Anakin, Obi-Wan, Ahsoka vs B-Team

Originally posted by Beniboybling
"I mean, it's just me..."So what your saying is that you admit the absurdity of your own argument? I see.

No I'm using Filoni's words against Tempest, as he clings to his words when/how they suit his argument referring to them as (word of god).

In any case, whatever the source books say, Filoni's words should certainly be taken into consideration when citing evidence from his own damn series. And that only further supports my argument, that Fisto beating Grievous in a series from a guy with those kind of views, isn't proof of him being on par with Kenobi. Not even close.

Kenobi has consistently proven himself to be on par with Darth Maul (which the same source book says is one of the deadliest and best trained Sith in the Sith's entire history), and Darth Vader.

You can't just keep referring to Cestus Deception (where Fisto in incapable of defeating Ventress), or TCW episode where he beats Grievous (created by a guy with the views I've stated) to prove he's on par with the likes of Maul and Vader.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
No I'm using Filoni's words against Tempest, as he clings to his words when/how they suit his argument referring to them as (word of god).

In any case, whatever the source books say, Filoni's words should certainly be taken into consideration when citing evidence from his own damn series. And that only further supports my argument, that Fisto beating Grievous in a series from a guy with those kind of views, isn't proof of him being on par with Kenobi. Not even close.

Good work sir. 👆

Kenobi has consistently proven himself to be on par with Darth Maul (which the same source book says is one of the deadliest and best trained Sith in the Sith's entire history), and Darth Vader.

Source: Revenge of the Sith novelisation

"Palpatine faced Mace and Agen and Kit and Saesee - four of the greatest swordsmen our Order has ever produced. By himself. Even both of us together wouldn't have a chance."

You can't just keep referring to Cestus Deception (where Fisto in incapable of defeating Ventress), or TCW episode where he beats Grievous (created by a guy with the views I've stated) to prove he's on par with the likes of Maul and Vader.

Sure Kit beat GG but it was under different circumstances than when Kenobi-wan beat GG.

Kit Fisto had fog which let him use stealth on GG. Furthermore Kit was wielding two blades while GG was wielding 3/4.

But when Kenobi-wan beat GG they were in a neutral environment with GG wielding all 4 blades. Plus GG was going all out and fighting harder than he ever had before.

Kit beat a GG who was missing a lightsaber, taking the fight less seriously, and while exploiting the environment

Originally posted by Beniboybling
Ah I see, so your ridiculing Tempest for "clinging" to Filoni's words as and when they suit his argument, while hiding behind Filoni's words now that they happen to suit your argument.

Good work sir. 👆

Do you actually have an argument here, or are you learning from Tempest's method of "if in doubt attack the person whose argument you don't like"

I've already explained, if you bothered reading, that when comparing fights in HIS series, HIS words are still pretty relevant.

Originally posted by Beniboybling
And Kenobi himself stated Fisto was one of the greatest Jedi duelists in the Order's history:

So? Dock's called the same. Does that make Fisto and Dooku equals? Do you have any idea how to make a logical argument?

There's nothing, no indication anywhere to even hint Fisto is a match for the likes of Ventress, Maul, Opress and Vader. Kenobi is.

Originally posted by Beniboybling
Your point?It proves that Fisto is on par with Kenobi, that is enough.

No. It proves he WAS on par with him very early in the Clone Wars in a novel in which Fisto was clearly no match for Ventress. Kenobi has proven himself far and beyond Ventress level consistently since then.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
Do you actually have an argument here, or are you learning from Tempest's method of "if in doubt attack the person whose argument you don't like"

I've already explained, if you bothered reading, that when comparing fights in HIS series, HIS words are still pretty relevant.

So? Dock's called the same. Does that make Fisto and Dooku equals? Do you have any idea how to make a logical argument?

There's nothing, no indication anywhere to even hint Fisto is a match for the likes of Ventress, Maul, Opress and Vader. Kenobi is

No. It proves he WAS on par with him very early in the Clone Wars in a novel in which Fisto was clearly no match for Ventress. Kenobi has proven himself far and beyond Ventress level consistently since then.

Originally posted by The_Tempest

Actually, the Grievous Fisto battled was so fresh we might as well have called him the Prince of Bel Air.

Brand new armor, hometurf advantage, and the benefit of backup. When Grievous battled Obi-Wan in ROTS, the state of his armor is unattested and he eschewed backup.

It was also a Grievous with no where near the training he had by the time he got decimated by Kenobi in ROTS. As Grievous himself points out before his fight with Kenobi, despite him and Kenobi having clashed blades plenty times before.

Originally posted by The_Tempest
Nonsense. The no.1 priority was to stop Sidious. Grievous was, in comparison, a relatively minor obstacle. 👆

Grievous in and of himself wasn't that important. But his role in the politics after Dooku's death was crucial. The Jedi Council knew they would have to/could force Palpatine to give up power after Grievous's destruction, and that would draw out Darth Sidious.

The film and novel makes this perfectly clear.

Originally posted by The_Tempest
No, Fisto was chosen for the no.1 priority {stopping Sidious}. Obi-Wan was elected to tackle a low-rent flunky tbh.

So is your argument that Tiin, Kolar and Fisto are all =/> Kenobi because they stayed behind.

Also you seem to not be able to make the proper distinction between who was chosen to do what in what order.

It was never that Fisto was chosen first to tackle Sidious over Kenobi. No, Kenobi was chosen first to destroy Grievous once and for all. He was chosen over Fisto for that, leaving Fisto/Tiin/Kolar to help Mace against Sidious. Are the 3 of them combined superior to Kenobi. Of course.

So this speculative stance of yours really doesn't have much relevance to the topic at hand. There's no evidence anywhere that Fisto is on par with Kenobi.

Originally posted by The_Tempest
Actually, he implied that Obi-Wan's swordsmanship was superior to his and Yoda's. You're free to pursue that line of thought, if you wish. 😂

He implied Kenobi was =/> himself as a swordsman only. He implied Kenobi might be even superior to Yoda in a sword fight against Grievous only.

The fact that Windu is even thinking along those lines proves:

1) Windu sees Kenobi as one of the top 3 elite swordsmen on the Council.

2) It further proves my point about Grievous being a terrible medium to compare different Jedi against.

Originally posted by The_Tempest
I know why Obi-Wan was sent after Grievous. The question is: do you know why Fisto was kept in reserve against Sidious? mmm

Explained above.

Originally posted by The_Tempest
The burden of proof is for anyone who makes a claim, DP. 👆

LOL It's not for me to prove someone's on par with one of the deadliest and best trained Sith of all time.

By that argument you could randomly put Kanan or Ahsoka on par with Darth Maul, and you're saying it would be up to me to prove he's not that good?

Nope, the burden of proof is on you to place Fisto on such a tier. And FYI, Fisto's performance against Sidious compared to that of Maul's and even Opress's performance (as confirmed by Filoni) doesn't exactly help Fisto's case.

Originally posted by The_Tempest
You're drawing conclusions inferred from evidence. That's all well and good. The problem, however, is when you hold others to a higher standard regarding the burden of proof. Why, that's just downright hypocritical, if you ask me.

Nah, all I've done is provide proof and reasoning for the league Kenobi is in.

You on the other hand are speculating on situations in a completely new way to how they've always been interpreted. And then actually trying to pass that pretty biased speculation as proof no less.

Things like "oh why was Kenobi there, and why was Fisto here?" is frankly far far away from solid evidence.

Kenobi-wan>>Kit. Just deal with it

Originally posted by Beniboybling
Lol sure thing.

Ah yes, if in doubt just roll with the LOL'S

Originally posted by Beniboybling
That's besides the point, the point is Maul's accolades doesn't make Fisto out of his league.

So... Better feats, and better accolades, don't make Maul better than Fisto?

Urm, yes they almost certainly do.

Heck Fisto's got nothing to even put him on Opress's level. In fact it's been clearly stated Opress fought better against Sidious than Fisto was even capable of.

Originally posted by Beniboybling
Aside from that duel he had with Grievous...I don't know what your talking about, but I'm talking about Grievous.

Ah right, everyone who beats Grievous is in the same league now? So Eeth Koth also on par with Kenobi then?

As I thought, There doesn't seem to be any logical approach to your arguments.

It's more a case of, "I've decided Fisto is on par with Kenobi, and will make the any facts I can find support that theory."

Originally posted by WildBantha88
Kenobi-wan>>Kit. Just deal with it

👆

They do need to learn to deal with it.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
It was also a Grievous with no where near the training he had by the time he got decimated by Kenobi in ROTS. As Grievous himself points out before his fight with Kenobi, despite him and Kenobi having clashed blades plenty times before.

He points out in ROTS that Dooku trained him in the Jedi arts, not that he'd had more training. Are you suggesting that Grievous hadn't been trained in the Jedi arts at all prior to his confrontation with Obi-Wan on Utapau?

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
Grievous in and of himself wasn't that important.

Precisely!

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
But his role in the politics after Dooku's death was crucial. The Jedi Council knew they would have to/could force Palpatine to give up power after Grievous's destruction, and that would draw out Darth Sidious.

The film and novel makes this perfectly clear.

Busting your balls aside, obviously eliminating Grievous was important. But still nowhere near as important as defeating Darth Sidious. Fisto was kept in reserve to be part of the more important task. Why would they logically assign a more crucial task to an inferior warrior?

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
So is your argument that Tiin, Kolar and Fisto are all =/> Kenobi because they stayed behind.

Yeah, my argument is and has always been that the meat and potatoes of the Jedi Council are more or less on par with one another with the obvious exceptions/prodigies {Yoda, Mace, Anakin} being noted.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
Also you seem to not be able to make the proper distinction between who was chosen to do what in what order.

It was never that Fisto was chosen first to tackle Sidious over Kenobi. No, Kenobi was chosen first to destroy Grievous once and for all. He was chosen over Fisto for that, leaving Fisto/Tiin/Kolar to help Mace against Sidious. Are the 3 of them combined superior to Kenobi. Of course.

So this speculative stance of yours really doesn't have much relevance to the topic at hand. There's no evidence anywhere that Fisto is on par with Kenobi.

The order of assignments is irrelevant because both warriors {Obi-Wan & Kit} and both goals {eliminating Grievous & eliminating Sidious} were established and considered before either decision was made. It wasn't like they'd already sent Obi-Wan to Utapau before factoring in a possible confrontation with Sidious. As you say, the goal was to get Grievous as part of an effort to lure Sidious out of hiding.

Obi-Wan was chosen to tackle a far lesser assignment with a far less dangerous quarry. Fisto was to be deployed on a far more important assignment involving a far more dangerous adversary.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
He implied Kenobi was =/> himself as a swordsman only. He implied Kenobi might be even superior to Yoda in a sword fight against Grievous only.

No, he implied that because Kenobi's mastery of Soresu addresses no fundamental weakness whereas Mace's Vaapad and Yoda's Ataru do, that Obi-Wan was the superior swordsman. We know that this obviously isn't true and that Mace and Yoda, despite Mace's pep talk, are both superior swordsmen and Force users to Obi-Wan.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
The fact that Windu is even thinking along those lines proves:

1) Windu sees Kenobi as one of the top 3 elite swordsmen on the Council.

You're trying to conform Mace's remarks to suit your conclusion. He doesn't say Obi-Wan is top 3. He implies that Obi-Wan is better than both he and Yoda. You're welcome to pursue that line of thought if you wish, but don't put words in Mace's mouth.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
2) It further proves my point about Grievous being a terrible medium to compare different Jedi against.

But again, he's not, as various combatants perform to varying degrees of success with Grievous.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
LOL It's not for me to prove someone's on par with one of the deadliest and best trained Sith of all time.

By that argument you could randomly put Kanan or Ahsoka on par with Darth Maul, and you're saying it would be up to me to prove he's not that good?

Nope, no one is asking you to prove a negative. I'm asking you to prove that Obi-Wan is on a different tier than Fisto.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
Nope, the burden of proof is on you to place Fisto on such a tier. And FYI, Fisto's performance against Sidious compared to that of Maul's and even Opress's performance (as confirmed by Filoni) doesn't exactly help Fisto's case.

A pretty weak argument when you consider that, per George, only Mace and Yoda can "compete" with Sidious. {Meaning Obi-Wan, like Kit, can't.} Filoni himself says that Maul and Opress can't compete with Sidious either. He was toying with them and yet "unleashed his full fury" {The New Essential Chronology against Mace's B-Team. What you're seeing is the difference between a Sidious courting battle {"The Lawless"} versus a Sidious going immediately for the kill {ROTS}.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
Nah, all I've done is provide proof and reasoning for the league Kenobi is in.

Nah, you assert Obi-Wan is better because he has more feats to draw on. The feat-only approach has gotten you into trouble in the past {Barriss, anyone?}.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
You on the other hand are speculating on situations in a completely new way to how they've always been interpreted. And then actually trying to pass that pretty biased speculation as proof no less.

'Bias'. 😂

Your preference for Obi-Wan is well-established. I have nothing against Kenobi; suggesting that he's on par with another all-time great {Fisto} only means that I think they're both that awesome. 👆

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
Things like "oh why was Kenobi there, and why was Fisto here?" is frankly far far away from solid evidence.

It's a pretty damn good question to ask tbh. That Fisto was kept in reserve against a greater adversary in no way suggests a great disparity with Obi-Wan. Doesn't make any sense to keep 3 losers on-hand to tackle the galaxy's greatest threat and simultaneously send their 3rd {or first, if you take Mace's pep talk at face value} best fighter to handle a relatively minor obstacle like Grievous.

Between that fact, the fact that neither one are considered to be remote competition for Sidious, their comparable performances against the General, numerous accolades for Kit's own ability, and the fact that Fisto was established to be greater than Obi-Wan at one point during the war... I'd say my case makes itself pretty well.

There's no reason to believe there's any real disparity between Kit and Obi-Wan.

Tempest, I see you haven't yet addressed the article I provided where Filoni puts Kenobi above S4 Maul + Opress combined, saying it simply wouldn't be believable that a newly resurrected Maul and Opress combined could take a ready Obi-Wan without the element of surprise.

But given that I've been slow replying to you, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that you will address that at some point.

Originally posted by The_Tempest
He points out in ROTS that Dooku trained him in the Jedi arts, not that he'd had more training. Are you suggesting that Grievous hadn't been trained in the Jedi arts at all prior to his confrontation with Obi-Wan on Utapau?

Given that Grievous has tangled many times with Kenobi during TCW, it's only logical to assume that Grievous has only brought this point up in ROTS, because he's had Further training since they last met. Why else suddenly mention that after already having fought him so many times.

Do you at least agree that Grievous was trained by Dooku during TCW? And therefore would logically be better trained by the end of TCW than near the beginning of TCW?

Originally posted by The_Tempest
Precisely!

Busting your balls aside, obviously eliminating Grievous was important. But still nowhere near as important as defeating Darth Sidious. Fisto was kept in reserve to be part of the more important task. Why would they logically assign a more crucial task to an inferior warrior?

Because there was logic to where everyone had to be. Yoda himself wasn't there, to draw out the Sith Lord. That doesn't mean they kept Mace there because Mace =/> Yoda.

Kenobi wasn't there because it was of utmost importance to destroy Grievous this time, again to draw out the Sith Lord. So again the fact that Fisto/Tiin/Kolar were chosen to stay behind doesn't mean each one of them is =/> Kenobi.

As someone else has already pointed out to you, Fisto himself remarks he wishes Kenobi was there.

Btw, the reason I wasn't addressing these points at first was because other people were addressing them just nicely.

Originally posted by The_Tempest
Yeah, my argument is and has always been that the meat and potatoes of the Jedi Council are more or less on par with one another with the obvious exceptions/prodigies {Yoda, Mace, Anakin} being noted.

Actually there was a time when you were not even placing Anakin in the elite. First couple of seasons of TCW, you remarked that TCW is proving that neither Anakin or Kenobi are exceptional Jedi (I assume you meant compared with the other notable Jedi, and were basing that on the fights Fisto/Koth put against Grievous and Luminara put against Ventress).

Well your theory of the majority of Council Members being pretty much on par came to a crash when Adi Gallia fought alongside Kenobi against Maul and Opress. Also when in the Old EU comic Sith Hunters (which was contributed to by both Filoni and Katie Lucas) Opress dominated Plo Koon in their fight.

So who are these meat and potatoes of the Jedi Council? Because they already seem to exclude Adi Gallia and Plo Koon? And are all these meat and potatoes of the Jedi Council on par with Darth Maul and Darth Vader as Kenobi has consistently proven himself to be?

Originally posted by The_Tempest
The order of assignments is irrelevant because both warriors {Obi-Wan & Kit} and both goals {eliminating Grievous & eliminating Sidious} were established and considered before either decision was made. It wasn't like they'd already sent Obi-Wan to Utapau before factoring in a possible confrontation with Sidious. As you say, the goal was to get Grievous as part of an effort to lure Sidious out of hiding.

Obi-Wan was chosen to tackle a far lesser assignment with a far less dangerous quarry. Fisto was to be deployed on a far more important assignment involving a far more dangerous adversary.

Addressed above.

Originally posted by The_Tempest
No, he implied that because Kenobi's mastery of Soresu addresses no fundamental weakness whereas Mace's Vaapad and Yoda's Ataru do, that Obi-Wan was the superior swordsman. We know that this obviously isn't true and that Mace and Yoda, despite Mace's pep talk, are both superior swordsmen and Force users to Obi-Wan.

I don't have the exact quote with me but I'm almost certain he was saying Kenobi was the best swordsman "to tackle Grievous" due to his total mastery of a very pure form.

Again proving Grievous is not the best medium for comparing different Jedi combat abilities with.

Windu did however imply that as a Pure Swordsman, Kenobi might be on par with or perhaps even better than himself. Naturally however a reasonable amount of modesty should be accounted for in that statement.

Originally posted by The_Tempest
You're trying to conform Mace's remarks to suit your conclusion. He doesn't say Obi-Wan is top 3. He implies that Obi-Wan is better than both he and Yoda. You're welcome to pursue that line of thought if you wish, but don't put words in Mace's mouth.

Funny, because you almost definitely seem to be trying to conform the order of events, and who was given what assignment, to suit your own conclusion as well.

Originally posted by The_Tempest
But again, he's not, as various combatants perform to varying degrees of success with Grievous.

I've already showed you how the creators of TCW were thinking of Grievous. Going by that he's certainly not a great medium to compare Jedi, because it just depends mind set and/or on who worked out the best way to battle him.

But if you really insist on him as a fair medium, would it be fair to compare Grievous's One full on fight with Fisto, to Kenobi's first full on fight with Grievous? Because that was in fact in "Grievous Intrigue" if you check the correct chronological order of TCW:

http://www.starwars.com/news/star-wars-the-clone-wars-chronological-episodeorder

And comparing it Kenobi seems better tbh. Kenobi in that fight is taking on Grievous's spinning blades in a pretty tight space. Plus he's fighting off a Magnaguard simultaneously. (Grievous actually initally challenged Kenobi with 2 Magnaguards).

And yet it was Grievous who ran from Kenobi in that instance. This was also on Grievous's own ship, so also his "home turf." Compare that to Fisto, who never actually "defeated" Grievous despite fighting him out in the open, and when it was Fisto who ran as soon as Magnaguards showed up.

Kenobi may have had more fights to have more impressive performances against Grievous (like in ROTS), but he also had more fights with which to look "bad" against Grievous.

Originally posted by The_Tempest
Nope, no one is asking you to prove a negative. I'm asking you to prove that Obi-Wan is on a different tier than Fisto.

Nah, you assert Obi-Wan is better because he has more feats to draw on. The feat-only approach has gotten you into trouble in the past {Barriss, anyone?}.

Firstly Barriss what? If anything Barriss's performance against Skwyalker further proves you can't reliably compare fights against just 1 opponent, otherwise yeah Barriss seems almost on par with Count Dooku 😬

And if you can't use fights against just 1 Dark Jedi as an appropriate medium, then you certainly can't use 1 Non-Force sensitive as an appropriate medium. Especially not one who has been specifically stated by TCW creators will lead to inconsistent fights depending on the Jedi mindset, and technique used to fight him.

If you really think that 1 Force sensitive is honestly a really good comparison medium as which to compare Jedi, then I give you these 2 fights:

?v=_Vtj5YxDcCk

and

?v=zEu_U78XFg4

and conclude from them that clearly Kenobi > Maul

See how that works 😬

Originally posted by The_Tempest
A pretty weak argument when you consider that, per George, only Mace and Yoda can "compete" with Sidious. {Meaning Obi-Wan, like Kit, can't.} Filoni himself says that Maul and Opress can't compete with Sidious either. He was toying with them and yet "unleashed his full fury" {The New Essential Chronology against Mace's B-Team. What you're seeing is the difference between a Sidious courting battle {"The Lawless"} versus a Sidious going immediately for the kill {ROTS}.

Again you seem to take the quotes of Filoni and Lucas you like and ignore what you don't like.

Filoni states Grievous's fights against Jedi will be very inconsistent depending on their mind set.

Filoni states Opress put up a better fight against Sidious than the Jedi Council. (Which is consistent and makes perfect sense given Opress eats Council Members for breakfast).

The fact that neither Opress or the Jedi Council members in question can compete with Sidious does not negate Opress simply putting up a better fight than them. After all Fisto certainly put up a better fight against Sidious than Kolar and Tiin did. Without question.

Just because there were certainly parts of the fight where Sidious toyed with the brothers, doesn't mean he was toying with every Saber strike he made. That's why Filoni made those comments, and that's why his comments are not inconsistent with anything else he said.

Originally posted by The_Tempest
Your preference for Obi-Wan is well-established. I have nothing against Kenobi; suggesting that he's on par with another all-time great {Fisto} only means that I think they're both that awesome. 👆

In terms of "my preferences" I'll have you know I prefer Maul to Kenobi. And yet I put them on par with each other, because that's what the evidence shows.

As for Fisto being great, that doesn't mean you're not lowballing Kenobi in this case. Because Kenobi is great. But putting Dooku down to Kenobi's level would still be a great disservice to Dooku. And comparing Dooku to Kenobi based on nothing but their individual encounters with Anakin (one opponent who actually is a force sensitive), would be terribly misleading.

Originally posted by The_Tempest
It's a pretty damn good question to ask tbh. That Fisto was kept in reserve against a greater adversary in no way suggests a great disparity with Obi-Wan. Doesn't make any sense to keep 3 losers on-hand to tackle the galaxy's greatest threat and simultaneously send their 3rd {or first, if you take Mace's pep talk at face value} best fighter to handle a relatively minor obstacle like Grievous.
Between that fact, the fact that neither one are considered to be remote competition for Sidious, their comparable performances against the General, numerous accolades for Kit's own ability, and the fact that Fisto was established to be greater than Obi-Wan at one point during the war... I'd say my case makes itself pretty well.

Addressed already. But FYI asking good questions, and drawing conclusions is speculating.

Originally posted by The_Tempest

Between that fact, the fact that neither one are considered to be remote competition for Sidious, their comparable performances against the General, numerous accolades for Kit's own ability, and the fact that Fisto was established to be greater than Obi-Wan at one point during the war... I'd say my case makes itself pretty well.

There's no reason to believe there's any real disparity between Kit and Obi-Wan.

I think I've provided a pretty thorough case of:

1) The top tier league Kenobi is in.
2) Shown that using a single non-force sensitive is NOT a good medium of comparison,
3) That even if we compare Kenobi's 1st fight with that non-force sensitive he still looked better than Fisto,
4) Comparing fights with a different non-force sensitive he looks Better than Maul, and
5) That most Jedi Council Members are NOT on par with each other.

So if you want to prove that Fisto is above Most other Council members and on par with Kenobi and Maul (as in clearly above the likes of Ventress and Opress) than the Onus of proof is on you. Because not only does Kenobi have more "feats" than Fisto like you like to point out, but he has "far Superior" feats to Fisto, which you try to put aside.

As I final note I would like to point out how much better the more sensible debating is now, without the constant cockiness, insulting (on both sides) and silly GIFS.

Kenobi has defeated Maul and Vader. Fisto has done nothing that compares.

Kenobi > Fisto.

👆

It really makes little sense that any Jedi past their "Bear Clan" years would have significant trouble with Grievous. Grievous can't use the Force. You could just Force push him and stuff like that. How can he defend against it, other than possibly magnetizing himself to the floor?

Originally posted by Darth Luminous
It really makes little sense that any Jedi past their "Bear Clan" years would have significant trouble with Grievous. Grievous can't use the Force. You could just Force push him and stuff like that. How can he defend against it, other than possibly magnetizing himself to the floor?

He goes flying, gets up, and comes back at you.

Or he runs away.

And most Jedi can't generate that level of power anyways.

Why not? Isn't it all about belief in the Force?

Ahsoka was only able to push him back a bit, and by feats Ahsoka is on the level of most typical Jedi Masters.

If Ahsoka can Force-push a Retail Droid out of frame, why can't she do the same thing to Grievous?

Unless your Mace Windu TKing GG isn't an option.

Unless you're Obi-Wan, Kit, Ventress, etc.

Ashoka could probably hold either Saesee or Kolar at bay for awhile considering she did so with equal or stronger foes like Ventress or Grievous.
Obi-Wan could handily defeat either of Fisto, Kolar or Tinn i'm not sure if he could beat 2 but if he could the 3rd would probably beat ashoka by that point

Mace would kill Anakin.

Team 2 wins

Obi-wan is not 'handily' defeating three of the greatest Jedi swordsman ever.

Originally posted by Darth Luminous
Not always. Obi-Wan seems to get more proficient at fighting Grievous as the series goes on.

That's the point. If Kenobi were just absolutely better, then that wouldn't be the case. Kenobi wouldn't require several shots at the same opponent to only do just as good as a playful Fisto if he were solidly above Kit.

Imagine what Fisto would do if he had the same amount of shots at Grievous. I mean, in his first fight against the cyborg, he could have ended him quickly, but he instead allowed Grievous back on his feet and continued to batter him.

Unless you're suggesting that Kenobi surpassed Fisto as the series went on, but even his last fight with Grievous didn't show it. I mean, we could presume Grievous got absolutely better than when he fought Fisto, but logically, Fisto should have increased even more so, being a force user and all. He has precognition and force enhanced speed (among other force using abilities that would serve in a saber duel) that would be honed over the course of time, whereas Grievous doesn't. I've never heard of him receiving upgrades every month. He's a cyborg who can adapt to saber forms within a few exchanges, which is an advantage he had when he faced Kit. Nothing changed about him, other than skill perhaps, but same for Fisto.

Force users have more to improve, hence Kenobi finally defeating Grievous solidly, when he otherwise could not.

DP, I'm also curious, what's wrong with being on par with Fisto? He's a beast. Also, Kenobi was floored by an unarmed Viszla, who wasn't even using his weaponry at the time, and at one point forcing Kenobi to use the force. Where were you getting at with those videos?

Tempest is a trained/experienced fighter, and anyone who has even a little training or experience wouldn't think of Kenobi as being solidly above Fisto based on their respective showings against the same opponent, unless theirs a difference in circumstance, but in this case the circumstance favored Kenobi more than it did Fisto, so there goes that. I've never seen anything from Temp to indicate that he has a bias against Obi Wan. He just doesn't see him as being right below Anakin, with everyone else far below that, and I agree with him on that, as there's nothing conclusive to support that notion.

Kit was wielding two blades while GG was wielding 3/4.

Because Kit took one of his sabers in combat, you mean. 👆

Plus GG was going all out and fighting harder than he ever had before.

Lol @ Grievous holding back against Kit and Mace.

Kenobi seems to get more proficient at fighting Grievous as the series goes on.

He actually gets progressively worse at it.