Spiderman vs Batman

This isn't a standard fight:

Assume that you live in a major city anywhere around the world with a sizable crime rate and the occasional supervillian. Who would you rather have paroling the streets, Spiderman or Bats? And why? Who woudl be the best and quickest at reducing the crime rate and keeping the streets safe?

...spins a web any size
catches thieves just like flies...

I'd rather have the Friendly neighborhood Spider-man protecting me. As for Who would be the quickest and best? Doesn't spidey operate at day and night?
he could probably cover a lot more of the city faster as well thanks to the web slinging

I would take Spiderman for the street thug types and cleaning the streets faster.................

I would prefer Batman for large crime syndicates that operate on a global scale but doing it in my backyard🙂

Spidey. He's a hero by day & by night

Batman. hes more intimidating and will make a much bigger impression, despite the fact that he doesnt have 'superpowers'

I'd chose Batman anyday.

Although he is 'only' a human (although a look at the Batman respect thread would make one quickly wonder exactly what type of 'human' he is....but I digress), the criminals do not know this. Based on how he is written, most Gothamites see him as a cross between an urban legend and the bogeyman, and even some members of the JLA consider him 'spooky.'
He has also managed to keep Gotham's nose mostly clean, a feat that Superman tried to do during the no Man's Land saga and miserably failed.
Batman is exemplary when it comes to keeping order in a city, and he does this primarily due to his intellect as well as fostering a general state of unease and unabated fear amongst the criminal populace.
In essence they try to avoid Gotham at all costs ......and Batman did this aspect of his job so well that criminals flooded to Buldhaven in order to get away from the Bat, thus making Bludhaven into a cesspool of crime (which is ONE of the reasons Nightwing went there, and also why Robin and Batgirl began full-scale operations there).

In a nutshell when it comes to taking care of a city no one can do it better than Batman.
Not Superman.
Not WonderWoman.

And certainly not Spiderman!

Spiderman s very good .....actually he is great .....the only thing is that he doesn't carry the same potence that Batman does.
Now, Spiderman is stronger, is faster, and has his spidersense.
But when I talk about potence I mean the impact he brings .....he doesn't inspire the same fear.
What they see in Spiderman is a super hero dressed up in spider garb.
What they see in Batman is malevolent evil waiting to snatch them up in some dark alley and drag them to the depths of hell.

Fear is a great motivator. One of the greatest if not the greatest (although some do claim that love can trump fear ....eg a mother's love for her child causing her to charge into a lion's den to save her child even when she is phobic of everything bigger than a mouse, but again I digress).

Spiderman is the 'friendly neighborhood' dude who keeps things straight and criminals away, and can be counted on for a quip or two. He is super strong, super this, super that .....all of it. A great guy.

Batman on the other hand, for all who do not know he is Bruce Wayne and a 'normal' human, is a shadow from hell. He inspires great fear in the criminal underground (again, he does his job so well most criminals avoid Gotham all together and opt for the 'Haven), he is seen as something akin to malevolence personified, and is believed to be some sort of bogeyman.

Furthermore he has handled some insane events that threatened Gotham .....for example the aforementioned No Man's Land, where he kept Gotham together after the earthquake (and after the entire United States abandoned it).
I wonder what Spiderman could have done?
Answer: nothing! Why? Because the thing that helped Batman out wasn't his strength or his ability, but the fact that he inspired fear amongst the criminal element, and inspired hope amongst the good civilians who had been stuck in Gotham.

What could Spiderman do, since the New york media portrays him as some no-gooder criminal-vigilante?
Sure, Spiderman could have caught criminals and stuff, but that wouldn't have worked. Superman is far better at such stuff than Spidey, and Superman failed.

Anyways, when it comes to protecting a city no one does it better than Batman. The whole mystery surrounding him, and the whole fear-for-criminals/hope-for-the-city dichotomy that hangs around him, helps him a lot. The mere knowledge that Gotham is 'Batman's city' keeps away most of the riff-raff, and those that remain are taken care of with ease.
With the end result being that Gotham, even though it is protected by 'humans,' is in many ways a better place to be than Metropolis (which has Superman). In one comic I have a group of criminals was moving from Gotham to go to Metropolis, preferring to face Superman rather than stay in a place that had the Bat!
Why?
Fear! To such an extent that they would rather face someone who can juggle tanks than stay in Gotham.
That is something that Spiderman doesn't inspire (at the very least nowhere close to the level of Batman).

Anyways, if I lived in a city that had the option between having The Bat or having Spiderman, my vote would always be 100% for Batman.
When it comes to city defense no one does it better.

p.s: well, the Flash in the Kingdom Come series did do it better .....since he was everywhere at the same time.

I was going to vote spidey, even though Spetznaz just made me feel ashamed to admit it...I'm going to go find a corner and a dunce cap now...

Gotham is a cesspool. It's been one since Bats started and it's still one now. He's not scaring the criminals enough

Originally posted by brainchild81
Gotham is a cesspool. It's been one since Bats started and it's still one now. He's not scaring the criminals enough

I still stand by what I said, plus Gotham without Batman would have imploded a long time ago.
Actually it could be said that Gotham wouldn't exist without the Batman (one good example being the Cataclysm/No Man's Land saga when even the United States government had to abandon the entire city, and heroes like Superman could do naught; as well as other examples being when an Epidemic ravaged the city and would have destroyed it. There have also been 'minor' incidents like when Batman took care of an invasion of Aliens).

Also Batman has been so good at scaring criminals that most have fled to Bludhaven, and some are even willing to face off against Kal El in Metropolis.

Anyways, whatever your opinion might be I still say that Batman would be far more effective at dealing with city-sized scenarios than Spiderman would.

By the way ....I'm curious as to how you think Spiderman could handle Gotham?
And how effective he would be (particularly when Superman has tried twice and failed)?

Originally posted by brainchild81
Gotham is a cesspool. It's been one since Bats started and it's still one now. He's not scaring the criminals enough

Haha

Originally posted by spetznaz
I'd chose Batman anyday.

Although he is 'only' a human (although a look at the Batman respect thread would make one quickly wonder exactly what type of 'human' he is....but I digress), the criminals do not know this. Based on how he is written, most Gothamites see him as a cross between an urban legend and the bogeyman, and even some members of the JLA consider him 'spooky.'
He has also managed to keep Gotham's nose mostly clean, a feat that Superman tried to do during the no Man's Land saga and miserably failed.
Batman is exemplary when it comes to keeping order in a city, and he does this primarily due to his intellect as well as fostering a general state of unease and unabated fear amongst the criminal populace.
In essence they try to avoid Gotham at all costs ......and Batman did this aspect of his job so well that criminals flooded to Buldhaven in order to get away from the Bat, thus making Bludhaven into a cesspool of crime (which is ONE of the reasons Nightwing went there, and also why Robin and Batgirl began full-scale operations there).

In a nutshell when it comes to taking care of a city no one can do it better than Batman.
Not Superman.
Not WonderWoman.

And certainly not Spiderman!

Spiderman s very good .....actually he is great .....the only thing is that he doesn't carry the same potence that Batman does.
Now, Spiderman is stronger, is faster, and has his spidersense.
But when I talk about potence I mean the impact he brings .....he doesn't inspire the same fear.
What they see in Spiderman is a super hero dressed up in spider garb.
What they see in Batman is malevolent evil waiting to snatch them up in some dark alley and drag them to the depths of hell.

Fear is a great motivator. One of the greatest if not the greatest (although some do claim that love can trump fear ....eg a mother's love for her child causing her to charge into a lion's den to save her child even when she is phobic of everything bigger than a mouse, but again I digress).

Spiderman is the 'friendly neighborhood' dude who keeps things straight and criminals away, and can be counted on for a quip or two. He is super strong, super this, super that .....all of it. A great guy.

Batman on the other hand, for all who do not know he is Bruce Wayne and a 'normal' human, is a shadow from hell. He inspires great fear in the criminal underground (again, he does his job so well most criminals avoid Gotham all together and opt for the 'Haven), he is seen as something akin to malevolence personified, and is believed to be some sort of bogeyman.

Furthermore he has handled some insane events that threatened Gotham .....for example the aforementioned No Man's Land, where he kept Gotham together after the earthquake (and after the entire United States abandoned it).
I wonder what Spiderman could have done?
Answer: nothing! Why? Because the thing that helped Batman out wasn't his strength or his ability, but the fact that he inspired fear amongst the criminal element, and inspired hope amongst the good civilians who had been stuck in Gotham.

What could Spiderman do, since the New york media portrays him as some no-gooder criminal-vigilante?
Sure, Spiderman could have caught criminals and stuff, but that wouldn't have worked. Superman is far better at such stuff than Spidey, and Superman failed.

Anyways, when it comes to protecting a city no one does it better than Batman. The whole mystery surrounding him, and the whole fear-for-criminals/hope-for-the-city dichotomy that hangs around him, helps him a lot. The mere knowledge that Gotham is 'Batman's city' keeps away most of the riff-raff, and those that remain are taken care of with ease.
With the end result being that Gotham, even though it is protected by 'humans,' is in many ways a better place to be than Metropolis (which has Superman). In one comic I have a group of criminals was moving from Gotham to go to Metropolis, preferring to face Superman rather than stay in a place that had the Bat!
Why?
Fear! To such an extent that they would rather face someone who can juggle tanks than stay in Gotham.
That is something that Spiderman doesn't inspire (at the very least nowhere close to the level of Batman).

Anyways, if I lived in a city that had the option between having The Bat or having Spiderman, my vote would always be 100% for Batman.
When it comes to city defense no one does it better.

p.s: well, the Flash in the Kingdom Come series did do it better .....since he was everywhere at the same time.

^^EXACTLY...thankyou, long story short, FEAR plays a big role in the criminal underworld...and batman invokes fear into the hearts of criminals like no other. ever. has. done. ...EVER.
and plus think about it, if spiderman was trying to protect gotham like batman, it just wouldnt look right...everything in gothams all gothic and dark n gloomy and scary and all of a sudden u see a guy with blue and red tights on😆

Originally posted by braz
^^EXACTLY...thankyou, long story short, FEAR plays a big role in the criminal underworld...and batman invokes fear into the hearts of criminals like no other. ever. has. done. ...EVER.
and plus think about it, if spiderman was trying to protect gotham like batman does, and criminals saw him, they wouldnt go run and hide like when they'd see batman theyd laugh their ass off 😆 and be like hey look, look at that big idiot in blue and red tights, shoot em for looking retarded 😱

Yup.
In a nutshell that is what would happen if Spiderman tried to sort out Gotham.
He'd literally be laughed out of town (and unlike Superman he'd have to walk or web-sling away instead of flying away).

heh, i edited 😄

Originally posted by spetznaz
I still stand by what I said, plus Gotham without Batman would have imploded a long time ago.
Actually it could be said that Gotham wouldn't exist without the Batman (one good example being the Cataclysm/No Man's Land saga when even the United States government had to abandon the entire city, and heroes like Superman could do naught; as well as other examples being when an Epidemic ravaged the city and would have destroyed it. There have also been 'minor' incidents like when Batman took care of an invasion of Aliens).

Also Batman has been so good at scaring criminals that most have fled to Bludhaven, and some are even willing to face off against Kal El in Metropolis.

Anyways, whatever your opinion might be I still say that Batman would be far more effective at dealing with city-sized scenarios than Spiderman would.

By the way ....I'm curious as to how you think Spiderman could handle Gotham?
And how effective he would be (particularly when Superman has tried twice and failed)?

How could Spidey hande Gotham? Easilly. Superman isn't really good for cathing criminals. He's better for things like protecting universes etc. So don't compare him with Spider-man. Batman is cool but he can't operate as fast as Spider-man. This is cathing criminals tournament. Spider-man has one big advantage. His ss. It not only warns him of danger but also tells him if there is crime happening somwhere near.

Originally posted by samishe
How could Spidey hande Gotham? Easilly. Superman isn't really good for cathing criminals. He's better for things like protecting universes etc. So don't compare him with Spider-man. Batman is cool but he can't operate as fast as Spider-man. This is cathing criminals tournament. Spider-man has one big advantage. His ss. It not only warns him of danger but also tells him if there is crime happening somwhere near.

Spider-Mans biggest down fall is his self Confidence. I would love to see Batman and Spider-Man switch cities for a Month I think Batman would be dead with in 5 days just think he would have to contend with Scorpion,Lizard,Rhino,Green Goblin,Doppleganger,Venom,Carnage,BT,Hobgoblin,Kraven and the Occasional Juggernaut Hulk or Firelord 😆 etc etc

I think Spider-Man would be way more effective with Batmans Villains then Batman with Spider-Mans Villains

Originally posted by Juntai
Spidey couldn't handle Gotham. Batman plays his villains like a fiddle, rather than directly. If Spidey came in and tried some bruiser shit, Clayface or Ivy or someone would have his ass.
Batman's built himself into their psyche. Batman's advantage is he knows all the quirks they have mentally. He knows how they think, how they act, what they'll say, what move is next. He's the Dark KNIGHT, because he moves in an oddest most indetectible way on the chessboard.

Batman's advantage is that he knows all the quirks they have mentally?
Come on, ofcourse he knows his villians, they are from his universe. But it doesn't mean anything. If he faced Spidey villians he would get in a same situation as Spidey in DC universe.
All Spider villians someday were new to him. So what? He defeated them. Learned their weaknesses. Same would happen to Bats Villians.

Originally posted by golem370
Spider-Mans biggest down fall is his self Confidence. I would love to see Batman and Spider-Man switch cities for a Month I think Batman would be dead with in 5 days just think he would have to contend with Scorpion,Lizard,Rhino,Green Goblin,Doppleganger,Venom,Carnage,BT,Hobgoblin,Kraven and the Occasional Juggernaut Hulk or Firelord 😆 etc etc

I think Spider-Man would be way more effective with Batmans Villains then Batman with Spider-Mans Villains

Have you ever read a Batman comic? He doesn't usually fight directly. All he'd do is hit a button and win. He wins with smarts. They'd all be too busy fighting eachother to notice the trap. On the forum, that sounds bad, but on the forum when we put them together, they just battle. Batman DOES NOT fight like that.

Spidey would have to deal with Ivy, Lex Luthor, Clayface, Azreal, Joker, and the occasional Superman. Haha. Since he'd try to brute it out, he'd probably die fast.

Originally posted by spetznaz
I'd chose Batman anyday.

Although he is 'only' a human (although a look at the Batman respect thread would make one quickly wonder exactly what type of 'human' he is....but I digress), the criminals do not know this. Based on how he is written, most Gothamites see him as a cross between an urban legend and the bogeyman, and even some members of the JLA consider him 'spooky.'
He has also managed to keep Gotham's nose mostly clean, a feat that Superman tried to do during the no Man's Land saga and miserably failed.
Batman is exemplary when it comes to keeping order in a city, and he does this primarily due to his intellect as well as fostering a general state of unease and unabated fear amongst the criminal populace.
In essence they try to avoid Gotham at all costs ......and Batman did this aspect of his job so well that criminals flooded to Buldhaven in order to get away from the Bat, thus making Bludhaven into a cesspool of crime (which is ONE of the reasons Nightwing went there, and also why Robin and Batgirl began full-scale operations there).

In a nutshell when it comes to taking care of a city no one can do it better than Batman.
Not Superman.
Not WonderWoman.

And certainly not Spiderman!

Spiderman s very good .....actually he is great .....the only thing is that he doesn't carry the same potence that Batman does.
Now, Spiderman is stronger, is faster, and has his spidersense.
But when I talk about potence I mean the impact he brings .....he doesn't inspire the same fear.
What they see in Spiderman is a super hero dressed up in spider garb.
What they see in Batman is malevolent evil waiting to snatch them up in some dark alley and drag them to the depths of hell.

Fear is a great motivator. One of the greatest if not the greatest (although some do claim that love can trump fear ....eg a mother's love for her child causing her to charge into a lion's den to save her child even when she is phobic of everything bigger than a mouse, but again I digress).

Spiderman is the 'friendly neighborhood' dude who keeps things straight and criminals away, and can be counted on for a quip or two. He is super strong, super this, super that .....all of it. A great guy.

Batman on the other hand, for all who do not know he is Bruce Wayne and a 'normal' human, is a shadow from hell. He inspires great fear in the criminal underground (again, he does his job so well most criminals avoid Gotham all together and opt for the 'Haven), he is seen as something akin to malevolence personified, and is believed to be some sort of bogeyman.

Furthermore he has handled some insane events that threatened Gotham .....for example the aforementioned No Man's Land, where he kept Gotham together after the earthquake (and after the entire United States abandoned it).
I wonder what Spiderman could have done?
Answer: nothing! Why? Because the thing that helped Batman out wasn't his strength or his ability, but the fact that he inspired fear amongst the criminal element, and inspired hope amongst the good civilians who had been stuck in Gotham.

What could Spiderman do, since the New york media portrays him as some no-gooder criminal-vigilante?
Sure, Spiderman could have caught criminals and stuff, but that wouldn't have worked. Superman is far better at such stuff than Spidey, and Superman failed.

Anyways, when it comes to protecting a city no one does it better than Batman. The whole mystery surrounding him, and the whole fear-for-criminals/hope-for-the-city dichotomy that hangs around him, helps him a lot. The mere knowledge that Gotham is 'Batman's city' keeps away most of the riff-raff, and those that remain are taken care of with ease.
With the end result being that Gotham, even though it is protected by 'humans,' is in many ways a better place to be than Metropolis (which has Superman). In one comic I have a group of criminals was moving from Gotham to go to Metropolis, preferring to face Superman rather than stay in a place that had the Bat!
Why?
Fear! To such an extent that they would rather face someone who can juggle tanks than stay in Gotham.
That is something that Spiderman doesn't inspire (at the very least nowhere close to the level of Batman).

Anyways, if I lived in a city that had the option between having The Bat or having Spiderman, my vote would always be 100% for Batman.
When it comes to city defense no one does it better.

p.s: well, the Flash in the Kingdom Come series did do it better .....since he was everywhere at the same time.

All very valid points and extremely well put, as always spetznaz.
But in Spidey's defense, I think there is something we should keep in mind. Spiderman doesn't have his own city. Batman (and Superman) have essentially their own private domain where they are the primary characters. Whatever happens in Gotham really only effects Batman. Thus Gotham is in many ways built around Batman is a way that New York City isn't build around Spiderman. As Spiderman has to share NY (and the criminals therein) with a multitude of other superheroes.

Another advantage is that Gotham is a fictional city, so conditions there can be tailor made to showcase Batman and his abilities. The fictional nature of Gotham makes it believable for Batman to have run all of the criminals out of the city and reduced the crime rate to nearly nothing. As Spiderman's New York has a real life counterpart, the same really can't be done. A crime free New York City just isn't as believable as a crime free Gotham, imo.