Re: COUNT DOOKU & GENERAL KENOBI vs DARTH SIDEOUS
Originally posted by mnat801
Who would win?
If you divide this into:
1) Sabers only fight
2) Force only fight
3) All Out
Then the duo probably wins 1. But in 2 & 3 Obi-Wan won't be a factor, so it really becomes Sidious vs Dooku.
Even in 1, I'd be interested to see what happens if Sidious goes Jar Kai on them like he does to Maul and Opress.
Originally posted by SIDIOUS 66
Yeah, basically.Obi Wan is no match for Sidious's sheer speed (which comes from Sidious's power and command of the force). Three of the orders best were non-factors, why wouldn't Obi Wan be?
Originally posted by Zampanó
I dunno; those three were all available to fight Grievous and weren't picked. So there's at least one factoid in Kenobi's favor.
Kit Fisto already outdueled Grievous, so we already know that he is at least capable. Besides, we can't put Kenobi ahead of them based on that decision alone.
Regardless, even if Kenobi is a more skilled duelist then any one of those three, his speed is not so much ahead of theirs that he can handle Sidious's speed. Sidious blitzed Kolar and Tiin before any of them could react, and then blitzed Fisto about a second later. Kenobi wouldn't do much better, IMO.
Originally posted by SIDIOUS 66
Kit Fisto already outdueled Grievous, so we already know that he is at least capable.
Actually he didn't. Fisto had to go Jar Kai just to match 3 of Grievous's blades. Whilst Obi-Wan defeated all 4 of his blades with just a single sword.
Have Obi-Wan go Jar Kai and we know he's in a totally different league challenging the Maul brothers together.
So I say based on that Kenobi >>> Fisto as a swordsman.
Originally posted by SIDIOUS 66
Regardless, even if Kenobi is a more skilled duelist then any one of those three, his speed is not so much ahead of theirs that he can handle Sidious's speed. Sidious blitzed Kolar and Tiin before any of them could react, and then blitzed Fisto about a second later. Kenobi wouldn't do much better, IMO.
He should since he's clearly a better swordsman than any of them. He's been called "The Master" of Soresu. Have any of those 3 been called the very best user of their particular form?
Plus there's the blocking 20 strikes per second, which does put his speed ahead of any of theirs too.
I honestly put Obi-Wan much closer to Dooku's level as a Swordsman than those 3 "celebrated" swordsmen.
Why is everyone putting so much emphasis on Jar'Kai as of late, with alternating interpretations that it's a technique of last resort or ultimate ace in the hole? Like every other facet of lightsaber combat, it comes with its inherent strengths and weaknesses.
Originally posted by Zampanó
I dunno; those three were all available to fight Grievous and weren't picked. So there's at least one factoid in Kenobi's favor.
So was Mace.
Originally posted by The_Tempest
Why is everyone putting so much emphasis on Jar'Kai as of late, with alternating interpretations that it's a technique of last resort or ultimate ace in the hole? Like every other facet of lightsaber combat, it comes with its inherent strengths and weaknesses.
POWER has suggested that Jar'Kai is very good against 2 opponents/multiple lightsabers.
Originally posted by Nephthys
POWER has suggested that Jar'Kai is very good against 2 opponents/multiple lightsabers.
In that it enables them to potentially defend themselves from multiple angles, absolutely. But there's the issue of coordination and strength; Ventress deals in the Jar'Kai technique and has been beaten by singular foes and multiple ones.
Originally posted by DARTH POWER
Actually he didn't. Fisto had to go Jar Kai just to match 3 of Grievous's blades. Whilst Obi-Wan defeated all 4 of his blades with just a single sword.
What? You do realize that Fisto started out with a single saber while Grievous started out with four, right? Or did you actually forget how Kit ended up with the second saber?
Originally posted by DARTH POWER
Have Obi-Wan go Jar Kai and we know he's in a totally different league challenging the Maul brothers together.
Why do you keep assuming that having two sabers suddenly puts one on a whole different league?
And we actually need to know the entire circumstances of that fight before we can properly judge it. For all we know, Kenobi could have caught Savage off-guard. The fact that Savage is still a very unskilled opponent at that point, is not helping Kenobi's case here.
Originally posted by DARTH POWER
So I say based on that Kenobi >>> Fisto as a swordsman.
Don't go that far. Kenobi once lost to a Grievous who was only using two sabers. Let's actually compare some of Kenobi's fights against Grievous to Fisto's:
^ Here Grievous gets the better of Kenobi, and he only has two sabers.
^Here Kenobi is having a lot of trouble with Grievous one on one, and is even disarmed of the electrostaff. This doesn't show the full fight, and I don't remember exactly how it played out, but it doesn't change the fact that Kenobi was clearly struggling.
^ And then here is Kenobi's most famous fight with Grievous. And this is Kenobi after having a lot more experience with Grievous.
And now let's compare those fights to Fisto's only one on one fight with Grievous....
^ At no point does Grievous overpower Fisto, nor does he put Fisto at a disadvantage, until the magnaguards intervene. Fisto also seems to be fighting Grievous with a much calmer demeanor than ROTS Kenobi did, despite Fisto having no experience in fighting someone like Grievous.
Now I'm not saying Fisto is a superior swordsman than Kenobi (although Obi Wan seems to think so). I'm saying they seem a lot closer than you believe.
Originally posted by DARTH POWER
He should since he's clearly a better swordsman than any of them. He's been called "The Master" of Soresu. Have any of those 3 been called the very best user of their particular form?
That's irrelevent. Sidious has never been called the "very best of any particular form" either.
Originally posted by DARTH POWER
Plus there's the blocking 20 strikes per second, which does put his speed ahead of any of theirs too.
Those 20 strikes per second came from the very same Grievous whom Kit also outdueled.
Originally posted by DARTH POWER
I honestly put Obi-Wan much closer to Dooku's level as a Swordsman than those 3 "celebrated" swordsmen.
I wouldn't.
Although I do believe Sideous would come out on top, I dont think Obi Wan would immediately be a non-factor.
Remember he is arguably the 3rd best jedi in the clone wars era, and he taught the jedi who defeated Dooku.
I'd say with teamwork, it could be a close fight with sideous eventually winning.
I made this thread in relation with the moment where dooku asked obi wan to join him to destroy the sith.
But of course thats my opinion.
Originally posted by The_Tempest
Why is everyone putting so much emphasis on Jar'Kai as of late, with alternating interpretations that it's a technique of last resort or ultimate ace in the hole? Like every other facet of lightsaber combat, it comes with its inherent strengths and weaknesses.
Originally posted by Nephthys
POWER has suggested that Jar'Kai is very good against 2 opponents/multiple lightsabers.
Originally posted by The_Tempest
In that it enables them to potentially defend themselves from multiple angles, absolutely. But there's the issue of coordination and strength; Ventress deals in the Jar'Kai technique and has been beaten by singular foes and multiple ones.
Originally posted by SIDIOUS 66Why do you keep assuming that having two sabers suddenly puts one on a whole different league?
What I've been suggesting is using 2 Sabers certainly helps against multiple lightsaber wielding opponents, or against an opponent capable of wielding 3/4 lightsabers.
It would be a little strange to deny that, unless you all think Ventress could have fought Anakin and Obi-Wan together with a single Saber. Or that Obi-Wan could have challenged Maul and Savage with a single one.
There is a reason Obi-Wan used 2 Sabers to fight them both. Same reason Fisto went Jar Kai on Grievous the second he got the chance. Because it obviously increased their chances in those combat situations.
As for Jar Kai having it's advantages and disadvantages against a single opponent, well yes it's a different fighting style that may prove to be more advantageous against certain combat styles but has it's disadvantages as well.
However since the person wielding 2 Sabers can always switch back to 1 (or be forced to if he gets disarmed of 1 blade), I would overall call it a definite advantage as long as the wielder is adept in both single and dual lightsaber combat.
Jar Kai doesn't offer an overall greater advantage against multiple foes than a single-bladed lightsaber.
The only advantage you gain by using two lightsabers is that you can defend from more angles than you normally would. What you give up is that you lose range of motion, you can't put as much force behind each strike because you're holding each blade with a one handed grip instead of gripping one blade with two hands, which also means that it would be easier for an opponent to knock a blade out of your hand with a powerful strike. As well, because you're holding each blade with one hand, you have to rely on using your forearms and wrists to generate momentum for each strike, compared to being able to use your entire body when swinging with one sword, which results in your attacks being slower and less controlled.
There is a reason why fighting with only one blade has historically been the preferred way of dueling- simply put, fighting with two swords is extremely impractical, regardless of how many people you're fighting.