Originally posted by Elite Hunter
I definitely have would say though that the specific time frame the TPM-ROTS is probably the time when his skills increased the most out of any equivalent time frame in his jedi career.
Probable.
But it would take a seriously convincing argument to prove that the TPM-RotS time period would make an extremely significant change for an 800-plus-year-old Jedi Master to suddenly go from "one of the best" to "the undisputed best" in thirteen years.
Originally posted by Gideon
Probable.But it would take a seriously convincing argument to prove that the TPM-RotS time period would make an extremely significant change for an 800-plus-year-old Jedi Master to suddenly go from "one of the best" to "the undisputed best" in thirteen years.
It would indeed but then again what we are discussing seems to be Yoda's saber skills in comparison to Anoon's. But the question should be how much of a gap there was really was from when Anoon was alive. From the two quotes of Yoda and Anoon that Advent posted, I interpret it as saying that Yoda was second to Anoon in sheer sabers.Then we would need to look at the engagements/battles that Yoda participated in after Anoon's death and to see how much his skills could have increased. And then compare that to what we see Anoon do in battle.
Originally posted by Gideon
According to the Revenge of the Sith novelization, Darth Sidious and Mace Windu achieved this state of absolute parity once Windu had submerged himself in Vaapad; while it is unlikely that Master Yoda and Anoon Bondara were precise equals with a lightsaber, one cannot rule the possibility out. Especially when one's argument seems to be based on, in one's own words, an "implication".
Twisting words in a book to help entertain the idea that two beings can be complete equals in skill, Escape? Sad. Really sad coming from you. What does the ROTS novelisation really say, you ask?
"Vaapad made him an open channel, half of a superconducting loop completed by the shadow; they became a standing wave of battle that expanded into every cubic centimeter of the Chancellor's office. There was no scrap of carpet nor shred of chair that might not at any second disintegrate in flares of red or purple; lampstands became brief shields, sliced into segments that whirled through the air; couches became terrain to be climbed for advantage or overleapt in retreat. But there was still only the cycle of power, the endless loop, no wound taken on either side, not even the possibility of fatigue.
Impasse.
Which might have gone on forever, if Vaapad were Mace's only gift."
Care to point out this supposed "absolute parity"? All it states is that it 'might have gone on forever' which doesn't exactly equate to "absolute parity". If it does, I'd like to know how.
All it means it that, at that time, neither had the necessary power to overcome the other (which does not mean that they were absolutely equal). If it says it in another section of the book, I'd like to see the quote.
Originally posted by Darth Sexy
Lucas' statement could mean that Yoda and Mace are good enough to handle Sidious with a saber, or it could mean they are good enough with the force. You can't make the claim that it was because they were better equipped with the force because the statement is as open to interpretation as the Vanity Fair statement..
You're just being downright silly at this point. And stupid. Because if its open to interpretation, you have no point either for fuck's sake.
But you're basically saying that Yoda was progressing at a normal rate for 800 years, and suddenly in a 10 year span, he surpasses everybody else. Does that make much sense to you Advent?
Uh, Anoon doesn't necessarily have to be leagues above Yoda, he could simply be slightly better. There's no power charts that define exactly by what margin a character is better than the next. That aside though, he advanced at a rather large level considering Mace Windu went from being defeated by Count Dooku in lightsaber duels to overwhelming Darth Sidious.
Why would it be so out of the realm of possibilities to suggest he was once the inferior, but by ROTS, was the superior? Its not whatsoever especially with what Elite Hunter pointed out and the fact that the novel never says by what degree he is better.
Twisting words in a book to help entertain the idea that two beings can be complete equals in skill, Escape? Sad. Really sad coming from you. What does the ROTS novelisation really say, you ask?
You've caught me. I don't like to consider myself a debater anymore; I prefer "twister of words" -- it has a nice Metallica ring to it, don't you think? "Master of Puppets", "Twister of Words". I like it.
But there was still only the cycle of power, the endless loop, no wound taken on either side, not even the possibility of fatigue.Impasse.
Which might have gone on forever, if Vaapad were Mace's only gift."
What's weird is that I get the "implication" of absolute parity. I mean, hell, the constant references to "no possibility of fatigue" or "no wound taken on either side" or "impasse".
Actually, if you take it as a cut and dry interpretation, there is nothing to support (not even an implication 😉 ) the idea that they were anything but absolute equals at this point.
Edit: Though, admittedly, I just twist words. No need to take me seriously.
Originally posted by Gideon
What's weird is that I get the "implication" of absolute parity. I mean, hell, the constant references to "no possibility of fatigue"
An exaggeration obviously. Neither party had access to unlimited stamina, and certainly they cannot last "forever" without tiring.
or "no wound taken on either side"
Ah, a fact anyone who watched the movie could deduce? At that point, no wound was taken on either side.
or "impasse".
impasse, n.
A position or situation from which there is no escape; deadlock.
I didn't realize a stalemate equated to or suggests "absolute parity" in any way. Merely that neither possesses an advantage enough over the other to win.
Actually, if you take it as a cut and dry interpretation, there is nothing to support (not even an implication 😉 ) the idea that they were anything but absolute equals at this point. [/B]
Except, you mean, for the fact that nothing suggests their skills are at an absolute equal level? Could it be that Mace Windu can't overpower Sidious due to his speed? Could it be that Sidious can't overpower Mace due to his strength? The point I'm trying to demonstrate here is that the passage never implies they are completely on par, but that neither possesses an advantage enough over the other to win.
You're just being downright silly at this point. And stupid. Because if its open to interpretation, you have no point either for fuck's sake.
Uh, Anoon doesn't necessarily have to be leagues above Yoda, he could simply be slightly better. There's no power charts that define exactly by what margin a character is better than the next. That aside though, he advanced at a rather large level considering Mace Windu went from being defeated by Count Dooku in lightsaber duels to overwhelming Darth Sidious.Why would it be so out of the realm of possibilities to suggest he was once the inferior, but by ROTS, was the superior? Its not whatsoever especially with what Elite Hunter pointed out and the fact that the novel never says by what degree he is better. [/B]
Originally posted by Darth Sexy
My [b]point is that you critisize me for taking a stance on an ambiguous statement when you do the exact same thing.[/b]
The statement isn't exactly as ambiguous as you'd like to believe, Sexy. Especially considering that I've provided more than sufficient reasoning to support its truth. In the thread you're referring to, you have no reasoning to support its truth other than your contextual interpretation, which doesn't even seem more than likely the opposite - in this case, it does.
It's not IMPOSSIBLE, but Yoda being one of the best for 800 years and 10 years later he's godly, is kind of illogical.
Excuse me? Anoon Bondara wasn't even fifty years old! Why would Yoda have to be placed as only "one of the best" for 800 years as opposed to second best for five to twenty-some years? Anyways, he logically must've advanced by a rather substantial degree because as I pointed out: Windu's skills grew enormously too (which only makes sense due to the need to train more for combat [both against the Sith threat which only revealed itself in TPM and the CIS], more lightsaber battles, and constant warfare throughout the Clone Wars).
Windu was 50+ right? Bondara was 50+. Yoda comes from (as you put it,), not the best, to being the absolute best in 10 years, after 800 years. Or is it more likely that Yoda has been the best for quite a while. There's also a reason why he's the leader of the jedi council.
Furthermore, your 'statement' is not definitive in any sense, because it is very possible and even likely that two individuals are equal to each other. If you are stating that Bondara>Yoda, then you are stating Maul>Yoda in a sense..
From Cloak of Deception:
"A Twi'lek, with slender head-tails and a heavily muscled upper body, his name was Anoon Bondara, a duelist of unparalleled skill. Qui-Gon engaged him in matches at every opportunity. For a match with Bondara, no matter how brief, was more instructive than twenty contests against lesser opponents."
unparalleled, adj.
Not paralleled; unequaled or unmatched; peerless; unprecedented.
QED.
I'm not going to bother directly responding to your question as we're just arguing in circles. At this point I'm merely going to explain why I'm correct again in full:
Originally posted by Advent
"The Twi'lek Jedi Master lived in the Force. Always still and complacent as a pool of unknown depth, he was nevertheless one of the best fighters in the order. [b]His skill with a lightsaber was second to none." (Darth Maul: Shadow Hunter)[/b]
Originally posted by Advent
Saying that he's "second to none" implies that he is above all others. The same novel also refers to Yoda's skills as "second to none on the Jedi Council" shortly thereafter, so the author gives us an obvious outline: that Anoon's skills are second to none in the Jedi Order and Yoda's skills are second to none on the Jedi Council (the Jedi Order as a whole includes the Jedi Council obviously).That not withstanding, your assumption would depend upon the extremely unlikely and asinine idea that they are SHEER EQUALS, that they are on the [b]exact same level
. Which is pretty stupid if you ask me. [/B]
Because,
Originally posted by Advent
From Cloak of Deception:"A Twi'lek, with slender head-tails and a heavily muscled upper body, [b]his name was Anoon Bondara, a duelist of unparalleled skill
. Qui-Gon engaged him in matches at every opportunity. For a match with Bondara, no matter how brief, was more instructive than twenty contests against lesser opponents."unparalleled, adj.
Not paralleled; unequaled or unmatched; peerless; unprecedented. [/B]
And considering
Originally posted by Advent
Anoon doesn't necessarily have to be leagues above Yoda, he could simply be slightly better. There's no power charts that define exactly by what margin a character is better than the next.
Originally posted by Advent
He logically must've advanced by a rather substantial degree because as I pointed out: Windu's skills grew enormously too (which only makes sense due to the need to train more for combat [both against the Sith threat which only revealed itself in TPM and the CIS], more lightsaber battles, and constant warfare throughout the Clone Wars).
Therefore,
Originally posted by Advent
Anoon Bondara doesn't necessarily have to be on par with ROTS Yoda.
Now your stance relies on the extremely unlikely and inane notion that TPM Yoda's [unknown] skills are absolutely equivalent to that of Anoon's, but that's not supported by any means of logical deduction, canon, or anything relatively meaningful aside from your belief that Yoda "must be the top dog". That is why I'm saying,
Originally posted by Advent
Your position doesn't make much sense.
What bullshit!
I never said that Anoon was a more powerful Force user or when all is accounted for, the better combatant than Yoda. Quote me for truth if you believe otherwise. And none of my sources imply such either, in fact, Shadow Hunter outright says that he was only "one of the best fighters" (accounting for both prowess with a blade and strength in the Force), but his dueling skills were unmatched within the Jedi Order.
Yoda has always been the greater Force user and overall was always the greatest.
And yes, there's reasonable evidence to support the idea that Yoda, being slightly lesser in skill than Anoon as of TPM, progressed by a considerable degree from the time period of TPM to ROTS making him better than Bondara. One could point out the constant fighting done throughout the Clone Wars, the need to extensively train because of such (also due to the fact of a growing Sith threat which didn't reveal itself until TPM), Mace Windu growing a lot, &c. which I've already done countless times.
Why are you denying all my evidence? You have no reason to. The bottom line is:
Now your stance relies on the extremely unlikely and inane notion that TPM Yoda's [unknown] skills are absolutely equivalent to that of Anoon's, but that's not supported by any means of logical deduction, canon, or anything relatively meaningful aside from your belief that Yoda "must be the top dog".
Whereas everything I've said is supported - be it from canon itself (which directly contradicts you and overrides your opinion) or valid reasoning. And this entire argument was spawned merely because of your improper use of ambiguous statements as evidence, but the key difference here is: you had only your naked contextual interpretation, as opposed to my more than sufficient evidence that supports what I'm saying and the statement really isn't too open to interpretation (I'd say that it's not whatsoever, actually).
STFU.
Originally posted by Darth Sexy
Advent, I never said you were wrong. I just said it makes little sense to me how Bondara could be more powerful than Yoda with a blade, when you said yourself that Yoda improved significantly in 10-13 years. What about the other 800?
You mean, the other eight hundred years where there was relative peace? There was absolutely no ongoing galactic conflicts or major threats from Yoda's birth to TPM, outside of the Stark Hyperspace War which lasted less than a year.
What happened in-between TPM and ROTS? War, the Sith revealed their presence, and the Jedi were becoming much more martial due to both. Why wouldn't he have advanced by a significant margin? He gained tons more experience and had the need to train much more extensively than before to combat all the combined problems the Republic and Jedi Order faced.
Either way, canon confirms that Anoon was better than TPM Yoda in dueling skill and all the reasoning and evidence points that way honestly. Additionally, I suppose I should apologize for my rudeness - I've just been pretty mean lately.
Originally posted by Darth Sexy
Hey when you're right you're right. It not making sense to me doesn't make it any less factual. Wouldn't the Dark Jedi Conflict also count as a major conflict?
For the Jedi Order or Republic? No, I don't think so. Although a rather dubious source, Wookiepedia writes:
"Seen as too dangerous to be left alive, the Jedi Council sent a Jedi Knight and her Padawan to hunt down and kill their former compatriot. They gathered an armada formed of ships from the system's various settlements and companies, which they used to crush the pirate fleet. They succeeded in resolving the danger, but were forced to slay Jeen in the process."
It doesn't seem to have affected the Republic/Jedi much seeing that they didn't bother sending more than two Jedi and amassed a fleet using non-Republic ships, as the Cularin system wasn't a part of the Republic at the time. Do you know if the sources that this Dark Jedi Conflict appear in confirm or disprove Wookiepedia? If Wookiepedia is right, then my answer would be the same as above. If they are wrong (which wouldn't surprise me in the least bit), then please enlighten me as to exactly what happened.