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

Standard equipment. Can he clear? If not where does he stop?

1. Theon Greyjoy
2. Alliser Thorne
3. Jorah Mormont
4. Tormund Giantsbane
5. Bronn of the Blackwater
6. Brienne of Tarth
7. Jaime Lannister

Does he get healed and rested after every fight? Because if he does then he probably clears. Jaime might beat him, but at this point Jon just has way more feats to pull from.

Yep fully healed after each fight

You have to look at the quality of the feats though not just the quantity. Obviously Jon has a lot since he's one of the main characters

Jon beats any and everyone forever.

loses at Brienne

Brienne or Bronn.

Originally posted by Rebel95
You have to look at the quality of the feats though not just the quantity. Obviously Jon has a lot since he's one of the main characters

None of these others have ever fought anything as dangerous as a white walker. What opponents have the others fought that are better "quality" than the opponents Jon has fought?

White Walkers are only so dangerous because you can't beat them without Valyrian steel, and because their really strong. Other than that, they aren't all that skilled.

Jon loses to Bronn, Brienne and Jaime(assuming you mean two handed Jaime of course)

Originally posted by Ursumeles
White Walkers are only so dangerous because you can't beat them without Valyrian steel, and because their really strong. Other than that, they aren't all that skilled.

Again I ask, which opponents have the others fouģht that make them more dangerous than the ones Jon fought?

Originally posted by juggerman
Jon loses to Bronn, Brienne and Jaime(assuming you mean two handed Jaime of course)

What makes you think bronn, brienne and jamie are better than Jon?

Originally posted by FrothByte
What makes you think bronn, brienne and jamie are better than Jon?

Jon has trouble with dirty fighters meaning Bronn has a clear advantage.

Brienne beat several anointed knights in the melee that won her place by Renley's side. These were men that trained all their lives with a master at arms like Jon. Jon OTTH has mostly fought untrained wildlings with inferior weapons and armor, or undead with no weapons at all

With Jaime it's mostly hype if I'm being honest. I'm actually starting to think I ride his nuts a little too hard now

Originally posted by FrothByte
Again I ask, which opponents have the others fouģht that make them more dangerous than the ones Jon fought? Brienne stomped two kingsguards, Jaime fought Ned & Brienne, and Bronn was able to carve through soldiers like butter, and he beat the seemingly best knight in the Vale.

Originally posted by Ursumeles
Brienne stomped two kingsguards

3

Originally posted by juggerman
Jon has trouble with dirty fighters meaning Bronn has a clear advantage.

Brienne beat several anointed knights in the melee that won her place by Renley's side. These were men that trained all their lives with a master at arms like Jon. Jon OTTH has mostly fought untrained wildlings with inferior weapons and armor, or undead with no weapons at all

With Jaime it's mostly hype if I'm being honest. I'm actually starting to think I ride his nuts a little too hard now
Sorry for responding to every ****ing post, but I need to point a few things out.

I don't think Jon really has problems with dirty fighters anymore - sure, he had problems with Karl, but he learned from him. He isn't too honorable anymore, either - he spit Styr in the face.

That's not Brienne's best feat, just sayin'.

Nah. The problem in GoT/ASOIAF vs is that many chars barely have feats - but we know that Jaime is >>> Beric, for example, as ASOIAF is about more than feats. I mean, for example, compare what GRRM said about Jaime - "one of the greatest swordsmen of all time" and Ned - "he's a average fighter". I mean, Ned might have more feats (he doesn't, but let's assume he does); but we know that Jaime is far better regardless.

Originally posted by Ursumeles
Sorry for responding to every ****ing post, but I need to point a few things out.

I don't think Jon really has problems with dirty fighters anymore - sure, he had problems with Karl, but he learned from him. He isn't too honorable anymore, either - he spit Styr in the face.

That's not Brienne's best feat, just sayin'.

Nah. The problem in GoT/ASOIAF vs is that many chars barely have feats - but we know that Jaime is >>> Beric, for example, as ASOIAF is about more than feats. I mean, for example, compare what GRRM said about Jaime - "one of the greatest swordsmen of all time" and Ned - "he's a average fighter". I mean, Ned might have more feats (he doesn't, but let's assume he does); but we know that Jaime is far better regardless.

It's cool

Bronn is a much dirtier fighter than Jon has faced before. I could see a quick dagger toss ending this fight before it began

I know it's not her best feat. Just pointing out that she was able to best many fighter with a similar training history as Mr. Snow

We're supposed to argue based on feats here.

Originally posted by juggerman
Jon has trouble with dirty fighters meaning Bronn has a clear advantage.

Brienne beat several anointed knights in the melee that won her place by Renley's side. These were men that trained all their lives with a master at arms like Jon. Jon OTTH has mostly fought untrained wildlings with inferior weapons and armor, or undead with no weapons at all

With Jaime it's mostly hype if I'm being honest. I'm actually starting to think I ride his nuts a little too hard now

Jon has been fighting Wildlings and zombies for some time now. It has been a long time since a dirty fighter got the best of him. Bronn on the other hand has shown to have trouble dealing with a decent opponent one on one that isn't weighed down with armor. He failed to take out that Dothraki and the sand snake. Jon actually has better odds than Bronn.

Originally posted by FrothByte
Jon has been fighting Wildlings and zombies for some time now. It has been a long time since a dirty fighter got the best of him. Bronn on the other hand has shown to have trouble dealing with a decent opponent one on one that isn't weighed down with armor. He failed to take out that Dothraki and the sand snake. Jon actually has better odds than Bronn.

Exactly. Jon has not been fighting competent fighters very often. Wildlings have no armor, inferior weapons and no actual combat training. The undead are even worse. They don't dodge, block, parry or use any other technique. They kinda just run right at you so you don't have to do much other than hack and slash them down.

As for Bronn, he was inferior to the Dothraki on horseback and found himself at a disadvantage which he turned around pretty quickly. Jon wouldn't have that advantage and we've seen Bronn's accuracy with that dagger toss

Besides wildlings and white walkers, Jon has fought countless of soldiers in armor in the battle of the bastards. Also the besting Ramsey feat was pretty good. With arrow blocking reactions and all.

Originally posted by Inhuman
Besides wildlings and white walkers, Jon has fought countless of soldiers in armor in the battle of the bastards. Also the besting Ramsey feat was pretty good. With arrow blocking reactions and all.

Giant melee battles aren't really the same as 1v1 fights. People were getting knocked over by horses mid swing, cut down by arrows and all sorts of other mayhem. And he used a fairly large shield to block those arrows. Also he wouldn't need to be that fast to block the arrows if he held the shield up before Ramsey released the bolt. Dunno if that's how it happened tho

We see Ramsay shooting, then we switch to Jon and only then he held the shield up. Seems pretty clear to me.

Just rewatched it and yeah he either lifts just as Ramsay is shooting or immediately after. Very fast indeed. But that one showing doesn't erase all the others. He repeatedly is tagged by things far slower than arrows. Unless we assume that GoT characters swing swords faster than arrows fly

Killing Styr isn't a good feat - Styr basically stomped him, until Jon found a hammer. And Karl could've killed him as well, though the enviroment may gave Tanner the edge.
Anyway, it's the second WW fight, him bring able to take on multiple wildlings on once/over a short time, and I think I'm missing something.

The Attack on the Wall, Hardhome, the Battle of the Bastards, and the frozen lake fight show that Snow is a gorram marathon man. His endurance is crazy

You mean when Brienne beat a sick and weakly Hound?

Originally posted by juggerman
Giant melee battles aren't really the same as 1v1 fights. People were getting knocked over by horses mid swing, cut down by arrows and all sorts of other mayhem. And he used a fairly large shield to block those arrows. Also he wouldn't need to be that fast to block the arrows if he held the shield up before Ramsey released the bolt. Dunno if that's how it happened tho

Then all the more I'm confused why you think Bronne is better than Jon? The only clean one on one fight Bronn won was over the vale knight who was encumbered by armor and who had zero feats for us to know how good he was. Bronn couldn't beat a sand snake (sand snakes who couldn't take down a 1 armed Jamie) and was only able to beat the Dothraki through circumstance. Other than that, Bronn has been fighting in giant melee battles and didn't perform quite as impressively as Jon Snow.

Originally posted by FrothByte
Then all the more I'm confused why you think Bronne is better than Jon? The only clean one on one fight Bronn won was over the vale knight who was encumbered by armor and who had zero feats for us to know how good he was. Bronn couldn't beat a sand snake (sand snakes who couldn't take down a 1 armed Jamie) and was only able to beat the Dothraki through circumstance. Other than that, Bronn has been fighting in giant melee battles and didn't perform quite as impressively as Jon Snow. Bronn > Dragon therefore is > Jon

Bronn took on two Sandsnakes, and they fought for a minute at best. Also, two sand snakes were able to give Euron trouble, who was slaughtering Yara's men, and beat Yara herself (who cut through Ironborn with ease) in less than half a minute. So yeah, it's not a bad feat.

Weapons allowed?

Jon took on the fookin' Legend of Gin Alley.

He clear with ease.

Jon loses to Brienne.

Originally posted by FrothByte
You mean when Brienne beat a sick and weakly Hound?
Wtf are you talking about? Brienne beat him fair and square. Yeah he hand been traveling and was probably tired but the same goes for Brienne

Originally posted by ares834
Jon took on the fookin' Legend of Gin Alley.

He clear with ease.
This

Originally posted by Rebel95
Wtf are you talking about? Brienne beat him fair and square. Yeah he hand been traveling and was probably tired but the same goes for Brienne

Sandor had a festering wound that left him sickened and weakened when he fought Brienne. That is what he is "talking about".

Arya claims it causes him to be much slower in the previous episode and that is should be cauterized.

Originally posted by FrothByte
Then all the more I'm confused why you think Bronne is better than Jon? The only clean one on one fight Bronn won was over the vale knight who was encumbered by armor and who had zero feats for us to know how good he was. Bronn couldn't beat a sand snake (sand snakes who couldn't take down a 1 armed Jamie) and was only able to beat the Dothraki through circumstance. Other than that, Bronn has been fighting in giant melee battles and didn't perform quite as impressively as Jon Snow.

You forgot about the Dornishmen that accosted him and Jaime before they fought the Snakes. Bronn tossed that dagger with crazy accuracy, killed another one fast as hell and injured one for the sole purpose of giving Jaime a shot. Then he killed that last one off screen

Originally posted by ares834
Jon took on the fookin' Legend of Gin Alley.

He clear with ease.

Originally posted by Firefly218
Bronn > Dragon therefore is > Jon

I dunno which one is better

Originally posted by juggerman
You forgot about the Dornishmen that accosted him and Jaime before they fought the Snakes. Bronn tossed that dagger with crazy accuracy, killed another one fast as hell and injured one for the sole purpose of giving Jaime a shot. Then he killed that last one off screen

Yeah but Jon has dozens of feats similar feats against wildlings, nights watch and random soldiers during battle. Not the knife throwing part but the taking out fodder easily part.

Originally posted by ares834
Arya claims it causes him to be much slower in the previous episode and that is should be cauterized.
Oh wow you're right I never noticed that before. I agree that under normal circumstances the Hound would probably win, but it's still a great feat for Brienne, and "sick and weakly" is a bit of an exaggeration lol

Originally posted by FrothByte
Yeah but Jon has dozens of feats similar feats against wildlings, nights watch and random soldiers during battle. Not the knife throwing part but the taking out fodder easily part.

Different fodder with different styles. Again wildlings have no armor and shit weapons when compared to southern fighters

Originally posted by juggerman
Different fodder with different styles. Again wildlings have no armor and shit weapons when compared to southern fighters

Do you have any proof that they have shit weapons? And Bronn himself beat someone else with far superior armor to his own.

Besided, you seem to have glossed over the fact that it wasn't just wildlings that Jon fought but various other soldiers in various other battles.

Originally posted by Ursumeles
Bronn took on two Sandsnakes, and they fought for a minute at best. Also, two sand snakes were able to give Euron trouble, who was slaughtering Yara's men, and beat Yara herself (who cut through Ironborn with ease) in less than half a minute. So yeah, it's not a bad feat.

Bronn took on 2 sand snakes in the beginning but one left and he ended up facing the other in single combat. And he ended up on the worse end of that fight.

Wildlings appear to well equipped when it comes to battle, aside from armor

Originally posted by FrothByte
Do you have any proof that they have shit weapons? And Bronn himself beat someone else with far superior armor to his own.

Besided, you seem to have glossed over the fact that it wasn't just wildlings that Jon fought but various other soldiers in various other battles.

Yes I do. I believe they stated it in the show and you can see they have weapons made of bone and rocks. Some do have metal weapons but you can't argue they are able to forge weapons as well as the kingdoms south of the wall

I didn't gloss that over. I specifically stated that Jon fought in battles but mostly those are mayhem and vastly different from a 1v1 fight. Plus he has had significant trouble against dirty fighters in the past

Originally posted by Rebel95
Wildlings appear to well equipped when it comes to battle, aside from armor

You can't really claim that weapons north of the wall are as good as the weapons south

Originally posted by juggerman
Yes I do. I believe they stated it in the show and you can see they have weapons made of bone and rocks. Some do have metal weapons but you can't argue they are able to forge weapons as well as the kingdoms south of the wall

I didn't gloss that over. I specifically stated that Jon fought in battles but mostly those are mayhem and vastly different from a 1v1 fight. Plus he has had significant trouble against dirty fighters in the past



You can't really claim that weapons north of the wall are as good as the weapons south There's no reason to think weapons south of the wall are better than ones beyond the wall.

Nothing from the show backs that notion up.

Of course there is. North of the Wall is is much less "advanced" than that of in the South. Again you clearly see some of the weapons are made of wood, rock and bone.

Also remember Gendry noticing Arya had "Castle forged steel"? That clearly shows there a difference between metal made by higher ups and the lower people and that on the same side of the Wall. There is no reason to believe the Free Folk can forge weapons to the same degree as lords in the South

If anything, Northmen weapons are superior as they withstand the brutal temperature extremes without shattering and go blow for blow with "proper" Westerosi steel.

Originally posted by KingD19
If anything, Northmen weapons are superior as they withstand the brutal temperature extremes without shattering and go blow for blow with "proper" Westerosi steel.

There's nothing to show "proper Westerosi steel" can't handle cold. Winterfell is very cold and they don't have any issues

Originally posted by juggerman
Of course there is. North of the Wall is is much less "advanced" than that of in the South. Again you clearly see some of the weapons are made of wood, rock and bone.

Also remember Gendry noticing Arya had "Castle forged steel"? That clearly shows there a difference between metal made by higher ups and the lower people and that on the same side of the Wall. There is no reason to believe the Free Folk can forge weapons to the same degree as lords in the South The steel weapons used have not shown to be inferior.

Using logic it would be. Even still, many do not use steel weaponry. Even if they did, almost none have any proper training. Most use these weapons for hunting and brawling.

Originally posted by FrothByte
Bronn took on 2 sand snakes in the beginning but one left and he ended up facing the other in single combat. And he ended up on the worse end of that fight. Yeah, he fought the other one for, like, 10 seconds. In this time, he could've killed her twice (as he punched her, and as he pushed her away). He only ended up with a small cut, which only was a problem because the Snake poisoned it. And I don't understand how that's a bad feat. Jon nearly got killed by randoms as well.

Could be that Bronn didn't want to kill a woman???

I mean, he didn't wanted to fight them, and Jaime & he just infiltrated the gardens, and walked through Dorne, so it is possible that they were exhausted.

Originally posted by juggerman
Using logic it would be. Even still, many do not use steel weaponry. Even if they did, almost none have any proper training. Most use these weapons for hunting and brawling.

In the end it doesn't matter. Quality of wildling weapons won't matter since we've never seen any of their weapons fail against Jon's Valerian sword nor any of the nightwatch's supposedly superior weaponry.

Jon didn't defeat them due to his superior weaponry. And Bronn doesn't have superior weapons than Jon anyway. So at this point this is simply strawmanning.

Originally posted by Ursumeles
I mean, he didn't wanted to fight them, and Jaime & he just infiltrated the gardens, and walked through Dorne, so it is possible that they were exhausted.

Suppositions. No proof. Bottom line is, Bronn fought one of them head on and came out being injured.

If the Sandsnake is > Bronn, she would beat Jon as well, so idc.

Originally posted by Ursumeles
If the Sandsnake is > Bronn, she would beat Jon as well, so idc.

Except you'd need to first prove Bronn > Jon so you can say Sandsnake > Jon. Bottom line is, neither Bronn or the sandsnake have ever faced odds as difficult as the ones Jon did.

Yeah, Jon beat a White Walker. That isn't all that impressive considering that Jon has one of the only weapons that can kill them. And while WW are really strong, they aren't really skilled - I wouldn't even say that beating one is Jon's best feat.

But Bronn killed a seemingly famous knight, slaughtered cavalary and killed groups of soldiers. Jon and Bronn are close to each other, but Bronn is ever so slightly better.

Originally posted by Ursumeles
Yeah, Jon beat a White Walker. That isn't all that impressive considering that Jon has one of the only weapons that can kill them. And while WW are really strong, they aren't really skilled - I wouldn't even say that beating one is Jon's best feat.

But Bronn killed a seemingly famous knight, slaughtered cavalary and killed groups of soldiers. Jon and Bronn are close to each other, but Bronn is ever so slightly better.

Did you forget the multiple battles in which Jon has slaughtered dozens of men without getting a scratch on him?

The same can be said for Bronn, lol.

I don't think Bronn killed even close to as many people as Jon has in the battles we've seen

Also Ramsey noted that people in the north praise Jon as the greatest swordsman ever which is pretty impressive, but probably exaggerated

Well, at very least it suggest Jon is >> Ramsay, and Ramsay is decent himself - so it might means Jon > Bronn, but maybe not.Originally posted by Rebel95
I don't think Bronn killed even close to as many people as Jon has in the battles we've seen I mean, slaughering many people in a battle isn't all that impressive. Though from what we saw of the Blackwater, Bronn killed quite some people, though honestly here my point is kinda moot. But tbf, we followed Jon all through the BotB, so we saw all is kills in the BotB.

Originally posted by Ursumeles
But tbf, we followed Jon all through the BotB, so we saw all is kills in the BotB.
True

Originally posted by Ursumeles
Well, at very least it suggest Jon is >> Ramsay, and Ramsay is decent himself - so it might means Jon > Bronn, but maybe not. I mean, slaughering many people in a battle isn't all that impressive. Though from what we saw of the Blackwater, Bronn killed quite some people, though honestly here my point is kinda moot. But tbf, we followed Jon all through the BotB, so we saw all is kills in the BotB.

You keep saying Jon's feats are not impressive, yet you fail to list any feats from Bronn that are more impressive.

Jon has fought in more melees than Bronn and survived unscatched. Jon has fought more dangerous opponents one on one than what Bronn has. White walker, the Halfhand, that big wildling chieften... all are more impressive than the vale knight, the random dothraki rider or the sand snake.

If you want to prove Bronn is better, it's not enough that you show Jon not being impressive, you actually need to show Bronn having better feats.

Oh yeah I forgot about the halfhand, he probably let Jon win though

He did let Jon win.

In the book it was specifically mentioned that he let Jon win. I don't recall any mention of that in the show though.

In any case, I wasn't just listing the fights Jon won (Bronn didn't win against the Sandsnake either). Merely pointing out that Jon went up against stiffer competition and actually displayed better swordwork.

It's not impressive that he survived in a large scale battle lol. So did just about every character. And just fighting someone good doesn't makes one better. Bronn slaughtered groups of soldiers in a few seconds, killed cavalary, beat a seemingly famous knight etc. Like seriously, why is losing against Styr more impressive than beating the Vale Knight? Why is fighting a holding-back Halfhand better?

And no, I'm not saying that Jon's feats aren't impressive, just that they aren't as impressive as you make them out to be.

Originally posted by Ursumeles
It's not impressive that he survived in a large scale battle lol. So did just about every character. And just fighting someone good doesn't makes one better. Bronn slaughtered groups of soldiers in a few seconds, killed cavalary, beat a seemingly famous knight etc. Like seriously, why is losing against Styr more impressive than beating the Vale Knight? Why is fighting a holding-back Halfhand better?

And no, I'm not saying that Jon's feats aren't impressive, just that they aren't as impressive as you make them out to be.

Oh for....

It's Sir Vardis Egen who fought and lost in the Eyrie Trial By Combat. That is literally the 2nd time in as many weeks I've had to post that damn link.

That said, Vardis is literally featless. Bronn's combat feats require set peices such as the ballista, or wildfire, and his duelling feats are not all that impressive when you consider jon doesn't fight in heavy plate armor like Vardis did. Jon is used to unpredicable foes, so Bronn's methods would not be as effective against him as they were against Vardis, because Vardis was expecting honorable combat. Jon on the otherhand knows better, and has fought against beings with supernatural stamina and feel no pain.

You do not know how jarring it is when you face down a foe that literally gives no consideration to pain nor injury.

I know that Vardis is featless, except for his fight against Bronn, but he still seems to be a famed knight.

Anyway, the White Walkers are also just about featless, skill wise - they beat the Thenn as he couldn't block their attack, and contended with Jon. And like I said, I can see Jon winning this -as he has similar feats as Bronn, IIRC he slaughtered 3 wildlings in like four seconds, and has better reach- but the large scale battles and WW feats aren't that impressive.

But tbf, Jon is meant to be better.

Originally posted by Ursumeles
I know that Vardis is featless, except for his fight against Bronn, but he still seems to be a famed knight.

Anyway, the White Walkers are also just about featless, skill wise - they beat the Thenn as he couldn't block their attack, and contended with Jon. And like I said, I can see Jon winning this -as he has similar feats as Bronn, IIRC he slaughtered 3 wildlings in like four seconds, and has better reach- but the large scale battles and WW feats aren't that impressive.

But tbf, Jon is meant to be better.

White Walkers are Featless? Well in a way. They DID route Jeor's rangers at the Fist of the First Men way back in Season 3.

I don't think the Night's Watch had weapons to beat the WW, tho.

Originally posted by Ursumeles
I don't think the Night's Watch had weapons to beat the WW, tho.

They had that bag of dragonglass Sam found with them. But it wasn't until Sam rescues Gilly that we find out the glass kills Walkers.

Originally posted by Ursumeles
It's not impressive that he survived in a large scale battle lol. So did just about every character. And just fighting someone good doesn't makes one better. Bronn slaughtered groups of soldiers in a few seconds, killed cavalary, beat a seemingly famous knight etc. Like seriously, why is losing against Styr more impressive than beating the Vale Knight? Why is fighting a holding-back Halfhand better?

And no, I'm not saying that Jon's feats aren't impressive, just that they aren't as impressive as you make them out to be.

A famed knight? Where did you get that from? Vardis was a known to the others in the vale but it's not like his name was being thrown around like he was some champion fighter.

Also, Jon won against Styr. So not sure what you're saying.

In the end, every single feat that Bronn has, Jon has something better. I keep asking, name a feat of Bronn that makes him better. Because all you're doing is listing Bronn feats that are lesser than what Jon has.

You say White Walkers are featless? Well, so are the sandsnakes, a random dothraki rider or Vardis. At least the white walkers are super strong and durable, which makes beating one way more impressive than fighting those featless opponents that Bronn fought.

Didn't Jon get launched by a Walker? iirc hitting that column should've shattered his spine, but he got right back up.

Originally posted by KingD19
Didn't Jon get launched by a Walker? iirc hitting that column should've shattered his spine, but he got right back up.

The anti-Jon team is lowballing like crazy. I can understand why a case for Brienne or Jamie can be made, but Bronn literally has done nothing more impressive than what Jon did, so all they do is try to make it seem like defeating a white walker is something that any person with valyrian steel can easily do.

Originally posted by FrothByte

Also, Jon won against Styr. So not sure what you're saying.

You say White Walkers are featless? Well, so are the sandsnakes, a random dothraki rider or Vardis. At least the white walkers are super strong and durable, which makes beating one way more impressive than fighting those featless opponents that Bronn fought.
After Jon got disarmed, Styr throwed him around like a ragdoll instead of killing him, and Jon got lucky and found a hammer. I don't see how that's a legit win.

You don't get what I'm saying. If we say both are featless, Jon needed far longer than Bronn to kill his opponents. The problem with the White Walkers is that they haven't fought anyone bar Jon and that random Thenn, and Jon has a specific weapon that counters them - their durability isn't helping them. Jon isn't good because he fought the WW, the WW are good because they contended with Jon.
Anyway, Jon has better feats - like slaughtering wildlings in seconds-, but Bronn has similar feats to those - slaughtering soldiers & cavalary, as well as clansmen. I can see why you think Jon wins, and I might even start to agree, because of his reach & reflexes, but things like getting beaten by Styr, beating the White Walkers (who don't have feats except for fighting Jon) and surving the BotB isn't good enough.

@KingD19 Styr and the Walker both tossed him around and should have broken his bones, but Jon just continued fighting. He's crazy durable.

Originally posted by Ursumeles
After Jon got disarmed, Styr throwed him around like a ragdoll instead of killing him, and Jon got lucky and found a hammer. I don't see how that's a legit win.

You don't get what I'm saying. If we say both are featless, Jon needed far longer than Bronn to kill his opponents. The problem with the White Walkers is that they haven't fought anyone bar Jon and that random Thenn, and Jon has a specific weapon that counters them - their durability isn't helping them. Jon isn't good because he fought the WW, the WW are good because they contended with Jon.
Anyway, Jon has better feats - like slaughtering wildlings in seconds-, but Bronn has similar feats to those - slaughtering soldiers & cavalary, as well as clansmen. I can see why you think Jon wins, and I might even start to agree, because of his reach & reflexes, but things like getting beaten by Styr, beating the White Walkers (who don't have feats except for fighting Jon) and surving the BotB isn't good enough.

@KingD19 Styr and the Walker both tossed him around and should have broken his bones, but Jon just continued fighting. He's crazy durable.

If you think Jon didn't beat Styr cleanly because he was lucky enough to find a hammer, then Bronn obviously didn't beat the dothraki rider cleanly, considering he only won because he was lucky enough to find a ballista. Agreed? So if you want to say Jon got beaten by Styr, then Bronn was clearly beaten by a random Dothraki. That's an even worse showing.

As for Jon having a weapon against WW, that's not much different from Bronn's sword easily being able to kill his opponents with a direct hit. What's different though is that you can't really block most of the WW's hits without getting thrown around. Bronn has never fought anyone that strong.

And for the last time, Jon didn't only slaughter wildlings. He slaughtered numerous soldiers while being in other battles, just like Bronn did.

Originally posted by FrothByte
If you think Jon didn't beat Styr cleanly because he was lucky enough to find a hammer, then Bronn obviously didn't beat the dothraki rider cleanly, considering he only won because he was lucky enough to find a ballista. Agreed? So if you want to say Jon got beaten by Styr, then Bronn was clearly beaten by a random Dothraki. That's an even worse showing.

As for Jon having a weapon against WW, that's not much different from Bronn's sword easily being able to kill his opponents with a direct hit. What's different though is that you can't really block most of the WW's hits without getting thrown around. Bronn has never fought anyone that strong.

And for the last time, Jon didn't only slaughter wildlings. He slaughtered numerous soldiers while being in other battles, just like Bronn did.
Link to Dothraki vs Bronn?
Anyway, you don't get what I'm saying. Jon losing to Styr isn't a bad showing for Jon - it's a good showing for Styr, but Styr is basically featless except for his fight with Jon (I guess he slaughtered crows & farmers tho), but being featless =/= being bad. If Bronn really lost to a Dothraki (as in, being disarmed and just being lucky to "find" a weapon) then it's a good feat for the Dothraji.

No, it is really different. If the Walkers just get touched by the sword, they fall into pieces. If a soldier get's a cut, then he just fights on - or Jorah woud've died because Qotho cut him in the cheek
And indeed Bronn never fought anyone that strong, but that doesn't means he can't beat a WW (with the right weapon, of course). Bronn has similar strenght feats to Jon, though I'd give Jon the edge. I mean, Arthur Dayne never fought anyone as strong as The Mountain, but does that mean Oberyn would beat Dayne?

And I know he didn't. I never said otherwise. I know Jon fought Wildlings, Soldiers, Wights and Crows. It's just that his feats against the wildlings are the most impressive, imo. And I don't think that random Bolton soldiers are >> the wildlings at Castle Black anyway.

Originally posted by Ursumeles
Link to Dothraki vs Bronn?
Anyway, you don't get what I'm saying. Jon losing to Styr isn't a bad showing for Jon - it's a good showing for Styr, but Styr is basically featless except for his fight with Jon (I guess he slaughtered crows & farmers tho), but being featless =/= being bad. If Bronn really lost to a Dothraki (as in, being disarmed and just being lucky to "find" a weapon) then it's a good feat for the Dothraji.

No, it is really different. If the Walkers just get touched by the sword, they fall into pieces. If a soldier get's a cut, then he just fights on - or Jorah woud've died because Qotho cut him in the cheek
And indeed Bronn never fought anyone that strong, but that doesn't means he can't beat a WW (with the right weapon, of course). Bronn has similar strenght feats to Jon, though I'd give Jon the edge. I mean, Arthur Dayne never fought anyone as strong as The Mountain, but does that mean Oberyn would beat Dayne?

And I know he didn't. I never said otherwise. I know Jon fought Wildlings, Soldiers, Wights and Crows. It's just that his feats against the wildlings are the most impressive, imo. And I don't think that random Bolton soldiers are >> the wildlings at Castle Black anyway.

There's a big difference between Jon vs. Styr and Bronn vs. random Dothraki. For one thing, Jon actually gave Styr a fight, looked to even have the edge up until they started fighting h2h. Whereas Bronn just ran away from the Dothraki. Styr is also one of the most feared wildling chieftains. He's strong, he's ruthless, he's a renowned warrior. Defeating a named character like that is way more impressive than beating random fodder, in this case a random dothraki. Here's the link:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ioMJMZptFw0

As for the WW, you're right, a single hit will kill them with the right weapon, though that's probably countered by the fact that a single hit from them will probably kill you too. The there's the fact that Jon didn't fight the WW initially with his sword. He fought with a random sword, even tried to go h2h with the WW. He got beat up bloody but still continued to fight. That's a better show of durability and heart than what Bronn ever did. Jon fought a WW a second time, this time he didn't even get hit. For someone to outskill an opponent who's massively stronger than they are with a longer reach, that's something Bronn has never done. Bronn was even afraid to go up against the Mountain.

In the end, Bronn hasn't gone up against opponents as dangerous as Jon has, nor has he dispatched these opponents as efficiently as Jon has. So there really is no logical reason why anyone would think he wins over Jon.

Book Jon loses to book Jorah.

If we're going with show versions, he probably gets to Bronn and loses.

Jon is pretty good with the sword and gets a lot of love as the main character, but he was never one of the elite fighters.

^ I mean, Show! Jon might not be Top-Tier, as in Jaime-level, but he's around the same level as the likes of Bronn / Daario / Greyworm, honestly. Why do you think Bronn wins, though?

@FrothByte Let's just agree to disagree. I don't really care for the debate anymore, you don't seem to understand / adress some of my points (maybe because of my shit english lol) and it's not like one of us will change our viewpoint.

Originally posted by random letters
Book Jon loses to book Jorah.

If we're going with show versions, he probably gets to Bronn and loses.

Jon is pretty good with the sword and gets a lot of love as the main character, but he was never one of the elite fighters. Bronn isn't an elite fighter.

Originally posted by Ursumeles

@FrothByte Let's just agree to disagree. I don't really care for the debate anymore, you don't seem to understand / adress some of my points (maybe because of my shit english lol) and it's not like one of us will change our viewpoint.

As far as I can tell, I just finished countering your points and am waiting to see how you get out of that corner. I can respect your decision to drop out of the debate but it seems like you're taking the easy way out.

Originally posted by random letters
Book Jon loses to book Jorah.

If we're going with show versions, he probably gets to Bronn and loses.

Jon is pretty good with the sword and gets a lot of love as the main character, but he was never one of the elite fighters.

Book Jon was described as being one heck of a sword fighter. Yeah he's not top tier like Jamie is but he's definitely one of the better ones.

Originally posted by Mindset
Bronn isn't an elite fighter.

Bronn is an Omega Level fighter, you dirty infidel.

DFVf2Qs7ynk

Originally posted by FrothByte
As far as I can tell, I just finished countering your points and am waiting to see how you get out of that corner. I can respect your decision to drop out of the debate but it seems like you're taking the easy way out. Whatever let's you sleep at night.

Man, Froth just convinced me that Bronn beats Jon. Fawken skills m8. #toogood4me.

Originally posted by Ursumeles
If Bronn really lost to a Dothraki (as in, being disarmed and just being lucky to "find" a weapon) then it's a good feat for the Dothraji.
That's kinda what happened. IIRC, the dothraki knocked Bronn off his horse and Bronn basically just ran away to the scorpion which he used to kill the dothraki.

And how is losing on horseback on a Dothraki, who is clearly capable (dodging a dagger) a bad feat?
They didn't even crossed blades

Originally posted by FrothByte
In the end it doesn't matter. Quality of wildling weapons won't matter since we've never seen any of their weapons fail against Jon's Valerian sword nor any of the nightwatch's supposedly superior weaponry.

Jon didn't defeat them due to his superior weaponry. And Bronn doesn't have superior weapons than Jon anyway. So at this point this is simply strawmanning.

I don't think you know what strawmanning is. I gave multiple points as to why I don't think Jon fighting undead and wildlings were as impressive as others might seem and you decided to focus on weaponry.

Originally posted by juggerman
Exactly. Jon has not been fighting competent fighters very often. Wildlings have no armor, inferior weapons and no actual combat training. The undead are even worse. They don't dodge, block, parry or use any other technique. They kinda just run right at you so you don't have to do much other than hack and slash them down.

As you can see, them having inferior weaponry is only a small part of my point

^ Well, Wildlings are often experienced killer, and it would make sense if the ones that attacked Castle Black were actually among the best of them. It's not like Dothraki have "official training" either. Correct me if I'm wrong, though.
And what is the basis that the Soldiers have that much training? It seems like they are just smallfolk to me.

Anyway, the impressive thing about Jon's wildlings feat is that he's capable of killing several opponents in only a few opinions, which is impressive regardless of his opponents being wildlings, smallfolk or whatever.

Originally posted by Ursumeles
^ Well, Wildlings are often experienced killer, and it would make sense if the ones that attacked Castle Black were actually among the best of them. It's not like Dothraki have "official training" either. Correct me if I'm wrong, though.
And what is the basis that the Soldiers have that much training? It seems like they are just smallfolk to me.

Anyway, the impressive thing about Jon's wildlings feat is that he's capable of killing several opponents in only a few opinions, which is impressive regardless of his opponents being wildlings, smallfolk or whatever.

Oh don't get me wrong, I think Jon is an excellent fighter in this universe. My contention is that people seem to think fighting multiple low skilled opponents equals being able to beat a single higher skilled opponent. In a melee fight you use different tactics than against one guy. Plus Bronn fights dirty which again Jon has had trouble with before. And finally, Bronn had his dagger that he can whip at Jon's throat with crazy accuracy. That would likely end the fight right there.

To be fair, if this were a straight up, no BS, one sword only and no armor for each match up then I'd side with Jon. But where anything goes, my money is on Bronn

EDIT: I just realised I didn't answer your question. Wildlings are indeed killers but again, how they fight is important. Jon has been training from a young age by a Master at Arms who taught him how to properly hold a blade, how to swing it, how to parry, feint, dodge and all manner of other techniques to use while in combat facing an opponent of equal or greater skill. The Wildlings could never hope to replicate such extensive training in the wilds of the True North. I would liken it that time the UFC had Marines come in and fight professional fighters. Marines are trained to kill in a multitude of ways this was a specific discipline that the MMA guys had a shit ton more experience in. Yeah they're good fighters compared to your average Joe but be was by no means hot shit in that area

As far as the Dothraki, we have no idea how Bronn stacked up in a actual sword fight. What we saw was the Bloodrider was superior to Bronn on horseback and it has been stated in the series that they train on horse all their lives. So it's understandable that he out performed Bronn while mounted.

Jon will catch the dagger and bury it in Bronn's ass.

Originally posted by Mindset
Jon will catch the dagger and bury it in Bronn's ass.

Possible. Or it might be buried in Jon's eye. Does Jon have Dagger catching feats I'm unaware of?

Originally posted by juggerman
Oh don't get me wrong, I think Jon is an excellent fighter in this universe. My contention is that people seem to think fighting multiple low skilled opponents equals being able to beat a single higher skilled opponent. In a melee fight you use different tactics than against one guy. Plus Bronn fights dirty which again Jon has had trouble with before. And finally, Bronn had his dagger that he can whip at Jon's throat with crazy accuracy. That would likely end the fight right there.

To be fair, if this were a straight up, no BS, one sword only and no armor for each match up then I'd side with Jon. But where anything goes, my money is on Bronn

EDIT: I just realised I didn't answer your question. Wildlings are indeed killers but again, how they fight is important. Jon has been training from a young age by a Master at Arms who taught him how to properly hold a blade, how to swing it, how to parry, feint, dodge and all manner of other techniques to use while in combat facing an opponent of equal or greater skill. The Wildlings could never hope to replicate such extensive training in the wilds of the True North. I would liken it that time the UFC had Marines come in and fight professional fighters. Marines are trained to kill in a multitude of ways this was a specific discipline that the MMA guys had a shit ton more experience in. Yeah they're good fighters compared to your average Joe but be was by no means hot shit in that area

As far as the Dothraki, we have no idea how Bronn stacked up in a actual sword fight. What we saw was the Bloodrider was superior to Bronn on horseback and it has been stated in the series that they train on horse all their lives. So it's understandable that he out performed Bronn while mounted.

My main contention with your arguments is that although I see your point,I don't see why you think Bronn's feats are better. Considering that for every feat Bronn has, Jon has one better. So my main issue with your stance is that you seem to be applying some form of double standard.

Originally posted by FrothByte
My main contention with your arguments is that although I see your point,I don't see why you think Bronn's feats are better. Considering that for every feat Bronn has, Jon has one better. So my main issue with your stance is that you seem to be applying some form of double standard.

I never said Bronn has better feats.

Originally posted by juggerman
I never said Bronn has better feats.

If you're not saying that Bronn has better feats, why are you giving him the win?

Originally posted by Silent Master
If you're not saying that Bronn has better feats, why are you giving him the win?

If you read my posts you'll see

Originally posted by juggerman
If you read my posts you'll see

Because you like him better, Fair enough.

Originally posted by Silent Master
Because you like him better, Fair enough.

Well that was easy

Originally posted by juggerman
Oh don't get me wrong, I think Jon is an excellent fighter in this universe. My contention is that people seem to think fighting multiple low skilled opponents equals being able to beat a single higher skilled opponent. In a melee fight you use different tactics than against one guy. Plus Bronn fights dirty which again Jon has had trouble with before. Jon is pretty adaptable - while he had problems with Tanner, he was able to fight against Styr (even though Styr disarmed him), and I don't think he ever struggled with a fighting style, other than against Karl.
And he had problem with dirty fighting while he fought honorable himself -later on, he spit Styr in the face.


That wasn't my point, actually. My point is that Wildlings are usually as good as the random soldiers Bronn beat - though guys like Blooriders, Lords and Knights are better. And after all, it's still impressive to beat 3 somewhat skilled opponents in a few seconds.

Yeah, I know, they haven't even crossed blades, and the random Dothraki has some good showings. I'm just saying that Dothraki are another example of good fodder without any special training.
Based on what is it a bloodrider, though?

Originally posted by Ursumeles
Jon is pretty adaptable - while he had problems with Tanner, he was able to fight against Styr (even though Styr disarmed him), and I don't think he ever struggled with a fighting style, other than against Karl.
And he had problem with dirty fighting while he fought honorable himself -later on, he spit Styr in the face.


That wasn't my point, actually. My point is that Wildlings are usually as good as the random soldiers Bronn beat - though guys like Blooriders, Lords and Knights are better. And after all, it's still impressive to beat 3 somewhat skilled opponents in a few seconds.

Yeah, I know, they haven't even crossed blades, and the random Dothraki has some good showings. I'm just saying that Dothraki are another example of good fodder without any special training.
Based on what is it a bloodrider, though?

Jon is very adaptable but as stated he has trouble in fights that aren't straight up. Bronn fights dirty and I think that's enough to edge it in his favor since Jon has shown issues against fighters like that

I would place soldier fodder over wildling fodder simply due to training and discipline but I can see why you might place them evenly

No sure what you meant by that last question though

Originally posted by juggerman
Jon is very adaptable but as stated he has trouble in fights that aren't straight up. Bronn fights dirty and I think that's enough to edge it in his favor since Jon has shown issues against fighters like that

I would place soldier fodder over wildling fodder simply due to training and discipline but I can see why you might place them evenly

No sure what you meant by that last question though Fair enough.

I'd put Sellswords > wildlings. But random soldiers that are probably part of the smallfolk? Nah.

Based on what is the Dothraki that killed Bronn's horse a blood rider?

Originally posted by Ursumeles
Fair enough.

I'd put Sellswords > wildlings. But random soldiers that are probably part of the smallfolk? Nah.

Based on what is the Dothraki that killed Bronn's horse a blood rider?

If we put 1 average Wildling against 1 average soldier I'd think the soldier would win more often than not. Training, weaponry, discipline, and armor advantages mean something.

I don't know honestly. What's the different ranks of Dothraki? I've heard of a Dothraki Screamer but I'm not sure if that's a rank/type or if it's just cuz they scream when they attack

I mean, it depends - both the wildlings in CB & Bolton soldiers had no problem sacrificing their lives, though the soldiers indeed have better weaponary. Not that it makes much of a difference for Jon, though.

Idk tbh, but the bloodriders are guys like Qotho - the best fighters & right hands of their khal. Drogo had only three of them (though I don't know if there are always three), so it's a special rank.

Originally posted by Ursumeles
I mean, it depends - both the wildlings in CB & Bolton soldiers had no problem sacrificing their lives, though the soldiers indeed have better weaponary. Not that it makes much of a difference for Jon, though.

Idk tbh, but the bloodriders are guys like Qotho - the best fighters & right hands of their khal. Drogo had only three of them (though I don't know if there are always three), so it's a special rank.

I think it does make a difference. You fight differently against a person with no armor vs a person with armor. Same for differences in weaponry

I think you're right in that Bloodriders are a specific type of Dothraki so there's no reason to assume Bronn's opponent was one. But all the men are trained on horseback from the time they are old enough to ride so even some of the worst fighters would still be superior on horseback to most Westerosi men

I mean it as in slaughtering several opponents in a few seconds is impressive either way. And at least the northern armor seems easy to pierce. But fair enough.

Obviously, Dothraki are the best riders in the world. It seems like only knights, lords & the likes are trained to ride, which would make sense considering the prize of horses, and even then the best Dothraki should be > most of the Westerosi on horseback (with exceptions like Loras and Jaime).

Originally posted by Ursumeles
I mean it as in slaughtering several opponents in a few seconds is impressive either way. And at least the northern armor seems easy to pierce. But fair enough.

Obviously, Dothraki are the best riders in the world. It seems like only knights, lords & the likes are trained to ride, which would make sense considering the prize of horses, and even then the best Dothraki should be > most of the Westerosi on horseback (with exceptions like Loras and Jaime).

Well to be fair the Westerosi blades are made specifically to pierce Westerosi armor

Agreed

Originally posted by juggerman
I never said Bronn has better feats.

Which is why I'm questioning why you still think he wins.... since feats is what we use in mvf.

He said several times he thinks that Bronn wins because of his style & dagger...

Originally posted by Ursumeles
He said several times he thinks that Bronn wins because of his style & dagger...

Understood. And I'm asking for any proof/feats to back up that position, which is the norm for debates here. You state your opinion and others ask you to back it up. Pretty standard procedure.

Originally posted by FrothByte
Which is why I'm questioning why you still think he wins.... since feats is what we use in mvf.

Dirty fighters give Jon mucho trouble as we've seen and Bronn is a dirty ass fighter so that gives him an advantage. And that dagger toss he used against the Dornishman would be a potential fight ender.

Originally posted by juggerman
Dirty fighters give Jon mucho trouble as we've seen and Bronn is a dirty ass fighter so that gives him an advantage. And that dagger toss he used against the Dornishman would be a potential fight ender.

Jon has fought against barbarians, cannibals, traitors, enemy soldiers, thieves, murderers, rapists, undead humans, white walkers, undead bears and giants.... but for some reason you think he'll have trouble with someone just because they fight dirty?

What, you think all the rest of those opponents he fought followed honorable rules of combat??

Originally posted by FrothByte
Jon has fought against barbarians, cannibals, traitors, enemy soldiers, thieves, murderers, rapists, undead humans, white walkers, undead bears and giants.... but for some reason you think he'll have trouble with someone just because they fight dirty?

What, you think all the rest of those opponents he fought followed honorable rules of combat??

As I've pointed out group combat is very different than 1v1. Also most of the people you've mentioned have had little to no proper training so of course Jon had advantages.

I see you've ignored the dagger throwing part so shall I assume we agree there?

Originally posted by juggerman
As I've pointed out group combat is very different than 1v1. Also most of the people you've mentioned have had little to no proper training so of course Jon had advantages.

I see you've ignored the dagger throwing part so shall I assume we agree there?

If you want to fixate about the dagger, people have blocked Bronn's dagger throw before. So it's not really an assured victory. Besides, what's to stop Jon from throwing a dagger of his own?

You assume that the people I mentioned don't have formal training. How would you know? For that matter, how do you know that Bronn has had formal training? It seems you're applying a double standard here. And if group battles are very different than 1v1 fights, well, Bronn has only ever won one 1v1 fight so his track record doesn't seem so good on that end either.

Originally posted by FrothByte
If you want to fixate about the dagger, people have blocked Bronn's dagger throw before. So it's not really an assured victory. Besides, what's to stop Jon from throwing a dagger of his own?

You assume that the people I mentioned don't have formal training. How would you know? For that matter, how do you know that Bronn has had formal training? It seems you're applying a double standard here. And if group battles are very different than 1v1 fights, well, Bronn has only ever won one 1v1 fight so his track record doesn't seem so good on that end either.

I never said it was assured but I don't recall Jon swatting a dagger out of the air before. If he has please let me know. If not then it is a way for Bronn to win

What evidence do you have that they did have training. The same point I made about weapons North of the Wall goes for training. They aren't the type of people that dedicate several hours daily just to training like people South of the Wall do. The True North is wild and unyielding, there are very few "safe" places like the castles in the South. It's unrealistic to assume Wildlings would be trained as well as Jon was. If you disagree please provide reasoning

As far as Bronn's training goes, we actually see Bronn in action vs the nobodies Jon has killed. We know Bronn, being a very successful sellsword, HAS to be skilled in order to survive. Survive in combat as well as make a living. If you are unskilled you die young being a sellsword. Plus both Tyrion and Jaime freaking Lannister thought he was good enough to train Jaime. Jaime would never allow someone unskilled to train him.

Originally posted by juggerman
I never said it was assured but I don't recall Jon swatting a dagger out of the air before. If he has please let me know. If not then it is a way for Bronn to win

What evidence do you have that they did have training. The same point I made about weapons North of the Wall goes for training. They aren't the type of people that dedicate several hours daily just to training like people South of the Wall do. The True North is wild and unyielding, there are very few "safe" places like the castles in the South. It's unrealistic to assume Wildlings would be trained as well as Jon was. If you disagree please provide reasoning

As far as Bronn's training goes, we actually see Bronn in action vs the nobodies Jon has killed. We know Bronn, being a very successful sellsword, HAS to be skilled in order to survive. Survive in combat as well as make a living. If you are unskilled you die young being a sellsword. Plus both Tyrion and Jaime freaking Lannister thought he was good enough to train Jaime. Jaime would never allow someone unskilled to train him.

How would you know that they don't dedicate several hours to learning how to fight? Either prove it or admit it's just an opinion. You think warrior races who spend a lot of time fighting and killing one another don't spend the time to learn how to do it properly? You claim wildlings have no formal training despite having no proof, yet act like Bronn has formal training despite having no proof. When has Bronn ever fought a trained fighter straight up and managed to look good hmm?

In fact, if you thought so highly of training, then you should automatically give Jon the win since he has more evidence of formal training than Bronn. But for some reason your "training" angle only comes into play whenever you talk about wildlings.

Jamie only trained with Bronn because they knew Bronn could be discreet.

You're putting way too much faith in a dagger throw that only worked once that wasn't in a 1v1 fight if I recall. So now I'm confused, are we considering group battles legit or not?

Originally posted by FrothByte
How would you know that they don't dedicate several hours to learning how to fight? Either prove it or admit it's just an opinion. You think warrior races who spend a lot of time fighting and killing one another don't spend the time to learn how to do it properly? You claim wildlings have no formal training despite having no proof, yet act like Bronn has formal training despite having no proof. When has Bronn ever fought a trained fighter straight up and managed to look good hmm?

In fact, if you thought so highly of training, then you should automatically give Jon the win since he has more evidence of formal training than Bronn. But for some reason your "training" angle only comes into play whenever you talk about wildlings.

Jamie only trained with Bronn because they knew Bronn could be discreet.

You're putting way too much faith in a dagger throw that only worked once that wasn't in a 1v1 fight if I recall. So now I'm confused, are we considering group battles legit or not?

Why is it that every time the Northern armies make it past the Wall they are easily pushed back by Winterfell and it's vassals? It's because they are not as well trained and disciplined. You act as if all training and fighting are the same. A man trained in a castle by multiple different teachers, not constantly near death from cold and hunger will be better trained than those on the other end. How many great fighters can you name from North of the Wall? How many legendary swordsmen, or bowmen, or spearmen or anything-men? Or women? How many can you think of South of the Wall? HUGE difference. The combat training is leagues apart. Again if you can give me ONE example of someone born North of the Wall that compares to the training available at Winterfell to Jon then you might have a point. Also since you questioned me about weaponry earlier, at the 1:08 mark they specifically mention that the Wildlings have pretty shitty weapons: p0BRaq-vur0

Gonna keep looking for videos that mention skill or training since that would help here

I already stated that Jon has better feats and would beat Bronn if he couldn't resort to underhanded fighting techniques so I don't why you need me to say it again...

That's untrue. We know for a fact that Bronn isn't the only discreet person in King's Landing. Bronn was chosen for his skill AND his ability to keep his mouth shut. In fact in the novels Jaime trained with Ser Ilyn Payne because he couldn't talk or write. Now that's discreet. Why didn't Jaime go that route if all he wanted was discretion? Jaime would never allow someone unskilled to train him period.

We've always considered group fights. I simply pointed out that they differ in tactics one uses. That dagger toss was damn accurate and unless you have a feat from Jon that would make it completely useless it's a viable strategy. I never said it was a automatic win or it was the only way he could win so idk why you claim I'm putting so much faith in it. I just said it could end the fight which it realistically could