Spider-Man vs Blade

Originally posted by Deadline
Im not arguing that a slap is more devastating than a punch I'm arguing that it can still be devastating.

Then I agree.

Originally posted by Deadline
No he wasn't he also had to use his martial arts in a lot of real life situations when he was in Hong Kong.

The aforementioned hearsay and anecdotal accounts of Bruce Lee's skill never actually displayed or verified.

Originally posted by Deadline
Oh really because what I was told is that it depends on how you use the techniques.

I guess I would encourage you to do some research on the subject.

Spider-Man accidentilly kills Blade by accident

Originally posted by srankmissingnin

The aforementioned hearsay and anecdotal accounts of Bruce Lee's skill never actually displayed or verified.

Doesn't mean it wasn't true.

Originally posted by srankmissingnin

I guess I would encourage you to do some research on the subject.

No I don't need to do any reasearch. Your problem is you think that just because you ahve an opinion that automatically makes you correct. I'm not saying that the moves cant be impractical but its how you use them that makes them practical, that logic applies to a lot of stuff.

eg Wing Chun can useful in close quarters but if you try to use it against a thai-boxer at long range you could get really ****ed up.

Originally posted by Mindset
I don't believe I made any comment on that, at all...

But it looks like you have a double standard, apparently.

I wasn't making a double standard, I was commenting o nthe fact that the opposing side is willing to ignore the impact panels in one instance and not in another, I generalized, my fault, (you probably want to stop read there) but again if we include the impact panels as evidence we see again that Blade was able to get in TWO successful strikes while both of Spiderman's were ineffective. Then we have the commentary in which Negus basically states Spiderman is out of his league while he tells Blade he's a worthy opponent.

Negus clearly vamping out before his fight with Blade:
http://img811.imageshack.us/img811/4472/smvv0020.jpg
http://img707.imageshack.us/img707/3835/smvv0021.jpg

notice change between eyes and ears.

Originally posted by Trackz
Negus clearly vamping out before his fight with Blade:
http://img811.imageshack.us/img811/4472/smvv0020.jpg
http://img707.imageshack.us/img707/3835/smvv0021.jpg

notice change between eyes and ears.

Yup he vamped out alright. Hell look at the claws on his fingers.

Originally posted by Deadline
Yup he vamped out alright. Hell look at the claws on his fingers.

This is what "Vamped Out" looks like. He had a full on rager when he finished Spidey, at best he had a partial when he fought Blade.

Double post

Originally posted by srankmissingnin
This is what "Vamped Out" looks like. He had a full on rager when he finished Spidey, at best he had a partial when he fought Blade.

there's absolutely no difference between the two vamp outs, not only that it makes no logical sense that he would hold back when he was afraid of having his whole empire fall and was going against spiderman and blade but would go all out when he was just fighting spiderman after having laughed off his punches in normal mode.

Originally posted by srankmissingnin
This is what "Vamped Out" looks like. He had a full on rager when he finished Spidey, at best he had a partial when he fought Blade.

Srank its a different artist! Just because it looks different under another artist doesn't mean he was on a full rager, thats stuff you are inserting and making up yourself. You're interpreting different = more.

Hell before you started arguing about full and partial ragers you were arguing he wasn't even vamped at all. No you've moved onto this.

Originally posted by Deadline
Doesn't mean it wasn't true.

No I don't need to do any reasearch. Your problem is you think that just because you ahve an opinion that automatically makes you correct. I'm not saying that the moves cant be impractical but its how you use them that makes them practical, that logic applies to a lot of stuff.

eg Wing Chun can useful in close quarters but if you try to use it against a thai-boxer at long range you could get really ****ed up.

Maybe it was true... but there is no evidence, and I like to have evidence with which to form my oppinions.

It's not just my opinion, it is pretty much the general consensus. Even Bruce Lee said in his book that if someone wrestled for a year and then boxed for a year they would be able to beat most Kung Fu masters.

Originally posted by Deadline
Srank its a different artist! Just because it looks different under another artist doesn't mean he was on a full rager, thats stuff you are inserting and making up yourself. You're interpreting different = more.

Hell before you started arguing about full and partial ragers you were arguing he wasn't even vamped at all. No you've moved onto this.

It's from he same book.... was there more than one penciler on art duty?

Nope. Just checked, Roberto Castro is the only penciler listed. Same artist, same book.

Originally posted by srankmissingnin
Maybe it was true... but there is no evidence, and I like to have evidence with which to form my oppinions.

No you don't actually.

Originally posted by srankmissingnin

It's not just my opinion, it is pretty much the general consensus. Even Bruce Lee said in his book that if someone wrestled for a year and then boxed for a year they would be able to beat most Kung Fu masters.

I'm not arguing that the moves can't be impractical I'm simply arguing its how you apply it.

Originally posted by srankmissingnin
It's from he same book.... was there more than one penciler on art duty?

Nope. Just checked, Roberto Castro is the only penciler listed. Same artist, same book.

This artist

http://img707.imageshack.us/img707/3835/smvv0021.jpg

is cleary different from the one below.

http://smg.photobucket.com/albums/v207/sinister_samurai/?action=view&current=smvv_0011.jpg

Originally posted by Deadline
This artist

http://img707.imageshack.us/img707/3835/smvv0021.jpg

is cleary different from the one you posted.

http://smg.photobucket.com/albums/v207/sinister_samurai/?action=view&current=smvv_0011.jpg

Same artist, two different colourists and inkers though.

Originally posted by srankmissingnin
Same artist, two different colourists and inkers though.

Maybe but there is a difference. You are interpreting the difference in artistic style as a difference rage. Thats confirmation bias.

Hell people draw Wolverine differently and some people make him look more pissed off.

Originally posted by Deadline
Maybe but there is a difference. You are interpreting the difference in artistic style as a difference rage. Thats confirmation bias.

Hell people draw Wolverine differently and some people make him look more pissed off.

Obviously but this is the same artist, and there is a huge difference between a freaking humanoid batface and depiction and merely having pointy ears / teeth like he did when he fought Blade. We are talking about the difference between Whedon-verse vampire face and the vampire appearance of Dracula's true form in that Van Helsing movie.

Srank are you actually arguing that Negus has to "vamp-out" to finish Spidey? If not then shut the **** up because you have no point, for all we know Spidey was kayoed from the first hit especially since we see later that a weakend Negus still can swat Spidey aside like a fly.

Does Negus has other feats that would put him > Spider-man? Outside of this comic I mean. I don't really read Blade.