Originally posted by ILS
You'll notice that your ABC logic is poorly applied here.
Huh? I hardly used ABC logic. ABC would be something like "Windu beat Sidous who stomped Maul, therefore Windu would Uber Trash Maul.."
Was just suggesting that IF we use the only foe they have both fought as a measuring stick, then Dooku LOOKS far superior.
The other opponent they have in common is Grievous, which again makes Dooku look superior (granted Dooku trained Grievous, and I've already stated previously that I don't see Grievous as the best measuring stick amongst Jedi/Sith due to his Non-Force nature.
Also suggested you might have a A>B>C>A type logic with the different Saber forms, which you do, and that's fine.
Originally posted by ILSSetting aside style advantages; Maul and Kenobi are both praised as being among the best duelists in all of recorded history with the feats to back it up, as you know. Windu and Dooku are better, but by a slim margin.
I'm cool with that.
Originally posted by ILS
And more to the actual point I was making: no, Dooku's not taking a "large" majority on account of a power Maul can circumvent better than most of Dooku's competition.
I would still call it a large majority. Because Dooku's just a little better in almost every category. For instance the time Maul gets the edge over Dooku in Sabers, Dooku will likely use his superior Force Powers to gain the overall edge again, much like how his fight against Skywalker went in "Crisis on Naboo." Or against Opress when he was disarmed by him.
I'm not suggesting Maul won't give Dooku hell every time. He will. I just think the number of times Maul will actually win will an all out will be small in number.