All in which I agree, but the first time I heard you saying GLs cannot clean sweep Thor, I thought you were actually suggesting he could take the majority. Which is quite out there.
Thor winning 1/10 or 2/10 depending on the opponents, isn't really out of question, and I'm not claiming it is. What I'm saying is that with the two opponents we listed I don't personally lean towards it happening -as I said, factoring experience as a team, the ability of the powers to blend and overall top herald material-. Also, I agree that the reduction in simple numbers is lacking of the consideration of how the actual fight goes, I could've said, for example, that Thor is at least beating one of the two a number of times, to mark the difference against sheer domination.
I try to make it as if the result in a team battle is going to depend on something else than the simple addition of power levels. If I say for example that Surfer takes 4 from Thor and BRB takes 3, I can expect them to do at least as good as 5. But the best each individual player does in the same matchup, the bigger their combinated win. I don't think Angrir had much of a shot of beating Thor at all, but since Nul does better, they actually worked don't-get-up and waste-power tactics that mattered in the end. Not every comic battle makes it crystal clear, nor teaming up is always as benefic.
You did bring something to the table that I admit I hadn't considered in the matchup we discussed, which is the experience of the nominal characters to fight teams. Experience beating teams should be considered as much as experience working as a team.
And no I don't really think GLs would dominate Thor in any demeaning sense. Most of the time I'm trying to understand exactly the points you're trying to make, and I'll be the first to admit that I jump into some debates without fully understanding a point made earlier, for which I should apologize, but if I had to stick in every discussion from the beginning I would never post.
Regarding the Inverse Ninja Law, I think it's importance is precisely to disbelief in how big teams are displayed in a certain matchup, given that their skills won't be accurately shown given the situation. It is also, a Wow factor in which the opponents are diminished just to become numbers and inflate the ability of the lone opponent. Now, the beauty of the INL is that it's accurate, you can actually point a bunch of examples in which it can be easily applied. It's a practical, positive observation and it's validity is justified by that recurrence. I don't believe there is an analogous general observation that you can make to two on one combat, or individual matchups, but I think both characteristics of the INL -less skill displayed, a wow factor- can be found in certain matchups, to a lesser degree. This was the argumentation I was trying to explain, but since you're not psychic you probably didn't know. Again, the analogy meant to clarify the statement but just made it muddier, so dropping it seemed like the thing to do.