Originally posted by carver9
Why mention low showings when I said this is all about their averages? If on average they suck, it wouldn't be considered a low.If Thor is consistently slower than street level and you provide proof of that, then yes, that's a solid argument.
What's the average of Surfer getting drained versus him fighting against such tactics?
How many times has Superman drained someone, especially someone of Surfer caliber. This is simple. If you say Superman beats Surfer by draining him, you need to provide enough proof showing that's within his abilities to do, not just a one off or two off. If we use one off, then people like Spiderman can survive the UN, Colossus can lift islands, Sun Spot can push planetary weight, Wonder Woman has star level strength, Cyborg, Mera, and Batman has nano seconds speeds (lmao), and the list goes on and on.
Because your argument about high showings can also be applied to low showings.
You say 'for something to be valid/a valid tactic, character X has to have done it more than 1,2,3, times'.
Iow, if it happens more than X times (which I keep asking for), then.....it's consistent.
So if Thor keeps getting embarrassed by street tiers - and again, you know the showings are there, there's an entire thread of them - then it's..... consistent, according to your logic.
It works both ways, without a definition of consistency. Is it a percentage? If you can't answer it, then it just becomes bias driven.