Re: The Greatest Foe the darkness had ever known...
Hmm...with full rest (as the OP says) Yoda's chances are pretty good.
1. wins
2. wins
3. wins
4. wins
5. 50/50
Boss: 55/45
RotJ Sidious shoudl be rusty with a saber, and while his Force powers are most probably better than in RotS, in combat I think Yoda will have a very slight edge.
You would never say did you move passed the second grade.. that isn't how passed in used in that context.
Idious.. it doesn't matter about the senate pod and falling because that was the same for both. You act like Yoda had magnets on his feet and couldn't fall as well. When in fact we know Yoda fell at the end because he was on the EDGE and Sids was in the pod. Yet, you wanna claim it was easier for Sids to fall out of the pod? Are you really trying to be stupid or does it just come naturally to you? Both could've been knocked from the pod and thus that is cancelled out. Palps wasn't anymore vulnerable to falling out than Yoda, thus that point is moot. What's key though.. is that Yoda's ATTACK CAUSED Palps to drop his weapon. Period end of story. Glad you did concede not being able to argue stuff on your own without the help of Gideon
Originally posted by DARTH POWER
That was your original unconvincing version of the argumet.
Yet the script supported it. Sorry you needed further convincing to realize something that is obvious.
Originally posted by DARTH POWER
This is the more along the lines of what Arhael proposed. He strengthened your argument about 100 times.
How? By stating the same thing I said, and then quoted the script which further supported my argument? Yes I guess he helped.
Originally posted by DARTH POWER
What the f***? Dooku fought off Anakin and Kenobi and almost took them both out.
But got demolished after Anakin was visually angry, not so much the case with Barriss.
Remember, no excuses. Barriss must be better than Dooku.
Originally posted by DARTH POWER
And in all the fights before that Skywalker never once managed to defeat Dooku.
But he did in ROTS. No excuses.
Originally posted by DARTH POWER
How on in the World of SW is that comparable to Barriss being no match for Skywalker the one time they fought?!
I explained already. She gave him a good struggle even after he became angry. And he had to use a combination of his force powers and saber skill to subdue her, whereas he just battered Dooku with his saber alone.
Originally posted by DARTH POWER
Nah. But he did need her to save Ashoka. Not sure how much of a difference that made to the fight, if any.
No excuses, he struggled with her. So you're right, it didn't make a difference.
Originally posted by DARTH POWER
He held back on his Force Powers. Which we know because 1) He never used them and 2) We see his equal/inferior Opress casually TK Death Watch warriors around.
Wow, same way Yoda held back his force powers on Dooku.
Originally posted by DARTH POWER
Like I said, Context includes ON Screen Reasons given for a fight. Like "Destroy the Sith we Must" obviously means no holding back. But "How do I get Viszla's men to follow me" is just something completely different.
Where is it stated that the only way they would follow him is if he defeated Vizsla in a strict saber duel? I mean, you accuse me of making things up when I think logically, so what are you doing here? Are you making excuses as well. And BTW, Maul's struggle with Viszla in swordplay, and being on the receiving end of plenty of physical attacks, would suggest that Vizsla is far superior to Savage, and far stronger, considering how easily Maul outskilled and overpowered Savage.
Originally posted by DARTH POWER
So we were FLAT OUT given the CONTEXT of that fight ON SCREEN. The reason for it wasn't just to outright murder Viszla, but to win over his warriors.
I didn't see them mentioning any rules for the fight. I mean, Vizsla was using blasters, missile launchers, cable, darts, etc. Why couldn't Maul use the force? Where is it stated that Maul wasn't allowed to use the force?
Remember, no excuses.
Originally posted by DARTH POWER
No I don't ignore context given to us and stated on screen.
You do all the time.
Originally posted by DARTH POWER
I ignore your BS Context which you make up every time you don't like the way a fight went like:
Which fight did I not like?
Originally posted by DARTH POWER
Yoda held back against Dooku - Because I say so LOL
So Yoda didn't hold back on using the force?
Or is it that he did hold back on using the force, but then suddenly decided to get real serious after he whipped his saber out?
Originally posted by DARTH POWER
Mace held back against Dooku - Because I say so LOL
When did I say this?
Originally posted by DARTH POWER
Sidious was fighting at 1/2 speed against Maul/Opress - Because I say so LOL
No, I say Sidious wasn't using his full speed because of the fact that he has displayed superior speed feats, and the fact that he logically wouldn't use his full speed against someone he wasn't trying to kill, or someone he was clearly toying with, or in a fight that he was enjoying. Why would he want to end his enjoyment so quickly?
You used almost the same logic when you said Maul could have used the force on Vizsla due to the fact that we see Savage using it against other Death Watch warriors.
Originally posted by DARTH POWER
He did fight harder against Sidious, no doubt about that, that was literally about the fate of the Galaxy and the Jedi. Plus he was pushed harder by Sidious's power. But he was trying to stop Dooku.
So if he wasn't fighting Dooku as hard as he was against Sidious, then that would suggest that he wasn't fighting his hardest. In other words: he was holding back.
Are you even trying?
Originally posted by DARTH POWER
And he even considered his fight with him good enough to not need to spar for a while after that- "Schism."
So he considered his duel with Dooku as nothing more than a good sparring match? Ok.
Originally posted by DARTH POWER
Bottom line- If Yoda could have stomped Dooku with ease- He would have.
You already admitted that he wasn't fighting Dooku his hardest, which would suggest that he wouldn't have even if he could have.
Really, are you even trying?
Originally posted by DARTH POWER
Reading comprehension is your friend. But clearly you ignoring your friend.
Well it's definitely your enemy.
Originally posted by DARTH POWER
Quote me where I said you were bitching about someone being a better debator than you. Then we will find out whose more stupid out of me and you.
Ok, now I feel like I fell into the trap of a troll. 😆
You can't be serious. SMH
Originally posted by Master Han
*past.They teach you that in 2nd grade.
Just saying.
Actually, *past is what I put at first, which is why I made the edit. But I figured passed the right way like Neph described.
Regardless, it's a something that can be easily mistaken. And I never claimed to be the best at grammar or spelling. But there is no excuse for the way KT writes. He doesn't even try.
Originally posted by KuRuPT Thanosi
You would never say did you move passed the second grade.. that isn't how passed in used in that context.
You didn't know that until Han brought it to your attention. Stop.
Originally posted by KuRuPT Thanosi
Idious.. it doesn't matter about the senate pod and falling because that was the same for both. You act like Yoda had magnets on his feet and couldn't fall as well. When in fact we know Yoda fell at the end because he was on the EDGE and Sids was in the pod. Yet, you wanna claim it was easier for Sids to fall out of the pod? Are you really trying to be stupid or does it just come naturally to you? Both could've been knocked from the pod and thus that is cancelled out. Palps wasn't anymore vulnerable to falling out than Yoda, thus that point is moot. What's key though.. is that Yoda's ATTACK CAUSED Palps to drop his weapon. Period end of story. Glad you did concede not being able to argue stuff on your own without the help of Gideon
Yet we see Yoda leaping around evading Sidious's attacks during the saber duel on the platform, whereas Sidious couldn't.
That doesn't matter... they terrain was the same for both... In fact... Sidious was less likely to fall than Yoda was seeing as it was actually IN the pod and Yoda was on the edge. To even argue otherwise is bordering on stupidity.. nothing new for you I know, but still pretty damn dumb. Yoda's ATTACK MADE HIM DROP HIS SABER.. PERIOD. What is so hard for you to understand here... he didn't just trip on his own.. the attack MADE him to do that.. thus Yoda disarmed him.
S66, I do believe DP has recanted of his heretical ways some time ago and has adopted a more logical, mature view of things. Which is to say my view of things.
This is not the same DP who was running around saying Maul and Opress gave Sidious hell or that Obi-Wan can solo both brothers at once or that Yoda fled Coruscant in ROTS because Sidious was a skilled rhetorician.
Originally posted by KuRuPT Thanosi
That doesn't matter... they terrain was the same for both
Yes, it does matter. The terrain wasn't the same for both. Yoda, being a lot smaller than Sidious, had more room to leap around in and evade Sidious' attacks, whereas Sidious had to rely mostly on his saber to defend himself with, as he didn't have the luxury of leaping around like Yoda did. Yoda had far more room to maneuver.
Originally posted by KuRuPT Thanosi
In fact... Sidious was less likely to fall than Yoda was seeing as it was actually IN the pod and Yoda was on the edge. To even argue otherwise is bordering on stupidity.. nothing new for you I know, but still pretty damn dumb. Yoda's ATTACK MADE HIM DROP HIS SABER.. PERIOD. What is so hard for you to understand here... he didn't just trip on his own.. the attack MADE him to do that.. thus Yoda disarmed him.
You're beyond stupid. Yoda wasn't less likely to fall because he had places to jump to, Sidious didn't. The script makes it clear that Sidious dropped his saber after nearly falling over the edge, not because Yoda knocked the saber out of his hands. So tell me how Sidious would have nearly fell over an edge on even ground?
I'm out.
Oh, and KT I missed your post where you asked Tempest if Sidious dropped his saber from slipping. You said I rode his coattail because I sometimes ask him for sources, yet you're asking him whether or not Sidious slipped when you supposedly read the script yourself? What would you call that? Sucking his coattail?
@Tempest, no, DP is going back to his old ways. Don't let him fool you, I thought he changed once before too. But I guess stupidity can't be cured. Maybe it goes in remission from time to time, IDK.
I guess I did ignore my friend, reading comprehension. DP said I was bitching about people who were clearly better debaters than me, not that I was bitching about them being better debaters. My bad.
Still, though. Lol @ Arhael being a better debater than me. Nai is a better debater than me at some things like interpreting literature perhaps, but he's not when it comes to arguing combat ability in a vs forum.
Originally posted by The_Tempest
He slipped and dropped his weapon... because of Yoda.Sidious definitely disarmed Yoda, though.
I remember the great Gideon's once suggesting that the script should not be taken as the final version of the confrontation we see in the movies, and that Yoda never actually disarmed Sidious. I'd trust his word over yours, loser.
Even if Yoda had the upper hand in the saber duel, a notion that I currently adhere to, the fight would still be quite the tossup; maybe a 55/45 split at best. If you actually wanted to look at the gauntlet from a probability standpoint and recognize that the chances of Yoda's winning each match is less than one, he probably doesn't clear. But we don't actually consider that, lol.
Yoda takes the majority against every combatant, probably including RotS Sidious, and possibly excepting RotJ Sidious.
Originally posted by Master Han
I remember the great Gideon's once suggesting that the script should not be taken as the final version of the confrontation we see in the movies, and that Yoda never actually disarmed Sidious. I'd trust his word over yours, loser.
The great Gideon was wise to encourage hesitation in the script's account of events, given that it would impart onto Yoda a sharp moment of profound, unparalleled idiocy for having the Dark Lord at his mercy and then relenting for no reason.
Originally posted by Master Han
I remember the great Gideon's once suggesting that the script should not be taken as the final version of the confrontation we see in the movies, and that Yoda never actually disarmed Sidious. I'd trust his word over yours, loser.
"The great Gideon's?" lol, and you had your nerve to correct me on spelling.
Anyway, he did suggest that because Yoda promising to destroy the sith, and then retreating when it seemed as if he had Sidious defeated, seemed contradicting with Yoda's intention in the movie. But IMO, if you look at the entire duel, without having to ignore the script, the only logical explanation as to why Yoda retreated was because he couldn't contain Sidious's lightning much longer with his saber. Most people argue otherwise because the script says that it looked as if Sidious was doomed when the lightning started to arch back towards him, but that doesn't prove Yoda wasn't having difficulty in redirecting the lightning with his saber. In fact, later on in the fight, Sidious blasts Yoda's weapon right out of his hands, so evidently, Sidious' lightning may have been too strong for Yoda to continue containing with his saber.
I was under the impression that a script was just lines and sequences for the actors to follow, not a novel that necessarily has to go into detail on what a character is feeling, and thus does not necessarily have to tell us that Yoda retreated because he was having difficulty in containing the lightning.