Originally posted by DARTH POWERAgain, its still the same person. The only real changes are his title and state of mind, so its not like he's changed his whole style of fighting. I think your forgetting that the purpose of threads like these are to let people provide their own judgements and opinions on a specific conflict of interest, not for somebody to just tell how it is and not let anyone disagree with it.
I think people keep forgetting that this thread isn't even Sith Anakin vs Kenobi. It's "Zone" Anakin vs Kenobi. That means Jedi Anakin at the top of his game.
Originally posted by DARTH POWERNo, that's only evidence that Anakin is superior to Dooku. Remember A>B>C argument is very biased. Because A may have an advantage against B, B could have an advantage against C, and C could have an advantage against A. So Anakin being superior to Dooku can help your argument, but doesn't prove anything when it comes to Anakin vs Obi Wan.
In which case the response to this:is pretty damn obvious.
The evidence of Anakin's superiority to Kenobi is his beating of Count Dooku who Kenobi was pretty useless against.
After that fight I don't see how anyone in their right mind can think there's no evidence Anakin is superior to Kenobi.
In fact even in the CW Series, Anakin is clearly a threat to Count Dooku, something Kenobi has never been.
In the CW series, Anakin has dueled Dooku many times, which would have helped in his case in their ROTS duel, whereas Obi Wan didn't duel Dooku at all if I am not mistaken.
If we go by your formula, Yoda could lose to Anakin seeing that Yoda didn't do as great a job against Dooku.
Originally posted by DARTH POWERBut unlike Australia's countless victory's, we only know of 2 of Anakin's victories. So, not the most perfect analogy. Plus your basing your arguments on Anakin's other fights, whereas I am basing my arguments on Anakin/Pre suit Vader vs Obi Wan.
No the cricket analogy is perfect. Even if Bangladesh beats Australia and even if it's the only time they played each other, it wouldn't matter. Everybody would know Australia is better because of the opponents they've beaten time and time again, whom Bangladesh has always been useless against.In this case we know Anakin is greater because of his far superior performances against Count Dooku (and even Ventress).
So therefore if Kenobi and Anakin fight only once, and Kenobi wins it doesn't matter. It's still perfectly clear that Anakin is the more powerful combatant.
I can see this thread could go on forever, and you and LL are obviously not going to change your minds. But based on what you've given me, it still doesn't add up to Anakin being superior to Kenobi, compared to what evidence has been shown in the films alone.
As somebody pointed out.. The reason Anakin won was because he gave into his rage and let it fuel him to victory against Dooku. he was using this SAME rage factor against Kenobi and it didn't take him to victory. Thus one might say... Kenobi has already beaten ZONE Anakin.
Furthermore, the "proof" that people are claiming Dooku is superior is very very tedious at best. Dooku was DRAINED FIGHTING BOTH KENOBI AND ANAKIN. Why this point doesn't get through some people's thick skulls is beyond me. Dooku was ALREADY weakened when Dooku fought him one v one. Let's not also forget that Dooku wasn't trying to kill Anakin at first... So who is to say he couldn't have landed that killing blow early on when he was fresher? You can't. Yet THIS is the proof Anakin is superior to Kenobi.. Facepalm... Some proof guys.
The facts are these... Kenobi beat a rage fueled Anakin and took him to school. Jedi Anakin is just as rash and brash as Sith anakin.. thus making him do stupid moves IN CHARACTER for him to do AT TIMES. That is EXACTLY the opening Kenobi would exploit and probably push Anakin to make. He knows Anakin better than anybody in he Star Wars mythos.. he knows how to get the best and worst out of him. That is exactly what he would use in battle with him.. and guess what.. exactly what he DID use in battle against him.
Kenobi beats Anakin more times than not and arguing that goes against on panel information. ya know, the part where Kenobi turns Anakin into a paraplegic
Originally posted by mnat801No, that's only evidence that Anakin is superior to Dooku. Remember A>B>C argument is very biased. Because A may have an advantage against B, B could have an advantage against C, and C could have an advantage against A. So Anakin being superior to Dooku can help your argument, but doesn't prove anything when it comes to Anakin vs Obi Wan.
So you honestly think Anakin>Dooku>>>Obi-Wan>Anakin??
The difference between Dooku and Obi-Wan was just too much for this theory to have any credit.
Originally posted by mnat801
In the CW series, Anakin has dueled Dooku many times, which would have helped in his case in their ROTS duel, whereas Obi Wan didn't duel Dooku at all if I am not mistaken. .
Excuses. And a pretty bad excuse at that. Why would Anakin having previous duels with Dooku help him more than it helped Dooku??
Originally posted by mnat801
If we go by your formula, Yoda could lose to Anakin seeing that Yoda didn't do as great a job against Dooku.
At least Yoda was still beating Dooku. If Yoda got humiliated by Dooku the way Obi-Wan did then that would be a whole different story.
Besides Many people do think that Zone Anakin vs Yoda would be a good duel.
Originally posted by mnat801
But unlike Australia's countless victory's, we only know of 2 of Anakin's victories. So, not the most perfect analogy. Plus your basing your arguments on Anakin's other fights, whereas I am basing my arguments on Anakin/Pre suit Vader vs Obi Wan.
Of course I'm basing it on Anakin's whole history of fights. Your just being biased and basing it on the one fight Obi-Wan was destined to win. Where Anakin made a completely out of character tactically stupid move.
Originally posted by mnat801
I can see this thread could go on forever, and you and LL are obviously not going to change your minds. But based on what you've given me, it still doesn't add up to Anakin being superior to Kenobi, compared to what evidence has been shown in the films alone.
Unfortunately for you this is an EU forum. So we don't just count the movies. Even in the movies Anakin showed his clear superiority to Obi-Wan by defeating Count Dooku. Something Obi-Wan is not capable of.
Originally posted by KuRuPT ThanosiFurthermore, the "proof" that people are claiming Dooku is superior is very very tedious at best. Dooku was DRAINED FIGHTING BOTH KENOBI AND ANAKIN. Why this point doesn't get through some people's thick skulls is beyond me. Dooku was ALREADY weakened when Dooku fought him one v one. Let's not also forget that Dooku wasn't trying to kill Anakin at first... So who is to say he couldn't have landed that killing blow early on when he was fresher? You can't. Yet THIS is the proof Anakin is superior to Kenobi.. Facepalm... Some proof guys.
This is complete BS! Who says that Dooku was tired from fighting both Kenobi and Dooku for a whole 13 seconds??
Oh right the novel. The same novel that clearly states Dooku completely revitalized himself with the Force before his One on One with Skywalker. And the same novel that made it perfectly clear that Dooku Decided to go for the kill BEFORE their one on one.
And you've been explained many times that this BS no longer holds after all the times Skywalker has stalemated Dooku in the CW series.
If you want to ignore all the evidence outside of the movies, then go discuss it in the Movie Versus forum. This is the SW EU section.
But frankly your quite lost if you don't consider the CW Series canon considering it's created and executive produced by Lucas. Most the main stories originate from him and the whole show was his idea!
Oh and technically going by Movies only would include the CW Movie.
Originally posted by DARTH POWERThat is exactly right. It's because Obi Wan knows Anakin's fighting style, therefore he knows his strengths and weaknesses, that's why he does better against Anakin than against Dooku.
So you honestly think Anakin>Dooku>>>Obi-Wan>Anakin??The difference between Dooku and Obi-Wan was just too much for this theory to have any credit.
Originally posted by DARTH POWERWait. You're talking to me about excuses? Who's the one trying give excuses for Anakin's loss against Obi Wan?!
Excuses. And a pretty bad excuse at that. Why would Anakin having previous duels with Dooku help him more than it helped Dooku??
The answer is easy. Anakin is a fast learner, therefore he can adapt, whereas Dooku is aging and underestimates him.
Originally posted by DARTH POWERWhether Obi Wan was destined to win doesn't matter. He still won. And that kind of stupid move is definitely in his character. It is ridiculous for someone to think otherwise.
At least Yoda was still beating Dooku. If Yoda got humiliated by Dooku the way Obi-Wan did then that would be a whole different story.Besides Many people do think that Zone Anakin vs Yoda would be a good duel.
[QUOTE=14117213]Originally posted by DARTH POWER
[B]Of course I'm basing it on Anakin's whole history of fights. Your just being biased and basing it on the one fight Obi-Wan was destined to win. Where Anakin made a completely out of character tactically stupid move.
Originally posted by DARTH POWERIF you want bring in any EU material, feel free.
Unfortunately for you this is an EU forum. So we don't just count the movies. Even in the movies Anakin showed his clear superiority to Obi-Wan by defeating Count Dooku. Something Obi-Wan is not capable of.
So one victory over Dooku is enough to declare superiority over Obi Wan, yet one victory over Anakin is NOT enough to declare victory over Anakin? That doesn't sound right.
Originally posted by mnat801
That is exactly right. It's because Obi Wan knows Anakin's fighting style, therefore he knows his strengths and weaknesses, that's why he does better against Anakin than against Dooku.
Ok. So you actually do agree that Anakin is the superior warrior to Obi-Wan, he's just at a disadvantage when fighting his teacher.. If that's what your saying then that's fine with me. I think there were other factors involved aside from that, but at least you agree that Anakin's superior and was disadvantaged.
Originally posted by mnat801
Wait. You're talking to me about excuses? Who's the one trying give excuses for Anakin's loss against Obi Wan?!
Not me. I'm basing who is the superior warrior on their past fights and not just one fight Obi-Wan was destined to win.
Originally posted by mnat801
The answer is easy. Anakin is a fast learner, therefore he can adapt, whereas Dooku is aging and underestimates him.
Yeah, your definitely the one making excuses.
The Clone War movie was Anakin's first fight against Dooku since AOTC. And even that early in the CW he faired far far better against the Count than Obi-Wan did as late as ROTS.
Originally posted by mnat801
IF you want bring in any EU material, feel free.
I constantly have. Your just ignoring it. Anakin consistently stalemates Count Dooku during the Clone Wars. Whilst Obi-Wan has always been useless against Dooku.
Originally posted by mnat801
So one victory over Dooku is enough to declare superiority over Obi Wan, yet one victory over Anakin is NOT enough to declare victory over Anakin? That doesn't sound right.
If your going to just ignore my points then get off these boards. Nobody likes a troll.
He's stalemated Count Dooku consistently during the CW! He fought an enraged Ventress alongside Kenobi and yet it was Kenobi who got knocked out cold. Skywalker has never been knocked out/defeated by Ventress.
I know your just going to ignore all these points and keep trolling though.
Originally posted by Lord LucienIt doesn't matter what way you use names here, it still doesn't change the fact that its the same person. I know Obi Wan fought Vader on Mustafar, but it feels like I can't even consider that fight just because Anakin had a name change.
Not in the way we use the names here. Anakin is the non-Dark version of Vader. Obi-Wan fought Vader on Mustafar. Dooku fought Anakin on the Invisible Hand.
Originally posted by mnat801
It doesn't matter what way you use names here, it still doesn't change the fact that its the same person. I know Obi Wan fought Vader on Mustafar, but it feels like I can't even consider that fight just because Anakin had a name change.
It wasn't just a name change. It was a whole mental shift. "Twisted by the Dark Side Young Skywalker has become. Gone is the boy you knew" or something like that..
And there's plenty of evidence that mental focus is the key to a Force user's power.
Originally posted by mnat801This is why you need to read the goddamn novel. It was about mentality. Anakin had four distinct mental phases that changed his combat prowess: his normal self, his angry self, his Zone self, and Vader. In terms of power and combative effectiveness it went Zone>Vader>anger>normal.
It doesn't matter what way you use names here, it still doesn't change the fact that its the same person. I know Obi Wan fought Vader on Mustafar, but it feels like I can't even consider that fight just because Anakin had a name change.
Originally posted by The_TempestDamn right.
For the record, Lucien is right and anyone who disagrees with him on this or any issue is wrong as f*ck.