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

SABERS ONLY

Maul takes it.

Originally posted by Emperordmb
Maul takes it.

Satele hasn't the feats to back up a win, she literally does nothing.

Nah, she can give a great fight imo.

Satele..

How does TPM Maul take this? A supposed Battlemaster, a jedi past his prime that utilized and extremely acrobatic form. among a few are his only feats! and he got beaten by TPM Kenobi who Is in no ****ing way on the same level as Satale!
Satale as a padawan held her own against Malgus and Vindican along with her master, and as the grandmaster Satale defeated 6 Sith Jedi and Malgus - albeit with the force. If this were TCW Maul I'd be inclined to give it to Maul but in this case Satale Takes it.

Using Maul's death to TPM Kenobi As an argument against him Is misleading and irrelevant.

Originally posted by XSUPREMEXSKILLZ
Using Maul's death to TPM Kenobi As an argument against him Is misleading and irrelevant.

http://www.reactiongifs.com/r/amusd.gif

Right..... at the risk of falling into your little trap, i'll counter and say. Is Bastila losing to Revan irrelevant? even though it shows that she can duel somewhat on par with him? Is Kolar losing to Grevious not relevant even though it shows how much pain he can take before falling? Everything from failure to success is relevant to judging a character's ability to defeat his/her opponent.

When has Bastila ever been stated to be anywhere near Revan's level? And how is Kolar losing to Grievous even relevant? TPM Maul didn't lose because he was similar to Kenobi in skill. He lost for very different reasons than the people you named. Kenobi one because of chance and inspite of weakness.

Saying Kenobi beat Maul is like saying Vader beat Sidious on the Death Star. Maul was literally just taking on kenobi and qui gonn simultaneously, treating kenobi as a minor, if not nonexistent, threat.

Originally posted by FreshestSlice
When has Bastila ever been stated to be anywhere near Revan's level? And how is Kolar losing to Grievous even relevant? TPM Maul didn't lose because he was similar to Kenobi in skill. He lost for very different reasons than the people you named. Kenobi one because of chance and inspite of weakness.

She dueled against Him and Malak as a show of her strength and it is always brought up when she's pit up against anyone. Am I wrong? or perhaps you'd like to point me to a bastila vs thread where that is not even mentioned?

Originally posted by XSUPREMEXSKILLZ
Saying Kenobi beat Maul is like saying Vader beat Sidious on the Death Star. Maul was literally just taking on kenobi and qui gonn simultaneously, treating kenobi as a minor, if not nonexistent, threat.

I expected such an imbecile comment from PT or Carthage but not from you of all people, Still I was prepared for this and am willing to admit that I am wrong when the time calls for it...
This is not it. Maul was not treating Kenobi as a non-existant threat if we go by higher canon(Movie) he's earnestly holding both of the jedi, never is he seen "taking it easy" on Kenobi unless of course you mean kicking him away or are you speaking of their fight after Jinn's death? which does not mean anything aside from him trying to separate Kenobi and Jinn which is evidently more likely. it should be that in his duel against them neither seem to be getting the edge until Maul separated them from each other and he killed jinn.

Here let me give you some points that have some merit to them instead of giving me shit for saying that TPM Kenobi defeating Maul.

#1. (like you said only thoroughly explained)Maul underestimated Kenobi, because he was a mere apprentice Maul decided that he need not try his earnest on a padawan and as such Maul did not see him as a viable threat which is quite likely as we have seen people underestimate their foes.

#2. Kenobi drew on his anger and Rage to defeat Maul, which caught the sith off guard and caused him his legs.

#3 then there's also the theory which says that Maul was tired after the duel with both jedi and jinn and was ripe for the pickings when Kenobi fought him. feel free to add to the fray.

Confession: I admittedly think Maul is a highly overrated character, who should've stayed dead. still I will not deny his prowess as of TCW But this one is not his peak and as such he holds nothing that will allow him to best a grandmaster of the order and extremely powerful jedi.

Originally posted by XSUPREMEXSKILLZ
Saying Kenobi beat Maul is like saying Vader beat Sidious on the Death Star. Maul was literally just taking on kenobi and qui gonn simultaneously, treating kenobi as a minor, if not nonexistent, threat.

Bloodlusted Kenobi cut Maul's saber in half (a stratagem that would typically disarm an opponent) and put him on his ass. He wasn't a minor nonexistent threat at that point bro.

Key words being, "bloodlusted," and, "at that point." Throughout the majority of the fight, Kenobi wasn't causing too much trouble for maul.

Although I am open to arguments in Satele's favor.

Originally posted by Fated Xtasy
She dueled against Him and Malak as a show of her strength and it is always brought up when she's pit up against anyone. Am I wrong? or perhaps you'd like to point me to a bastila vs thread where that is not even mentioned?

Revan and Malak would both destroy Bastila. Revan beats her down solo several times, even when she has the amp from the Star Forge. As for Bastila vs Malak, the very nature of their relationship as master and apprentice shows him to be the better. Bastila was his apprentice for a month at the most. I doubt she improved greatly from their Leviathan encounter.