Trials: Dooku vs Sidious

Originally posted by Veneficus
Obi-Wan IS a better duelist than Anakin. He has more experience, skills and knowledge. He might not have as much raw power but he has more skill.

According to Nick Gillard, who is the designer, creator, and overall mastermind of the Star Wars dueling universe, Obi-Wan is not the superior duelist. Obi-Wan is a level 8, and while he is an exceptional Jedi, he is not quite on Anakin's level - who is a level 9. Dooku is also ranked as a level 9, which would explain how the Count so easily disposed of Obi-Wan.

According to Gillard and Lucas, Obi-Wan is able to compete with Anakin only because he is aware of how Anakin fights, and that Obi-Wan's skill at defense is on par with Anakin's skill at offense.

Level 9s:

Yoda
Sidious
Mace
Dooku

Anakin IS a better duelist in RotS than Obi-Wan.

Originally posted by Escape81
Superiority is in question. No, Sorgo, Obi-Wan did not own Anakin. I seem to recall their duel being immensely long and intense. I also recall Anakin gaining the upper hand on various occasions. No, I'm afraid Obi-Wan did not own Anakin.

In fact, it would be questionable how the fight would've ended if Anakin didn't give into his unlimited stupidity and make the jump. It seemed that Obi-Wan assumed it was over then.

Now, there's no question Obi-Wan is smarter than Anakin... but a better duelist? Not likely.

Escape, I am sorry to break it to you, but you're wrong. Anakin DID Get owned. Well, simply because he is the one with fake arms and legs and he also has to use a breathing device to stay alive. I clearly remember Kenobi walking away from the fight and Anakin sitting on a Lava slope burning up while missing a few legs and an arm.

One has to be smart to be a good duelist, Escape. This is why Kenobi won. Anakin was stupid and made the wrong move. That doesn't make him much of a good duelist AT ALL.

Sure, Anakin may have been the better Duelist, but he didn't win the duel and he didn't even defeat Kenobi the second time they fought. Kenobi let Vader kill him.

Anakin did get the upper hand quite the few times... But in the end?

Anakin fell to Kenobi's blade. It's that simple. Nothing mattered up to that point. Just like Maul....

"Sorgo, Maul wuz owning kenoby for most of t3h fight!"

^ Wrong. Maul got stupid. His arrogance took over and he was killed and he LOST. He didn't "Win" because he did better during the most of the fight.

In the end, Kenobi walked away and it was Maul at the bottom of a shaft in two pieces. So....

Who really won? Same instance with Anakin and Kenobi. Anakin lost Whether he was a better duelist or not didn't matter because he lost and that also gives us a hint that Kenobi may be a better duelist.

Originally posted by Escape81
According to Nick Gillard, who is the designer, creator, and overall mastermind of the Star Wars dueling universe, Obi-Wan is not the superior duelist. Obi-Wan is a level 8, and while he is an exceptional Jedi, he is not quite on Anakin's level - who is a level 9. Dooku is also ranked as a level 9, which would explain how the Count so easily disposed of Obi-Wan.

According to Gillard and Lucas, Obi-Wan is able to compete with Anakin only because he is aware of how Anakin fights, and that Obi-Wan's skill at defense is on par with Anakin's skill at offense.

Level 9s:

Yoda
Sidious
Mace
Dooku

If you watch the specials in the ROTS DVD set you have Nick Gillard saying that Anakin and Obi-Wan are basically equal and he just called Anakin a "level 9" because Anakin is using the Dark Side which makes him more dangerous than Obi-Wan because of "aggressive" abilities (force choke). He isn't a better swordfighter.

And for the "level 9" characters you've mentioned. We know that Mace has beaten Sidious, Dooku has beaten Mace and Dooku was beaten by Yoda. So even on equal level one person can be superior to another on the same level.

Originally posted by Sorgo
Escape, I am sorry to break it to you, but you're wrong. Anakin DID Get owned. Well, simply because he is the one with fake arms and legs and he also has to use a breathing device to stay alive. I clearly remember Kenobi walking away from the fight and Anakin sitting on a Lava slope burning up while missing a few legs and an arm.

One has to be smart to be a good duelist, Escape. This is why Kenobi won. Anakin was stupid and made the wrong move. That doesn't make him much of a good duelist AT ALL.

Sure, Anakin may have been the better Duelist, but he didn't win the duel and he didn't even defeat Kenobi the second time they fought. Kenobi let Vader kill him.

Anakin did get the upper hand quite the few times... But in the end?

Anakin fell to Kenobi's blade. It's that simple. Nothing mattered up to that point. Just like Maul....

"Sorgo, Maul wuz owning kenoby for most of t3h fight!"

^ Wrong. Maul got stupid. His arrogance took over and he was killed and he LOST. He didn't "Win" because he did better during the most of the fight.

In the end, Kenobi walked away and it was Maul at the bottom of a shaft in two pieces. So....

Who really won? Same instance with Anakin and Kenobi. Anakin lost Whether he was a better duelist or not didn't matter because he lost and that also gives us a hint that Kenobi may be a better duelist.

Lmao. By that same token, Dooku was flat out owned by Anakin. One left the duel with his head on his shoulders. The other did not. Ups...

Originally posted by Borbarad
If you watch the specials in the ROTS DVD set you have Nick Gillard saying that Anakin and Obi-Wan are basically equal and he just called Anakin a "level 9" because Anakin is using the Dark Side which makes him more dangerous than Obi-Wan because of "aggressive" abilities (force choke). He isn't a better swordfighter.

And for the "level 9" characters you've mentioned. We know that Mace has beaten Sidious, Dooku has beaten Mace and Dooku was beaten by Yoda. So even on equal level one person can be superior to another on the same level.

Precisely. Point being, Sorgo says Obi-Wan owned Anakin, when he in fact, did not. Gillard also said in an interview, and I reiterate this, that one victory does not necessarily mean that a duelist is truly superior to another, and that at level 9 - the environment and Dark Side play a keen role in victories.

Originally posted by Escape81
According to Nick Gillard, who is the designer, creator, and overall mastermind of the Star Wars dueling universe, Obi-Wan is not the superior duelist. Obi-Wan is a level 8, and while he is an exceptional Jedi, he is not quite on Anakin's level - who is a level 9. Dooku is also ranked as a level 9, which would explain how the Count so easily disposed of Obi-Wan.

According to Gillard and Lucas, Obi-Wan is able to compete with Anakin only because he is aware of how Anakin fights, and that Obi-Wan's skill at defense is on par with Anakin's skill at offense.

Level 9s:

Yoda
Sidious
Mace
Dooku

You DO realize that Nick Gillard also says that he could beat Anakin in a fight? Nick Gillard is full of crap. Ask Janus he will tell you the same thing.

Originally posted by Veneficus
You DO realize that Nick Gillard also says that he could beat Anakin in a fight? Nick Gillard is full of crap. Ask Janus he will tell you the same thing.

That he could beat Anakin, or Hayden? Because Gillard is an expert swordfighter, and didn't earn his position from party favors. Give him a sword, and yeah, I'd imagine he could.

Originally posted by Escape81
Lmao. By that same token, Dooku was flat out owned by Anakin. One left the duel with his head on his shoulders. The other did not. Ups...

There was circumstance to that!

There was no Circumstance to Anakin getting owned! Anakin didn't let himself get chewed up and he wasn't holding back on Kenobi, and Kenobi wasn't holding back on him.

Those two are totally irrelevant to each other.

You have quite a dull perspective on things, Escape.

Originally posted by Escape81
Precisely. Point being, Sorgo says Obi-Wan owned Anakin, when he in fact, did not. Gillard also said in an interview, and I reiterate this, that one victory does not necessarily mean that a duelist is truly superior to another, and that at level 9 - the environment and Dark Side play a keen role in victories.

That doesn't honestly matter.

The one that walks away alive is usually the better one. There are some circumstances where that is not true, but in most cases it is. Like Kenobi VS Anakin or Maul VS Kenobi. Sure, Anakin was the better duelist, but who kept their limbs?

Originally posted by Sorgo
There was circumstance to that!

There was no Circumstance to Anakin getting owned! Anakin didn't let himself get chewed up and he wasn't holding back on Kenobi, and Kenobi wasn't holding back on him.

Those two are totally irrelevant to each other.

You have quite a dull perspective on things, Escape.

Excuses, excuses. No, Sorgo. Anakin did not get owned by Obi-Wan. He was defeated, but he was not beaten quickly. He had more of the upper hand during the fight than Obi-Wan. To own would be to annihilate or obliterate in battle, which Obi-Wan did not do. Period.

I have to say, Anakin went from being Der Ubermenchen to Floppy the Amputee. True, it may not have happened instantly, but that is my definition of owned.

Originally posted by Ianus
I have to say, Anakin went from being Der Ubermenchen to Floppy the Amputee. True, it may not have happened instantly, but that is my definition of owned.

Then that is a grotesque definition. Owned insinuates an instant and utter annihilation. The fact of the matter is that Obi-Wan was constantly on the move, and Anakin had the upper-hand 90 percent of the time. So indeed, Ianus, I agree. It didn't happen instantly. Thus I see no reason why Obi-Wan owned Anakin.

Owned insinuates clear and final victory over an opponent. Anakin may have lashed out like an undisciplined schoolboy, but in the end he was OWNED as the above picture shows, limbless and left for dead.

I sure as hell didn't see anyone else wrecked that badly with ONE single swipe, do you?

Originally posted by Escape81
Then that is a grotesque definition. Owned insinuates an instant and utter annihilation. The fact of the matter is that Obi-Wan was constantly on the move, and Anakin had the upper-hand 90 percent of the time. So indeed, Ianus, I agree. It didn't happen instantly. Thus I see no reason why Obi-Wan owned Anakin.

You are totally crossing the line. 90% of the time? That is the most ridiculous bullshit I have heard in a while. They were quite fair in the fight and had a share of upper hands.

And yes... Anakin got pwned. He was missing limbs and burned like a barbequed steak.

You are totally crossing the line. 90% of the time? That is the most ridiculous bullshit I have heard in a while. They were quite fair in the fight and had a share of upper hands.