episode guide.

Obi-Wan fending off Maul and Savage is as much an outlier as the aforementioned feat.

Otherwise, Savage (and Ventress as well) has proven himself to be Council level material. And contrary to the baseless Obi-Wan fanwank, I've seen no evidence to conclude he's inherently better than the likes of Koon, Fisto, Gallia, et al.

If Obi-Wan has an advantage, it's slight. He will not be owning Savage by an means in a general scenario.

Fended off is not the same as disarming someone and breaking their leg. Kenobi did to Maul and Savage what Maul did to Qui-Gon and Obi-Wan. It'd be like arguing TPM Kenobi or Qui-Gon were superior to TPM Maul. It's a ridiculous notion.

Originally posted by Mizukage Yoda
Kenobi has bested Ventress as well,
So what? This doesn't prove that Kenobi will win by a big margin.

Originally posted by Mizukage Yoda
and is considered by Windu to be a superior duelist than himself.
lol

As did he about Billaba.

Originally posted by Intrepid37
So what? This doesn't prove that Kenobi will win by a big margin.




His consistent stalemates against Maul suggests he is above Opress and Ventress by a noticeable margin. At least in sword fighting/close combat.

With Force powers included Opress's chances against Kenobi increase a fair bit. But I'd probably still give Kenobi a slight majority personally.

Obi-Wan. Rather easily.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
His consistent stalemates against Maul suggests he is above Opress and Ventress by a noticeable margin. At least in sword fighting/close combat.
Concistent stalemate? He survived for half a minute or so before Gallia died. The other one he lost.

You can't overlook how Kenobi has been portrayed as an equal to Ventress, and how Opress has too.

Kenobi definitely has the edge in sheer skill and technique, but Opress makes up for it with strength and raw power.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
With Force powers included Opress's chances against Kenobi increase a fair bit. But I'd probably still give Kenobi a slight majority personally.
In an 'all-out' I'd give Opress a slight 6/10.

Originally posted by Intrepid37
Concistent stalemate? He survived for half a minute or so before Gallia died. The other one he lost.
He was beating Maul.



Then you are lost.

Originally posted by Intrepid37
As did he about Billaba.

Who is well above Savage. Your point?

Originally posted by Intrepid37
In an 'all-out' I'd give Opress a slight 6/10.

Originally posted by Intrepid37
Concistent stalemate? He survived for half a minute or so before Gallia died. The other one he lost.

Firstly it was over a miunte, which is quite long by SW standards. Second where are you getting he was just "surviving?" If you read Shadow Conspiracy it's made clear that was quite a tough fight for both combatants.

And by the end, if anyone had the edge it was actually Kenobi with that kick that put Maul on his knees for a second.

The first fight was another stalemate until Maul used Dun Moch to enrage Kenobi putting him off balance. (Brilliant scene).

I am actually a much bigger Maul fan than Kenobi, but there's really no denying that Kenobi and Maul are being shown to be peers now.

Originally posted by Intrepid37
You can't overlook how Kenobi has been portrayed as an equal to Ventress, and how Opress has too.

You also can't overlook how Kenobi has been shown to take it easy on Ventress. "You'll have to do better than that my darling.." is hardly the statement of a guy out for blood.

That bit of flirtation/chemistry between them has always been clear.

Originally posted by Intrepid37
Kenobi definitely has the edge in sheer skill and technique, but Opress makes up for it with strength and raw power.


In an 'all-out' I'd give Opress a slight 6/10.

Well we agree an all out will be a split.

How it Opress splitting with Kenobi?

Opress, while impressive at first, has fallen by the wayside. He has got stomped by both Kenobi and Maul.

Originally posted by ares834
How it Opress splitting with Kenobi?

Opress, while impressive at first, has fallen by the wayside. He has got stomped by both Kenobi and Maul.

In a pure sword fight your right.

I'm just giving Opress a minority of wins due to his beastly Tk. He's ragdolled Kenobi in the past and overpowered Adi Gallia with it too.

Originally posted by Mizukage Yoda
He was beating Maul.
Not really.



Originally posted by Mizukage Yoda
Then you are lost.
That was convincing.


Originally posted by Mizukage Yoda
Who is well above Savage. Your point?
Prove it.

People are making it sound as if I'm putting Opress above Kenobi in terms of swordmanship. facepalm

Originally posted by Intrepid37
In no category does Kenobi beat Opress handily.


Originally posted by DARTH POWER
Firstly it was over a miunte, which is quite long by SW standards. Second where are you getting he was just "surviving?" If you read Shadow Conspiracy it's made clear that was quite a tough fight for both combatants.

And by the end, if anyone had the edge it was actually Kenobi with that kick that put Maul on his knees for a second.

The first fight was another stalemate until Maul used Dun Moch to enrage Kenobi putting him off balance. (Brilliant scene).

I am actually a much bigger Maul fan than Kenobi, but there's really no denying that Kenobi and Maul are being shown to be peers now.
When did I deny that Kenobi and Maul were peers?

Maul has won one and stalemated the other, both while not wanting to kill Kenobi.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
You also can't overlook how Kenobi has been shown to take it easy on Ventress. "You'll have to do better than that my darling.." is hardly the statement of a guy out for blood.

That bit of flirtation/chemistry between them has always been clear.
lol

As he did with Maul ''your legs make you look taller''?

No.



Originally posted by DARTH POWER
Well we agree an all out will be a split.
Agreed.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
In a pure sword fight your right.

I'm just giving Opress a minority of wins due to his beastly Tk. He's ragdolled Kenobi in the past and overpowered Adi Gallia with it too.

Ah, I thought you were saying he would take half the wins.

Ignoring Opress's domination of Obi-Wan and Anakin and focusing solely on Obi-Wan's turnabout against Maul and Opress frankly smacks of fanboy tactics.

Shadow Conspiracy notes that the confining terrain played to Obi-Wan's advantage (as it did to Savage's advantage when he fought Anakin and Obi-Wan on Dooku's dreadnought).

The recently released Clone Wars episode guide outright confirms that Savage has grown more powerful since his days as Dooku's flunkie.

That Obi-Wan performed so well was clearly the result of contextual factors. He's no Dooku; he's not fit to polish the shoe Sidious would effortlessly put up his ass.

Savage has gone toe-to-toe with Plo Koon, Adi Gallia, Ventress, and Anakin. You can hand wave that all you like for the purposes of aggrandizing Obi-Wan, but I'm not.

An all out fight with them is gonna be close: Obi-Wan's superior skill and experience versus Savage's greater power and ferocity.

Originally posted by The_Tempest
Ignoring Opress's domination of Obi-Wan and Anakin and focusing solely on Obi-Wan's turnabout against Maul and Opress frankly smacks of fanboy tactics.

When did Opress "dominate" Anakin and Kenobi?

He held his own, sure. But in both fights he ended up fleeing. By contrast Kenobi has dominated Savage. And there is a sense of parity between Kenobi and Maul, the same Maul who managed to also dominate Savage.

Yes, I don't see Kenobi dominating Savage in a typical fight. But he certainly seems to hold a significant advantage.

When I say dominate, I mean it literally. He had the advantage; the Jedi (even Anakin!) were on he backfoot, giving ground. He floored them both twice, as I recall: to say nothing of their humiliation on Toydaria.

And while I agree that Maul and likely Obi-Wan are above Savage, I have never taken Maul's quick defeat of Savage to be reflective of a general contest between the two precisely because it is incongruent with both characters' abilities.

Originally posted by ares834
there is a sense of parity between Kenobi and Maul, the same Maul who managed to also dominate Savage.

Yes, I don't see Kenobi dominating Savage in a typical fight. But he certainly seems to hold a significant advantage.

Kenobi hasn't cybernetic legs that ables him to nullify Opress' strength either.

DP, Sorry I didn't address your earlier post, but I'm on my iPhone and so have to make responses as general as possible due to format limitations.

Originally posted by Intrepid37
Kenobi hasn't cybernetic legs that ables him to nullify Opress' strength either.

Ares isn't claiming that Kenobi would dominate Opress to the same extent Maul did.

Just that he's on par with Maul who is clearly above Opress/Ventress.

Originally posted by The_Tempest
When I say dominate, I mean it literally. He had the advantage; the Jedi (even Anakin!) were on he backfoot, giving ground. He floored them both twice, as I recall: to say nothing of their humiliation on Toydaria.

Yes, he knocked them both down twice yet he never seemed to truly have the advantage and if he did, it was slight. Neither of the Jedi seemed to be truly troubled by him nor were they any worse for wear after the duel. Furthermore, in the first fight he fled from them.

@POWER, that's an A>B>C argument. No one in their right mind would believe Maul would beat Opress as swiftly he did should they fight again in open terrain.

Originally posted by Intrepid37



lol

As he did with Maul ''your legs make you look taller''?

No.



If he called Maul "My darling" then it would be comparable. Besides that wasn't during combat. It was while he was defensless, hitting Maul where it hurts (the legs he removed himself).

And I think most would agree Kenobi doesn't generally go all out on Ventress. But then it's rare when he goes All-Out anyway. But I can bet he does against Maul.

Originally posted by Intrepid37
@POWER, that's an A>B>C argument. No one in their right mind would believe Maul would beat Opress as swiftly he did should they fight again in open terrain.

I know that. But similarly no one in their right mind believes Maul wouldn't take a large majority against Opress.

Originally posted by ares834
Yes, he knocked them both down twice yet he never seemed to truly have the advantage and if he did, it was slight. Neither of the Jedi seemed to be truly troubled by him nor were they any worse for wear after the duel. Furthermore, in the first fight he fled from them.

Yes but then there was 2 of them. Having the advantage against both of them twice is pretty impressive.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
If he called Maul "My darling" then it would be comparable. Besides that wasn't during combat. It was while he was defensless, hitting Maul where it hurts (the legs he removed himself).

And I think most would agree Kenobi doesn't generally go all out on Ventress. But then it's rare when he goes All-Out anyway. But I can bet he does against Maul.
Oh come on. He also says ''Throwing in with pirates now, oh how the mighty Sith have fallen.


Originally posted by DARTH POWER
I know that. But similarly no one in their right mind believes Maul wouldn't take a large majority against Opress.
I have never believed otherwise?

Originally posted by Intrepid37
Oh come on. He also says ''Throwing in with pirates now, oh how the mighty Sith have fallen.




He hardly had time while fighting Maul to start taking the mick out of his combat abilities.

He's basically never fought Ventress (in TCW at least) with the same intensity he fights Maul.

Its pretty obvious that he has a thing for Ventress.

Its also pretty obvious that he borderline HATES Maul.

Originally posted by Intrepid37
Not really.

He got a kick in. And created an opening for himself.





Kenobi is slightly above Maul, let alone his apprentice.





Injuring Mace Windu>>Anything Savage has done.

Also the stupid comparison of Savage vs. Kenobi and Skywalker is just that, stupid.

Kenobi took off Savage's arm and broke his leg. He was winning and force them into retreat.

That is not the same as Savage getting off a Force Push or some shit like that. Filoni himself states that Maul and Savage lose. The length people will go into denial about this is obscene.

I agree with Mizukage. Kenobi was able to break Opress' leg and slice his arm off, while at the same time fending Maul off all within a narrow corridor. And in the end it was the brothers running from Kenobi.

That to me is all that is needed to prove that Kenobi can beat Opress in a 1 on 1, in any one of these situations. At least 9/10 times.

Yeah Savage has impressive force feats and physical strength, but Kenobi's skill and experience would be too much for him.

Originally posted by mnat801
I agree with Mizukage. Kenobi was able to break Opress' leg and slice his arm off, while at the same time fending Maul off all within a narrow corridor. And in the end it was the brothers running from Kenobi.

That to me is all that is needed to prove that Kenobi can beat Opress in a 1 on 1, in any one of these situations. At least 9/10 times.

Yeah Savage has impressive force feats and physical strength, but Kenobi's skill and experience would be too much for him.
You took the words right out of my mouth.

Originally posted by Mizukage Yoda
He got a kick in. And created an opening for himself.
And then Maul kicked his ass.





Originally posted by Mizukage Yoda
Kenobi is slightly above Maul,
Yeah, no.

Originally posted by Mizukage Yoda
let alone his apprentice.
No.


Originally posted by Mizukage Yoda
Injuring Mace Windu>>Anything Savage has done.
Let's not pretend Opress couldn't do that should Mace be extremely injured and holding back.

Originally posted by Mizukage Yoda
Also the stupid comparison of Savage vs. Kenobi and Skywalker is just that, stupid.

Kenobi took off Savage's arm and broke his leg. He was winning and force them into retreat.

That is not the same as Savage getting off a Force Push or some shit like that. Filoni himself states that Maul and Savage lose. The length people will go into denial about this is obscene.
It's not denial, it's common sense. Opress literally ragdolled Anakin and Kenobi, Ventress gave the best performance of her life against the same pair and, in turn, Kenobi goes apeshit on the brothers.

One ordinary performance doesn't outweigh the average.

Well, since Filoni has stated that the brothers legitimately lost the fight, I think it's a valid showing. The intention was to showcase how "Strength in character can defeat strength in numbers ." Mind tell, what is the average then? Even before, Maul had more trouble fighting Kenobi than fighting Savage.

Kenobi is superior to Savage, simple as that.
Filoni said Kenobi won. It's not denial, it's common sense that Filoni has a greater say on Kenobi's victory than what vague average fans speculate on.

What, a circumstancial victory equals greater power and skill?

Right.

There's a reason why Kenobi consitently struggles with Grievous, Ventress and Maul.

Originally posted by Mizukage Yoda
Filoni himself states that Maul and Savage lose. The length people will go into denial about this is obscene.

Originally posted by Vensai
It's not denial, it's common sense that Filoni has a greater say on Kenobi's victory than what vague average fans speculate on.

Correction.

Filoni states Maul and Opress lost in that situation and in that scenario.

Anyone who believes Kenobi is > Maul + Opress under normal circumstances is just plain out crazy.

He is however > Opress in a one on one.

I can accept Kenobi being above Opress in an 'all-out', but he will by no means ''handily'' beat him, which is the only thing I've argued.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
Correction.

Filoni states Maul and Opress lost in that situation and in that scenario.

Anyone who believes Kenobi is > Maul + Opress under normal circumstances is just plain out crazy.

Glad to have finally converted you.

Originally posted by Intrepid37
And then Maul kicked his ass.
With Savage's aide.







Uhhh yeah.




http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aE_CVWMWK74

When Adi Gallia dies Kenobi would have one-shotted Savage were it not for Maul's intervention.




Mace Windu would utterly stomp Savage in a similar manner Sidious did.



He pushed them back, not ragdolled him. He force choked Dooku as well, but we all know Dooku would take him to the curb. Ventress took on a non-focused Kenobi and Skywalker, and Kenobi has a thing for Ventress.

Ventress lost that duel, Savage it was undecided, Kenobi won the duel. He won the engagement and mutilated Savage while he did it.



Filoni plainly states that the only thing different about Kenobi was he was exhausted, unfocused, and mentally distraught in one instance where he fought Maul and that he was focused on the second one.

His first fight with Maul is an outlier. Deal with it.

Nah, Intrepid's right. Obi-Wan had the advantage of terrain and the brothers didn't want to kill him.

Both are outliers and Obi-Wan will not be owning Savage.

Originally posted by Mizukage Yoda
With Savage's aide.
Savage was fighting Ventress...



Originally posted by Mizukage Yoda
Uhhh yeah.
Nope.


Originally posted by Mizukage Yoda
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aE_CVWMWK74

When Adi Gallia dies Kenobi would have one-shotted Savage were it not for Maul's intervention.
After kicking him due to Opress being distracted.

At 4:28 Maul would've impaled Kenobi with his saber had he been trying to kill him.



Originally posted by Mizukage Yoda
Mace Windu would utterly stomp Savage in a similar manner Sidious did.
While holding back and being injured? This begs for prove.


Originally posted by Mizukage Yoda
He pushed them back, not ragdolled him. He force choked Dooku as well, but we all know Dooku would take him to the curb.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MOkn3UBL51g

0:10 he ragdolls them.
0:18 he forces them on the defensive
0:57 he puts them on their ass via a Force wave.

Originally posted by Mizukage Yoda
Ventress took on a non-focused Kenobi and Skywalker, and Kenobi has a thing for Ventress.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=laHyeF0wz84

0:22 ''The pleasant is all mine, dear Obi-Wan. I've missed you'' (she has a thing for Kenobi lolz)

1:12 ''I'm all yours Obi-Wan'' (she has a thing for Kenobi lolz)

1:56 ''Come and get me boys'' (she has a thing for Kenobi lolz)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P-nDmMMtb6Q

0:29, she pwns Kenobi with a kick and fights equally with Skywalker.

She then fights both of them as equals before getting disarmed through a force push only to choke them both.

Originally posted by Mizukage Yoda
Filoni plainly states that the only thing different about Kenobi was he was exhausted, unfocused, and mentally distraught in one instance where he fought Maul and that he was focused on the second one.
And did he not, in the same episode, mention that the brothers had been trying too hard (or something like that?)

Originally posted by Mizukage Yoda
His first fight with Maul is an outlier. Deal with it.
Yeah, and it was Maul's first fight in over a decade on newly made cybernetic legs.

http://i1349.photobucket.com/albums/p751/Intrepid37/Darth%20Maul/maulisntthesameheoncewas_zps46235a02.png

http://i1349.photobucket.com/albums/p751/Intrepid37/Darth%20Maul/mauldoesntknowhisplace_zpsb35b7c16.png

Originally posted by Intrepid37
Savage was fighting Ventress...

Talking about Maul who is>>>Savage





Wrong, Opress looks up at Kenobi and has time to dodge, he just couldn't.






Savage is not even close to Mace Windu's league in bladework. Do you think Windu would get disarmed in the casual manner Maul disarmed Savage?





1. That's not ragdolling, that's a force push.
2. Yeah because they were trying so hard.
3. They weren't even fighting him at the time. He was being gunned down, why would they even bother having their defenses up?




Except Kenobi is a Jedi and Ventress is a Sith. Kenobi embarrases her in TCW movie.



Not the same thing. Neither Kenobi nor Skywalker were exhausted by the end of the duel. Ventress was.



No he didn't. He said that they had overextended themselves politically.




Yeah I'm going to go ahead and say being tortured and foodless for hours trumps the legs. Kenobi wasn't in the mental state to win. He was confused that Maul was back, then add in the Dun Moch and you have Maul at an extreem psychological advantage.

Originally posted by Mizukage Yoda
Talking about Maul who is>>>Savage
Not sure what your point is?

Originally posted by Mizukage Yoda
Wrong, Opress looks up at Kenobi and has time to dodge, he just couldn't.
Nah, he didn't notice Kenobi in time.


Originally posted by Mizukage Yoda
Savage is not even close to Mace Windu's league in bladework. Do you think Windu would get disarmed in the casual manner Maul disarmed Savage?
lol@you if you think Maul would handle Savage the same way in a hypothetical fight.

Maul would disarm and kill an injured Windu, yes.

Originally posted by Mizukage Yoda
1. That's not ragdolling, that's a force push.
So I guess Maul didn't ragdoll Kenobi after Savage's arm was cut off either?

Originally posted by Mizukage Yoda
2. Yeah because they were trying so hard.
Prove they weren't trying their hardest.

Originally posted by Mizukage Yoda
3. They weren't even fighting him at the time. He was being gunned down, why would they even bother having their defenses up?
lols, having their defenses up against a monster + blasterfire sounds like a pretty good idea.

Originally posted by Mizukage Yoda
Except Kenobi is a Jedi and Ventress is a Sith. Kenobi embarrases her in TCW movie.
Yeah, watch how she disarms him 30 seconds into the fight.



Originally posted by Mizukage Yoda
Neither Kenobi nor Skywalker were exhausted by the end of the duel. Ventress was.
And?



Originally posted by Mizukage Yoda
No he didn't. He said that they had overextended themselves politically.
Link?



Originally posted by Mizukage Yoda
Yeah I'm going to go ahead and say being tortured and foodless for hours trumps the legs.
I'm going to go ahead and say the opposite.

Also, hours? Proof?

Originally posted by Mizukage Yoda
Kenobi wasn't in the mental state to win. He was confused that Maul was back, then add in the Dun Moch and you have Maul at an extreem psychological advantage.
lol

Maul had gained new legs, met his new brother and, according to Insider #132, ''didn't know his place''.

Not the best mental state either.

Originally posted by Intrepid37


Link?






It's here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zvGXSe8fvrs

Conversation about Obi-Wan fighting well against the brothers starts around 16:00. Lasts a couple of minutes.

It seems all of you have misread my 'No Force' rules, so I'm enabling force powers now. And ask yourselves--can Obi-Wan go to the extent of using force powers more than Savage did? Could -he- ragdoll Ventress and Dooku?

Originally posted by Taay'hai
It seems all of you have misread my 'No Force' rules, so I'm enabling force powers now. And ask yourselves--can Obi-Wan go to the extent of using force powers more than Savage did? Could -he- ragdoll Ventress and Dooku? Jedi don't tend to use force powers offensively. But even in an all out situation, Obi Wan will come out victorious.

And I don't recall Savage ragdolling Ventress and Dooku.

Originally posted by The_Tempest
Glad to have finally converted you.




Just have to get you to admit that Kenobi's > Tiin, Kolar, Fisto and most council members

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
Just have to get you to admit that Kenobi's > Tiin, Kolar, Fisto and most council members
He is, but not by a long shot at all.

Originally posted by Intrepid37
-snip-

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zvGXSe8fvrs
17:57

"And he loses that fight, rather he's not in the right mindset...When you get to this episode, Obi-Wan is much more focused and ready. Not only that but when Adi-Gallia dies, he gains more focus and sort of has to right that wrong. He's a very skilled swordsman. He's not going to lose that fight in that situation."

"I think it's more of a tie..."

"Nah."




No you're both wrong and should take the director of the show's view higher than your own.

lol

Because Filoni says it's a win doesn't mean it's not a circumstancial win.

Originally posted by Mizukage Yoda


No you're both wrong and should take the director of the show's view higher than your own.

And I would IF Filoni said Obi-Wan was better than Savage, let alone so superior as to be able to curbstomp him.

But in fact he doesn't. All he says is that Obi-Wan won't lose THAT duel in THAT situation. Since THAT duel and THAT situation aren't at play here, there's nothing relevant in Filoni's commentary.

Feel free to address the rest of my argument in your next post instead of pretending the only time the two ever fought was in Revival and that Filoni's statement means "lol obiwan pwnz all day 3vry day n savage sux!"

One thing is to say Kenobi can beat Opress with ease. Another thing is to think he can actually beat Opress + Maul.

I can't take anyone who supports the latter incident seriously.

Mizukage Yoda, THAT duel and THAT situation clearly imply a context specific win. It's not something Kenobi can do anytime, otherwise he wouldn't have got stomped by the brothers in the prior episode, and wouldn't have fought Maul one on one twice without a clear winner both times.

Tempest and Intrepid, Filoni did also denote the win to Kenobi being a "very skilled swordsman." So even though his win was context specific, it was still an awesome feat and showed us Kenobi's skill and clear superiority over Opress.

That said Opress won't lose 10/10. His physical strength and beastly TK will always be a threat to Jedi (minus Yoda, Mace, Peak Anakin).

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
Mizukage Yoda, THAT duel and THAT situation clearly imply a context specific win. It's not something Kenobi can do anytime, otherwise he wouldn't have got stomped by the brothers in the prior episode, and wouldn't have fought Maul one on one twice without a clear winner both times. So you're saying that's just a one off performance!? He either can do it, or he can't. If he could win over Maul and Savage this time, I don't see any reason for him not being able to do it again (except when Maul gets his new legs). Filoni outright said that the win was due to Obi Wan's swordsmanship and focus, not because it was context specific.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
Tempest and Intrepid, Filoni did also denote the win to Kenobi being a "very skilled swordsman." So even though his win was context specific, it was still an awesome feat and showed us Kenobi's skill and clear superiority over Opress. Basically.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
That said Opress won't lose 10/10. His physical strength and beastly TK will always be a threat to Jedi (minus Yoda, Mace, Peak Anakin). Savage is as much a threat to Obi Wan as he is to Anakin.

Originally posted by Intrepid37
One thing is to say Kenobi can beat Opress with ease. Another thing is to think he can actually beat Opress + Maul.

I can't take anyone who supports the latter incident seriously. So you can't take the Clone Wars seriously? He did it in Revival.

Originally posted by The_Tempest
And I would IF Filoni said Obi-Wan was better than Savage, let alone so superior as to be able to curbstomp him. Well after Obi Wan's showings in Revival, it should be easy math.

Originally posted by The_Tempest
But in fact he doesn't. All he says is that Obi-Wan won't lose THAT duel in THAT situation. Since THAT duel and THAT situation aren't at play here, there's nothing relevant in Filoni's commentary. Any Star Wars content should be relevant. And you're overcomplicating his commentary. Filoni simply said Obi Wan wins against Maul and Savage. Get over it.

Originally posted by The_Tempest
Feel free to address the rest of my argument in your next post instead of pretending the only time the two ever fought was in Revival and that Filoni's statement means "lol obiwan pwnz all day 3vry day n savage sux!" Well where's your proof stating otherwise? Most would agree that Maul and Obi Wan are pretty even, and Maul > Savage. So even without that fight in Revival, it should still be clear that Obi Wan > Savage.

Filoni didn't say it was context specific... Shadow Conspiracy does. facepalm

Originally posted by mnat801
So you're saying that's just a one off performance!? He either can do it, or he can't. If he could win over Maul and Savage this time, I don't see any reason for him not being able to do it again


He clearly can't beat Maul and Opress together every time they fight.

Remember Ventress has beaten Kenobi while fighting off Anakin, and even Force choked them both at one time. Doesn't mean she can do that every/any time they fight.

Originally posted by mnat801
(except when Maul gets his new legs). Filoni outright said that the win was due to Obi Wan's swordsmanship and focus, not because it was context specific.


He states how Kenobi has "even more focus" after Gallia dies, is imlying he was extra determined to avenge her. The question is did Maul and Opress have the same kind of focus in that fight? As I remember the fight started with Maul saying something like "No, not yet, I'm not ready."

"THAT fight THAT situation," clearly implies a specific situation.

Filoni also states how in the prior episode how in "THAT fight and THAT situation" Kenobi and Ventress together were going to lose against the same duo.

However it is clear to me Kenobi > Opress.

Agreed. No doubt the circumstances gave him a boost in performance, but not that great a boost. He's still above Opress without them.

Seriously I am not saying that Obi-Wan can do it all the time, just that that showing easily puts him above Savage and perhaps Maul slightly.

Kenobi already proved superiority over both of them.. why would fighting just one of them be even up for discussion? Close for spite

He might be... fractionally. >:]







I didn't dispute that Obi-Wan is "a very skilled swordsman" nor have I contested that Obi-Wan isn't Opress's superior... in experience and skill. In fact, I acknowledged a few posts back that this is a contest of Opress's greater power and ferocity and Obi-Wan's deeper skill and experience.

I comport myself entirely with Filoni's commentary. I do not comport myself with certain individuals' interpretationfabrication of Filoni's commentary.



This isn't math?
Put it another way, if it were math... then Opress should have slaughtered Obi-Wan outright in "Revenge" or "Revival" since Kenobi and the Chosen One combined were inadequate against Savage in "Witches of the Mist."

This is clearly not math, else all fights would be above contextual factors and be unerringly predictable. Your argument defeats itself.



I'm uncertain as to why you're so clearly enraged by my refusal to hop aboard the Obi-Wagon.



And if most people decided to jump off a particularly high cliff, would you follow suit? Perhaps? And while there would no doubt be much rejoicing, it wouldn't be especially wise.

This is argumentum ad populum, an appeal to the majority, a fallacy of the highest order.

But, to answer your question:


Savage embarrassed Anakin & Obi-Wan twice in "Witches of the Mist"
Savage is confirmed to have only grown more powerful
Savage has acquitted himself well against two other Council Masters, Plo Koon & Adi Gallia
Filoni indicates that Obi-Wan's victory is context-specific
Shadow Conspiracy indicates that the confining environment worked to Obi-Wan's advantage and that Obi-Wan fought aggressively because he knew defensive tactics would give him "no hope" of victory
Obi-Wan is unable to beat Maul alone in their first duel in "Revival," but is able to fend both Zabraks off a short time later to such an extent that you all think he'd stomp either. What about that doesn't scream "circumstantial victory," especially since Filoni never hints that Obi-Wan isn't in the right mindset at that point?


Six very good reasons to conclude that Obi-Wan will not duplicate those results in a general fight. I see no reason to lie about Filoni's commentary and disregard other evidence simply because some of us wish to furiously masturbate to the character.

Obi-Wan had been knocked out and beaten up in Revival. I highly doubt he was at 100%. Plus Maul used Dun Moch on him.

Originally posted by Nephthys
Obi-Wan had been knocked out and beaten up in Revival. I highly doubt he was at 100%. Plus Maul used Dun Moch on him.

Generally, its best to know what one is talking about before one interjects. The episode you're referencing is Revenge, you moron, not Revival.

Raise your game if you're going to be Captain Contrarian.

Why do people keep saying the victory was context or cicumstances specific. You act as though being more focused or going offensive is context or circumstances when they aren't. Those are all things he can do at the drop of a hat in pretty much every fight he's ever in. Obviously, if he's a mess emotionally... focus might be an issue. Yet, THAT is more an example of context or circumstances than him being focused. Him being focused is something he can do a majority of the time... being emotionally troubled isn't something that has or would happen regularly and would be much more circumstancial than him being focused or fighting offensively.

Obi-Wan appeared to be "focused" going in to the first fight with Maul in "Revival" and is unable to defeat him alone.

It's only after Adi Gallia dies that he snaps and unleashes himself on Opress, interceding and about to kill an unprepared Savage until Maul attacks. That's why Filoni takes care to mention Adi's death as a motivating factor.

I'm not inclined to disregard that simply because you really like Obi-Wan.

That doesn't change the fact that being focused and fighting offensively is something he can do on a regular basis. Him dropping his saber in a pit and having to fight without it is a much better example of context or circumstances. To provide a real world example.... The Ravens decide they need to run the ball and switch up their offensive gameplan for the Steelers. That is something they can do all the time and each and every game. It might not work all the time but they have those options. Just like Kenobi can go offensive or get more focused. A bus crash that takes out the whole offensively line of the Ravens... THAT is an example of circumstances and context that isn't normal or regular and decided the outcome because of it. They are worlds apart.

No one ever said that Obi-Wan would fight "unfocused." That's pretty dumb: isn't he focused in most battles?

But clearly his performance in the second duel in "Revival" owed more to something other than just mere focus... else he would have beaten Maul pretty handily one-on-one in the first duel, in which he appeared to be wholly focused as well.

That, I attribute, to Adi Gallia's death. Not to mention, as I have pointed out, a favorable environment (which I also believe is what explains Savage's excellent performance against Obi-Wan & Anakin in 'Witches of the Mist').

Bereft of these things, Maul's intent to keep Obi-Wan alive, etc. and I don't see Obi-Wan taking these two out on neutral ground.

But that's all I have to say on the subject, since I'm repeating myself unnecessarily. Feel free to disagree.

Originally posted by The_Tempest
Generally, its best to know what one is talking about before one interjects. The episode you're referencing is Revenge, you moron, not Revival.

Raise your game if you're going to be Captain Contrarian.

Jeez, cranky much? I made an honest mistake. No need to jump on me for it.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
He clearly can't beat Maul and Opress together every time they fight. Yeah I agree not every time, but my point is that his performance in Revival means he has the ability to do it again. But the fact that Maul was disadvantaged due to cybernetic legs and his long absence from battle means that Kenobi can't be superior to Maul from that battle alone.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
Remember Ventress has beaten Kenobi while fighting off Anakin, and even Force choked them both at one time. Doesn't mean she can do that every/any time they fight. I don't recall Ventress beating Kenobi. I do recall her knocking him out, but that happens to him in almost every fight he has anyway. And yes, that doesn't mean Ventress can do it everytime, but it certainly means she could do it again.



Originally posted by DARTH POWER
Filoni also states how in the prior episode how in "THAT fight and THAT situation" Kenobi and Ventress together were going to lose against the same duo.

However it is clear to me Kenobi > Opress. Well that wasn't suprising seeing that Opress was beating him up before the fight, so injured/hurt Obi Wan and Ventress with 1 saber makes for a disadvantaged team.

Originally posted by The_Tempest
This isn't math?
Put it another way, if it were math... then Opress should have slaughtered Obi-Wan outright in "Revenge" or "Revival" since Kenobi and the Chosen One combined were inadequate against Savage in "Witches of the Mist."

This is clearly not math, else all fights would be above contextual factors and be unerringly predictable. Your argument defeats itself. How does Savage force pushing them into a wall in Witches of the Mist equate to being able to slaughter Obi Wan? It only shows that he has the ability to force push them again. Where as Obi Wan was able to damage Savage while having Maul to deal with at the same time. That's gotta count for something...



Originally posted by The_Tempest
I'm uncertain as to why you're so clearly enraged by my refusal to hop aboard the Obi-Wagon. You're refusing to accept a victory by Obi Wan that has been approved by Filoni. Where's my liking for Obi Wan getting involved here?



Originally posted by The_Tempest
And if most people decided to jump off a particularly high cliff, would you follow suit? Perhaps? And while there would no doubt be much rejoicing, it wouldn't be especially wise.

This is argumentum ad populum, an appeal to the majority, a fallacy of the highest order.

But, to answer your question:


Savage embarrassed Anakin & Obi-Wan twice in "Witches of the Mist"
Savage is confirmed to have only grown more powerful
Savage has acquitted himself well against two other Council Masters, Plo Koon & Adi Gallia
Filoni indicates that Obi-Wan's victory is context-specific
Shadow Conspiracy indicates that the confining environment worked to Obi-Wan's advantage and that Obi-Wan fought aggressively because he knew defensive tactics would give him "no hope" of victory
Obi-Wan is unable to beat Maul alone in their first duel in "Revival," but is able to fend both Zabraks off a short time later to such an extent that you all think he'd stomp either. What about that doesn't scream "circumstantial victory," especially since Filoni never hints that Obi-Wan isn't in the right mindset at that point?


Six very good reasons to conclude that Obi-Wan will not duplicate those results in a general fight. I see no reason to lie about Filoni's commentary and disregard other evidence simply because some of us wish to furiously masturbate to the character. I applaud you for you're effort. Unfortunately you wasted your time because I sort of agree with your conclusion anyway. But you don't have to be so personal about it.

All I'm disagreeing with is anyone denying that Obi Wan didn't win the fight in Revival, that it is unforeseeable that he can do it again, and that Savage can beat Kenobi in a one on one. That being said, I agree Kenobi won't win every rematch.

Originally posted by Nephthys
Jeez, cranky much? I made an honest mistake. No need to jump on me for it.

I can't help the fact that I'm seething with rage.

I wasn't even contradicting you you prick.

I was kidding.

Generally its best to actually be funny when you're joking. And have it be slightly recognizable as a joke.

Raise your game if you're going to be Captain Comedy.

I don't see why Maul's win over Kenobi in Revenge is treated as a context specific victory. Maul was not in the right mindset either and not as powerful as in S5.

Originally posted by Intrepid37
I don't see why Maul's win over Kenobi in Revenge is treated as a context specific victory. Maul was not in the right mindset either and not as powerful as in S5.

Because Filoni states in the interview that Kenobi was the one disadvantaged in that fight. If he stated so for Maul it'd get more attention.

Yeah, and an Insider issue with an interview with one of the producers say the same for Maul.

Filoni has also said the same for Maul in Revenge. That he did really well to be beating Kenobi like that after being out of action for 10+years.

Nice one.

Originally posted by The_Tempest
No one ever said that Obi-Wan would fight "unfocused." That's pretty dumb: isn't he focused in most battles?

But clearly his performance in the second duel in "Revival" owed more to something other than just mere focus... else he would have beaten Maul pretty handily one-on-one in the first duel, in which he appeared to be wholly focused as well.

That, I attribute, to Adi Gallia's death. Not to mention, as I have pointed out, a favorable environment (which I also believe is what explains Savage's excellent performance against Obi-Wan & Anakin in 'Witches of the Mist').

Bereft of these things, Maul's intent to keep Obi-Wan alive, etc. and I don't see Obi-Wan taking these two out on neutral ground.

But that's all I have to say on the subject, since I'm repeating myself unnecessarily. Feel free to disagree. ACTUALLY that is EXACTLY what people are saying when they say Kenobi's win was ENTIRELY CIRCUMSTANCIAL AND CONTEXTUAL and then CITE FOCUS AND GOING OFFENIVE as the reasons. Which is exactly my point those are circumstances and context in a fight. Those are readily available options for Obi. Circumstancila and contextual would be obi finding a super lightsaber sword right before battle and using it to win. That is circumstnaces and context not being focused or gong offensive.

KT do you honestly believe that was a normal showing for Obi-Wan and that he can defeat Maul and Opress together for a split or a majority?

If so then your welcome to explain to me why he couldn't defeat Maul alone in their 2 previous One on One fights. Filoni's even confirmed Kenobi was ready and in the right mind set for the second one.

You act as though he lost against Maul... He did no such thing at al. They were simply stalemating. The simple answer is he would've defeated maul eventually and was doing this usual waiting for openings and landing the killing blow. See how easy that was? His first fight doesn't count much as there we ACTUALLY have cirucmstances.. Kenobi wasn't in the right frame of mind. So toss that out. Why are you assuming he was going to lose to maul and thus it's odd he beat both of them? That is you assuming your own conlcusion. He very well could've defeated maul and imo would have. He was doing his usual thing... once Savage got into the mix.. well then he went offensive and took it to them. It's really that simple. Nobody is saying he could beat them each and every time.. but that certainly wsn't a one off and he could've do that again either.

Originally posted by KuRuPT Thanosi
Why are you assuming he was going to lose to maul and thus it's odd he beat both of them? That is you assuming your own conlcusion. He very well could've defeated maul and imo would have.

You're doing the exact same...

Originally posted by KuRuPT Thanosi
The simple answer is he would've defeated maul eventually and was doing this usual waiting for openings and landing the killing blow.

You do know what assuming your own conclusion is right? He asked me how it was possible Kenobi could stalemate maul and not beat him yet beat both of them? I gave an answer on how that was possible and makese sense. That isn't assuimng your own conlusion buddy. Let's get back to your laughable conclusino that Anakin beats Kenobi in seconds in the other thread LULZ

Originally posted by Mizukage Yoda
Seriously I am not saying that Obi-Wan can do it all the time, just that that showing easily puts him above Savage and perhaps Maul slightly.



That's my thought as well.

Originally posted by KuRuPT Thanosi
You do know what assuming your own conclusion is right? He asked me how it was possible Kenobi could stalemate maul and not beat him yet beat both of them? I gave an answer on how that was possible and makese sense. That isn't assuimng your own conlusion buddy. Let's get back to your laughable conclusino that Anakin beats Kenobi in seconds in the other thread LULZ

No you missed my point completely. Your saying Obi-Wan beat them once, so he beats them every time.

I'm saying(using your logic) that Maul was beating him in Revenge, therefore Maul wins everytime.

Opress stomped Kenobi in Revenge, therefore Opress stomps Kenobi everytime.

When Kenobi and Maul were stalemating Maul was driving Kenobi back the whole time, whilst Kenobi was using his defensive style to just survive. This also explains why Kenobi eventually ran away in Revenge.

So clearly the only win of Kenobi's was a circumstantial one-off. The brothers only lost because they were caught by surprise by Kenobi's offensive. Plus the cramped space made it difficult for the 2 giants to maneuver properly.

Also Kenobi is yet to have a convincing victory over Maul, considering Kenobi's 1 "Win" ended with Maul just fine, and Kenobi knocked out.

Maul was on the run from Kenobi +pirates. It was pirates who shot off his legs. Therefore Maul only lost to Kenobi + Pirates.

See how making up our own explanations work both ways KT

I'd vote for Kenobi. While Savage has much more raw power with the Force, he doesn't have the efficiency with it to have this battle won for him. Kenobi, on the other hand has sufficient saber skills to injure Savage while holding off Maul under the right circumstances.

Savage can give Kenobi trouble, but I doubt he can win this.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
Opress stomped Kenobi in Revenge, therefore Opress stomps Kenobi everytime. You're definition of "stomping" is very different than mine in this case.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
When Kenobi and Maul were stalemating Maul was driving Kenobi back the whole time, whilst Kenobi was using his defensive style to just survive. This also explains why Kenobi eventually ran away in Revenge. No, that was because he was previously beaten up by Savage, hence affecting his fighting ability.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
So clearly the only win of Kenobi's was a circumstantial one-off. The brothers only lost because they were caught by surprise by Kenobi's offensive. Plus the cramped space made it difficult for the 2 giants to maneuver properly. If anyone was at a disadvantage in that cramped space, it was Kenobi. The brothers were on both sides of him, leaving him nowhere to run, as well as the 2 against 1 factor. That episode made it clear that Kenobi can handle beating 2 powerful individuals WHEN NEEDED. I think that's the point Kurupt is trying to make. So circumstantial? Maybe... A one-off? I don't think so.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
Also Kenobi is yet to have a convincing victory over Maul, considering Kenobi's 1 "Win" ended with Maul just fine, and Kenobi knocked out.

Maul was on the run from Kenobi +pirates. It was pirates who shot off his legs. Therefore Maul only lost to Kenobi + Pirates. This I agree with.

Originally posted by mnat801
You're definition of "stomping" is very different than mine in this case.


Opress took Kenobi down in a few swings. How was that not a stomp?

Originally posted by mnat801
No, that was because he was previously beaten up by Savage, hence affecting his fighting ability.

He wasn't seriously injured. Maul just getting new legs and being out of action for 10+ years was surely the bigger disadvantage.

Besides Filoni only mentions him not being prepared and in the right mind set. He mentions nothing about the slapping around Kenobi got putting him at some major disadvantage. In fact no one official has noted that as putting his performance down.

He was just fine when Opress stomped him. So clearly it was all just a low showing for Kenobi.

Originally posted by mnat801
If anyone was at a disadvantage in that cramped space, it was Kenobi. The brothers were on both sides of him, leaving him nowhere to run, as well as the 2 against 1 factor. That episode made it clear that Kenobi can handle beating 2 powerful individuals WHEN NEEDED. I think that's the point Kurupt is trying to make. So circumstantial? Maybe... A one-off? I don't think so.



The novel says Maul and Opress were not able to maneuver properley in the cramped space.

But of course the brothers had the clear advantage of 2 against 1.

If the win was circumstantial then it was a rarity. Kenobi isn't Sidious and won't just be beating up the brothers anytime he faces them. Not even for a majority. In fact I'd say only for a very small minority.

If we look at all the times he's faced both brothers, or even one of the brothers in TCW then so far that minority win is 1/7.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
Opress took Kenobi down in a few swings. How was that not a stomp? That wasn't even a fight, he was surprise attacked.



Originally posted by DARTH POWER
He wasn't seriously injured. Maul just getting new legs and being out of action for 10+ years was surely the bigger disadvantage. Still both disadvantages.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
Besides Filoni only mentions him not being prepared and in the right mind set. He mentions nothing about the slapping around Kenobi got putting him at some major disadvantage. In fact no one official has noted that as putting his performance down. We don't need Filoni to confirm this, its shown in the episode where you can see Obi Wan's face is bruised up. I don't see a reason why it wouldn't put his performance down.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
The novel says Maul and Opress were not able to maneuver properley in the cramped space. You seem to be forgetting that Kenobi was also in that crammed space as well, yet unlike the brothers he performed well in that situation.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
If the win was circumstantial then it was a rarity. Kenobi isn't Sidious and won't just be beating up the brothers anytime he faces them. Not even for a majority. In fact I'd say only for a very small minority.

If we look at all the times he's faced both brothers, or even one of the brothers in TCW then so far that minority win is 1/7. Seeing that Kenobi was able to beat them the first time, I'd say that's up for opinion.

By your logic, 1/7 times Kenobi can pull that feat off. That's like picking a red ball out of a hat of 6 white balls. Which is unlikely. Yet Kenobi was able to defeat the brothers in their first showing, which doesn't really help your argument, does it?

Originally posted by mnat801
That wasn't even a fight, he was surprise attacked.

It was a fight, just not a very long one.

Kenobi was ready to fight, and he had time to acknowledge Opress was there before he attacked him.

I'm not saying that's what would normally happen, but it did happen that time.

Kenobi should have been prepared for some one else, or some kind of surprise attack as he was warned by Mace that it was obvious he would be walking into a trap.




Originally posted by mnat801
We don't need Filoni to confirm this, its shown in the episode where you can see Obi Wan's face is bruised up. I don't see a reason why it wouldn't put his performance down.

Not necessarily. In the Slave arc he allowed himself to get beaten up in combat to buy Anakin some time. But when he stopped he was perfectly fine to stomp his opponent and all the droids.

Heck Padawan Luke took a much worse beating from Vader in ESB, and yet got back up and gave him a better fight later even hitting Vader's shoulder.

Maul was definitely with the greater disadvantages at that time Imho, having been out of action for 10+years and just getting new monster legs he had yet to adjust to.




Originally posted by mnat801
You seem to be forgetting that Kenobi was also in that crammed space as well, yet unlike the brothers he performed well in that situation.

Kenobi was a lot smaller than the brothers. We clearly saw he could maneuver just fine with all the flips and somersaults.


Originally posted by mnat801
By your logic, 1/7 times Kenobi can pull that feat off. That's like picking a red ball out of a hat of 6 white balls. Which is unlikely. Yet Kenobi was able to defeat the brothers in their first showing, which doesn't really help your argument, does it?

I don't get what first time your talking about.

The first 2 times he faced Opress with help and was tossed around with the Force.

The next time Opress disarmed him in Lightsaber combat quite quickly.

The next 2 times he fought Maul One on One with no clear winner each time.

Then after Adi died he tried engaging both brothers but was clearly being driven back and he fled.

It was the 7th time he engaged the brothers that he defeated them. But even then the defeat of Maul was with the aid of pirates.

But yeah I still do agree it was a great showing that finally showed us what Kenobi is capable of.

But then I'd say Maul's best showing was probably his final lightsaber fight with Sidious. I doubt Peak Kenobi was > Peak Maul. That added to their 2 one on ones which both seemed able to go either way, is why I say Maul and Kenobi seem to be peers.

It's quite clear to me that Maul is Kenobi's superior. First fight, he wins, this despite circumstancial disadvantages, and the second time, when they stalemated, he was ''not ready' and held back as in did now want to kill him.

Maul did have the physical and long time "out of combat" disadvantages the first time. And he seemed to not be in the right mind set the second time "No, not yet, I'm not ready"

But Kenobi had the disadvantage of "not being in the right mind set" the first time. And the Big disadvantage of being out numbered the second.

It seems to me TCW has been making Kenobi and Maul out to be peers. Whilst it's also been making Anakin and Dooku peers (sort of).

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
It was a fight, just not a very long one.

Kenobi was ready to fight, and he had time to acknowledge Opress was there before he attacked him.

I'm not saying that's what would normally happen, but it did happen that time.

Kenobi should have been prepared for some one else, or some kind of surprise attack as he was warned by Mace that it was obvious he would be walking into a trap. Kenobi was ready to fight Maul, which he wasn't even sure was real yet, not Savage. But yeah, he should have been prepared for the worst case scenario, but still, its an unfair fight to judge on. Its sort of similar to Vader killing Sids, he should of been aware of Vader, but we know Sidious > Vader.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
Not necessarily. In the Slave arc he allowed himself to get beaten up in combat to buy Anakin some time. But when he stopped he was perfectly fine to stomp his opponent and all the droids. Well that's where the right mindset comes into play. Plus he was prepared for it, and I don't see those slavers as a threat compared to Maul.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
Heck Padawan Luke took a much worse beating from Vader in ESB, and yet got back up and gave him a better fight later even hitting Vader's shoulder. Sure, but that was in the middle of the fight, not before it.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
Maul was definitely with the greater disadvantages at that time Imho, having been out of action for 10+years and just getting new monster legs he had yet to adjust to. And that's why I'm not declaring Kenobi's superiority over Maul in any of the battles.






Originally posted by DARTH POWER
Kenobi was a lot smaller than the brothers. We clearly saw he could maneuver just fine with all the flips and somersaults. Ok I guess that's a fair comment.




Originally posted by DARTH POWER
I don't get what first time your talking about.

The first 2 times he faced Opress with help and was tossed around with the Force.

The next time Opress disarmed him in Lightsaber combat quite quickly.

The next 2 times he fought Maul One on One with no clear winner each time.

Then after Adi died he tried engaging both brothers but was clearly being driven back and he fled.

It was the 7th time he engaged the brothers that he defeated them. But even then the defeat of Maul was with the aid of pirates. The first time where its just Kenobi vs Maul & Savage - after Gallia dies. The pirates happen afterwards.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
But yeah I still do agree it was a great showing that finally showed us what Kenobi is capable of.

But then I'd say Maul's best showing was probably his final lightsaber fight with Sidious. I doubt Peak Kenobi was > Peak Maul. That added to their 2 one on ones which both seemed able to go either way, is why I say Maul and Kenobi seem to be peers. I think I agree with you on this one. Although I think that Peak Kenobi > or < Peak Maul can be up for opinion. And correct me if I'm wrong, but in the past I believe you agreed that Kenobi = Anakin roughly, so wouldn't that make Maul > Anakin?

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
No you missed my point completely. Your saying Obi-Wan beat them once, so he beats them every time.

I'm saying(using your logic) that Maul was beating him in Revenge, therefore Maul wins everytime.

Opress stomped Kenobi in Revenge, therefore Opress stomps Kenobi everytime.

When Kenobi and Maul were stalemating Maul was driving Kenobi back the whole time, whilst Kenobi was using his defensive style to just survive. This also explains why Kenobi eventually ran away in Revenge.

So clearly the only win of Kenobi's was a circumstantial one-off. The brothers only lost because they were caught by surprise by Kenobi's offensive. Plus the cramped space made it difficult for the 2 giants to maneuver properly.

Also Kenobi is yet to have a convincing victory over Maul, considering Kenobi's 1 "Win" ended with Maul just fine, and Kenobi knocked out.

Maul was on the run from Kenobi +pirates. It was pirates who shot off his legs. Therefore Maul only lost to Kenobi + Pirates.

See how making up our own explanations work both ways KT

It was made clear in revenge Kenobi wasn't in the right frame of mind and not a 100% why are you using this as any kinda of proof of anything? Now, this is in stark contrast to their last fight.. where ALL parties were said to be at 100% and just fine. In one situation we're using a fight with all parties just fine... you're trying to use a fight where one party was CLEARLY stated not to be up to par. The weight of evidence isn't nearly the same.

Except Maul was not up to par nor was he as powerful as in Season 5.

Maul has always either held back or been hindered against Kenobi in TCW.

Kenobi is more powerful as well as time has gone on.. so that isn't a relevant point at all. Those cancel eachother out. What we are left with is weaker versions of both but being in the right frame of mind and kenobi taking out both of them. The other fight is kenobi not being in the right frame of mind and losing. Those are the facts.

Yeah? Prove that Kenobi grew between the Season 4 final Season 5. Also, Maul was not in the right mindset either, so there's that.

When were all combatants stated to be at 100%, KT?

They don't to be stated to be at 100% Temptest since there weren't stated to be anything wrong with them. Unless of course you're trying to get me to prove a negative, in which case, you should know that is a fallacy and requires to proving. They didn't have anything stated or hinted at that they weren't 100% thus we assume they were just fine.

Pretty sure he's talking about the Season 4 final.

Originally posted by Intrepid37
Yeah? Prove that Kenobi grew between the Season 4 final Season 5. Also, Maul was not in the right mindset either, so there's that.

You haven't seen Kenobi progressively improve his combat performance in the many fights he's had? Are you even watching the seasons or just arguing to argue? Are you really suggesting Kenobi hasn't improved from season to season?

Might as well make different topics for different characters in different seasons.

Actually, no I haven't seen Obi-Wan improve. He ran from Grievous in S5.

Originally posted by KuRuPT Thanosi
Now, this is in stark contrast to their last fight.. where ALL parties were said to be at 100% and just fine.

No, I'm asking you to provide evidence for this ^ claim.

Originally posted by KuRuPT Thanosi
They don't to be stated to be at 100% Temptest since there weren't stated to be anything wrong with them. Unless of course you're trying to get me to prove a negative, in which case, you should know that is a fallacy and requires to proving. They didn't have anything stated or hinted at that they weren't 100% thus we assume they were just fine.

lol

YOU claimed that they were all said to be at 100%. This has less to do with proving a negative (which isn't the case) and more to do with you fibbing.

Either prove your claim or reword it.

Ummm if it isn't stated that there is nothign wrong... then we assume they are at 100% correct?

Umm... Again, YOU said it WAS stated. Either provide the STATEMENT or admit there isn't one.

I just asked you a question.. if there isn't stated to be anything wrong.. we assume there is something wrong or we assume they were just fine? Simple question

Since we're in third grade again, I asked you first.

You made a claim, prove it or concede it. Then I'll answer your question.

Dude, just admit there wasn't a statement and then say that your point is still valid. Unless there is a statement saying they weren't 100% its safe to assume that they were.

Which is exactly my point... he knows that is what I meant but he wants to argue just to argue. So here, yes there was NO statement saying they were 100%, but since there is no statement saying they weren't, it's then safer to assume they were then they weren't. Fair enough? So now onto my point.. Kenobi beat them when they were all okay.. he lost to them when it was specifically stated he wasn't.

Ok, in that case Kenobi was 100% when Ventress knocked him out in 7 seconds flat, since it wasn't stated anywhere that he was below 100% in that episode.

Kinda like how Sids lost to a mace who wasn't even trying to kill him and only arrest him and thus wasn't going all out 100%. Like that?

Can we all just agree Kenobi defeats Savage with a debatable amount of difficulty?

Originally posted by KuRuPT Thanosi
Kinda like how Sids lost to a mace who wasn't even trying to kill him and only arrest him and thus wasn't going all out 100%. Like that?

What?

I just used your own argument against you, and your response was to use a completely irrelevant analogy.

Originally posted by Mizukage Yoda
Can we all just agree Kenobi defeats Savage with a debatable amount of difficulty?

Yes.

Obi-Wan is superior swordsman so he is likely to win in a contest (not involving Force powers).

In all-out situation, Opress might have a chance with his Force powers but this would be luck/smart-decision making based development.

Originally posted by KuRuPT Thanosi
Which is exactly my point... he knows that is what I meant but he wants to argue just to argue. So here, yes there was NO statement saying they were 100%, but since there is no statement saying they weren't, it's then safer to assume they were then they weren't. Fair enough? So now onto my point.. Kenobi beat them when they were all okay.. he lost to them when it was specifically stated he wasn't.

I wasn't trying to "argue just to argue" at all. But you made a claim and I demand proof for it.

I'm not telepathic: there is a HUGE difference between "let's assume they were at peak performance unless otherwise noted" (which I don't disagree with) and "they were all STATED to be at peak performance."

It's your error, not mine.

Originally posted by The_Tempest
Actually, no I haven't seen Obi-Wan improve. He ran from Grievous in S5. Either that or Grevious drastically improved.

Originally posted by S_W_LeGenD
Obi-Wan is superior swordsman so he is likely to win in a contest (not involving Force powers).

In all-out situation, Opress might have a chance with his Force powers but this would be luck/smart-decision making based development. It seems like Obi Wan's force abilities are a bit underrated. Although he's not known for excelling at using the force, he's no pushover either. He was able to stalemate Anakin's force push in ROTS, and Anakin = most powerful force user ever.

However Savage is definitely powerful in the force, so imo he'd have a chance if the situation was force powers alone. In an all out, I'm still confident Kenobi takes this 9/10.