ROTS Obi Wan Kenobi Vs ROTS Kit Fisto

Originally posted by KuRuPT Thanosi
Where on God's green earth did this notion of Fisto having more accolades than Kenobi come from? Fisto being a council member longer and being in the order longer and thus having a higher rank before Kenobi.. doesn't mean he has more accolades. Ventress DOMINATED him with relative ease. Kenobi has been defeated as well but he's also beat her with ease. Fisto would have zero chance against Anakin.. and Kenobi beat anakin. Are they pretty close in a saber duel.. sure they are... is kenobi still superior.. yes Ohhh and Kenobi most certainly would last longer against Sids than Fisto did.

It came from viewing which people both Kenobi and Fisto dueled like Grievous, Ventress, and eachother. Fisto beat AOTC Kenobi and he did better against Grievous overall and Ventress is debatable to say which is better however Kenobi did not beat her easily as you claim. Next time base your arguments with evidence.

Fisto beat kenobi under what circumstances?

You mean evidence like Fisto getting owned by sids in seconds... Maul lasting longer against sids.. and Kenobi beating maul.. LIKE that??? You mean like Kenobi beating Anakin.. something Fisto would never be able to do. You mean like that kinda evidence? Stuff I clearly stated already.

Originally posted by Arab Jedi
It came from viewing which people both Kenobi and Fisto dueled like Grievous, Ventress, and eachother. Fisto beat AOTC Kenobi and he did better against Grievous overall and Ventress is debatable to say which is better however Kenobi did not beat her easily as you claim. Next time base your arguments with evidence.

Kenobi has better performances against both Ventress and Grievous.

Fisto has done nothing to suggest he's on par with someone like Maul. I don't get what's so hard to grasp here. Is Fisto good? Yes. He's >/= AOTC Kenobi. But nothing anywhere puts him on par wit Late CW/ROTS Kenobi's best feats.

In fact nothing even puts him on par with Ventress or Opress. Let alone Late CW Kenobi and Maul.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
Kenobi has better performances against both Ventress and Grievous.

Fisto has done nothing to suggest he's on par with someone like Maul. I don't get what's so hard to grasp here. Is Fisto good? Yes. He's >/= AOTC Kenobi. But nothing anywhere puts him on par wit Late CW/ROTS Kenobi's best feats.

In fact nothing even puts him on par with Ventress or Opress. Let alone Late CW Kenobi and Maul.

And that becomes irrelevant unless you think Savage can take Fisto, Kolar and Tiin at the same time.

Why people don't accept some of the other Council members as being able to fight on par with Kenobi is beyond me.

Originally posted by Intrepid37
And that becomes irrelevant unless you think Savage can take Fisto, Kolar and Tiin at the same time.

Why people don't accept some of the other Council members as being able to fight on par with Kenobi is beyond me.

Except it doesn't mean that. It means that Savage did better in that situation.

What has Opress to do with this?

Originally posted by Intrepid37
Except it doesn't mean that. It means that Savage did better in [b]that situation.

What has Opress to do with this? [/B]

Agreed.

Originally posted by Intrepid37
You were correct. Now, the scene is obviously contradicted by the movie, but it's worth noting.

A contradiction as in it wasn't stated in that scene within the film, yeah. But I'm not sure I'm willing to disregard the quote due to the fact that both Shaak Ti and Windu felt that he was one of the orders best, along with him being termed as a "celebrated swordsmaster" in TCVD. Also, I believe that Tempest provided a source that states that the jedi council consisted of some of the best warriors of the order, and Fisto is obviously one of them. Then we have Lucas referring to the PT era as the golden age of the jedi order. So, considering all that, the quote doesn't seem to contradict how good Fisto is meant to be.

Originally posted by Intrepid37
The statement does not make Fisto a superior swordsman, or even an equal in my opinion, but it just furthers the theory that Fisto would put up a very good fight.

Well, no that statement alone does not make Fisto a superior swordsman, and I didn't mean to imply that. But having better accolades than Kenobi and comparable feats, and then having people still say that Kenobi is a much better fighter is a bit of a stretch.

Originally posted by KuRuPT Thanosi
Where on God's green earth did this notion of Fisto having more accolades than Kenobi come from?

You should google the word accolade, and then go back and read my post before making a fool of yourself.

Because....

Originally posted by KuRuPT Thanosi
Fisto being a council member longer and being in the order longer and thus having a higher rank before Kenobi..doesn't mean he has more accolades.

...this makes absolutely no sense, and I'm not sure what it has to do with anything I said.

Originally posted by KuRuPT Thanosi
Ventress DOMINATED him with relative ease.

No, she didn't. The novel actually suggested that it was a very intense duel until Ventress finally penetrated his defense and landed a kick.

But Ventress has, however, "DOMINATED" Kenobi on two occasions, the last one being when Kenobi had Anakin's help against her.

Originally posted by KuRuPT Thanosi
Kenobi has been defeated as well but he's also beat her with ease.

When has Kenobi ever beat her with ease? He never has. He merely bested her on a couple of occasions, but never with ease.

So while Kenobi has had better performances against Ventress than Kit has, he's also had far worse performances against her as well, which which brings him down a bit when comparing their respective performances against her, considering the humiliation Kenobi has dealt at her hands.

Basically when we look back and consider all of Kenobi's fights against Ventress, she actually comes off as the better duelist: she's defeated him more than he has her, and she's also humiliated him even when he had help against her. So if Ventress is better than Fisto based on his single performance against her, then she's also better than Kenobi based on all of his performances against her.

Originally posted by KuRuPT Thanosi
Fisto would have zero chance against Anakin..

Against an Anakin who was so mind screwed that he choked his wife, and actually believed himself to be more powerful than Palpatine at the time, thinking he was ready to overthrow him?

Why not? Kenobi stood a chance.

If you want to argue that Fisto probably would not have lasted long enough to make it to the lava-bank like Kenobi did, then you'd have an argument because Kenobi is more of a defensive fighter than Fisto, but this doesn't mean Kenobi is superior to Fisto, and it wouldn't grant Kenobi a guaranteed victory against Fisto because Fisto is not some mind screwed maniac whose judgement is clouded like it was with dark side Anakin.

Originally posted by KuRuPT Thanosi
and Kenobi beat anakin.

Yeah, because Anakin leaped right onto Kenobi's saber. It would be just as easy for Anakin to do the same with Fisto.

Originally posted by KuRuPT Thanosi
Are they pretty close in a saber duel.. sure they are

So then why are you claiming Fisto would have zero chance against dark side Anakin? If you believe Kenobi beat Anakin due to being superior, then that would suggest that you do not believe Fisto and Kenobi are close in saber combat. Why are you contradicting yourself?

Originally posted by KuRuPT Thanosi
is kenobi still superior.. yes

Probably.

Debatable though.

Originally posted by KuRuPT Thanosi
Ohhh and Kenobi most certainly would last longer against Sids than Fisto did.

Based on what? Because he once barely bested Maul, who lasted longer against Sidious than Fisto did, although Sidious wasn't trying to kill him?

Why the hell do some of you have absolutely no grasp of context? It's frustrating. lol

Originally posted by SIDIOUS 66
A contradiction as in it wasn't stated in that scene within the film, yeah. But I'm not sure I'm willing to disregard the quote due to the fact that both Shaak Ti and Windu felt that he was one of the orders best, along with him being termed as a "celebrated swordsmaster" in TCVD. Also, I believe that Tempest provided a source that states that the jedi council consisted of some of the best warriors of the order, and Fisto is obviously one of them. Then we have Lucas referring to the PT era as the golden age of the jedi order. So, considering all that, the quote doesn't seem to contradict how good Fisto is meant to be.

Originally posted by SIDIOUS 66
Well, no that statement alone does not make Fisto a superior swordsman, and I didn't mean to imply that. But having better accolades than Kenobi and comparable feats, and then having people still say that Kenobi is a much better fighter is a bit of a stretch.

I know. I was just providing my reason why I'm not willing to disregard Kenobi's quote about Fisto being one of the best ever just because it wasn't stated in the film.

I never said we should.

Originally posted by Intrepid37
Except it doesn't mean that. It means that Savage did better in [b]that situation.

What has Opress to do with this? [/B]

He never said anything about THAT situation. He made a direct comparison because with the 2 situations saying Opress is better.

Stop throwing his comment aside like it means nothing and it was a pointless thing to say.

But Filoni never actually said Opress IS better. He said Opress lasted longer against Sidious, which is incontrovertible.

I'd give Kenobi an 8/10 advantage. Kenobi has proven in the RotS novel that he can hold up against opponents that are far faster than him. When he is fighting Grievous he notes he is slower than 12 strikes per second, but can still defend against it via skill. Greivous has to ramp it up to 20 strikes per second to overload Kenobi's defense, and Fisto isn't that fast. And besides speed and ferocity, in a 1 on 1 match, Fisto has no advantage against Obi-Wan--In fact, he's disadvantaged by Shii-Cho's weakness against singular opponents.

Kenobi has a stronger advantage than you might think--Not because he's better so to speak, as much as because he's more suited to this battle than Fisto is by far.

Might as well blame Fisto's loss to Ventress on the acccount of Makashi being suited to beat Shii-Cho.

Originally posted by NewGuy01
I'd give Kenobi an 8/10 advantage. Kenobi has proven in the RotS novel that he can hold up against opponents that are far faster than him. When he is fighting Grievous he notes he is slower than 12 strikes per second, but can still defend against it via skill. Greivous has to ramp it up to 20 strikes per second to overload Kenobi's defense, and Fisto isn't that fast. And besides speed and ferocity, in a 1 on 1 match, Fisto has no advantage against Obi-Wan--In fact, he's disadvantaged by Shii-Cho's weakness against singular opponents.

Kenobi has a stronger advantage than you might think--Not because he's better so to speak, as much as because he's more suited to this battle than Fisto is by far.

Actually the fact that Fisto had Grievous on the defensive during most of their duel would suggest that he is faster Grievous, unless we are to assume that Grievous held back his speed and was purposely being tooled by Fisto, which I seriously doubt.

Also, just because Fisto's style is suited for multiple opponents doesn't automatically put him at a disadvantage when facing a single opponent.

Originally posted by Intrepid37
Might as well blame Fisto's loss to Ventress on the acccount of Makashi being suited to beat Shii-Cho.

Yep.

Originally posted by SIDIOUS 66
Actually the fact that Fisto had Grievous on the defensive during most of their duel would suggest that he is faster Grievous, unless we are to assume that Grievous held back his speed and was purposely being tooled by Fisto, which I seriously doubt.

Also, just because Fisto's style is suited for multiple opponents doesn't automatically put him at a disadvantage when facing a single opponent.

Are you going to argue that Kit Fisto is twice as fast as Kenobi?

Logically it would put him at a disadvantage, as the lack of precision in his technique would make it harder to attack or defend against blows from a more precise duelist, most notably a Makashi user.