You really gotta settle on an avatar, I'm getting confused.
__________________ Recently Produced and Distributed Young but High-Ranking Political Figure of Royal Ancestry within the Modern American Town Affectionately Referred To as Bel-Air.
Registered: Jul 2003
Location: Dreaming...Or am I living...
Non-Canon though...
I know its the EU forum but just saying. You have to go by movies first.
But you also have to realie that Obi was DAMN good. He basicly stood his ground an blocked EVERYTHING GG tossed at him. Less experienced Jedi, if caught at the right time probably would have fallen. He was good, Obi was just better.
At ROTS, Obi was probably the best fighter the jedi had...
Registered: Jul 2003
Location: Dreaming...Or am I living...
No..
Yoda was not a great Duelest, Niether was Mace. Mace left himself open too much. Sidious bested him pretty quickly. Yoda always had to rely on his superior force powers. He never was a great swordfighter. I hold out that both of them would have lost to Anakin.
I have to say I agree with Tpt. Remember that Obi-wan fought and defeated a Sith while still a Padawan, and from there did spend a lot of time learning saber technique, which you can clearly see. Yoda relied on the Force for saber fighting, you can see this by all the flipping around that he does; he wouldn't be able to do that without using the Force. Mace? Well, as was said, he did leave too many openings while fighting. He was a good Jedi, yes, this is obvious by the fact that he was the head of the Council. But best duelist? No, I would have to say that that was Obi-wan, who is one of the few Jedi who'd ever even had any actual duelling experience.
Anyway, Grevious. I didn't mind him so much. However, they totally screwed things up with the Clone Wars cartoon. Yeah, he was supposed to be good, but that was just ridiculous, and it made him look like crap in ROTS.
All the damn Grevious fanboys (hell, fanboys in general) really annoy me, though....
Do I think Obi could have taken on Sidious? No, probably not, but what does that have to do with anything? Remember, both Mace and Yoda lost to Sidious.
Registered: May 2005
Location: .::The Anti-Fanboy Confederation::.
@tptmanno1 and Lana:
I have to set some things straight here. The best duellists the order had in PT times where Yoda and Mace and they were considered to play in their own league with the other Jedi not even coming close to them.
Mace and Dooku were quite close when it comes to duelling and Dooku could take Obi-Wan and Anakin at once which he has shown in AotC and in ROTS as well. So Mace is better than Obi-Wan. Yoda was about to defeat Dooku after 30 seconds of lightsaber dueling (have a look at the AotC script) so he's obviously even better than Dooku (and Mace) which makes him better than Obi-Wan.
If you want to discuss that point. Windu became a Jedi Knight at the age of 13 (Obi-Wan 25) and designed his own fighting style which is said to be the most deadly light saber style there is (Shatterpoint). And he became a Jedi Master at the age of 28 (Obi-Wan was in his late 30s). So how would Obi-Wan be better than Mace or Yoda ? Impossible...
And about Sidious. Yoda told Obi-Wan that he has no chance against Sidious. Period. And Sidious lost against Mace (he was without a weapon, lying on the ground and was with his back against the wall - can it be more obvious ?) and he did only defeat Yoda because of being a lucky *****. So what ?
__________________
"Dear God, what is it like in your funny little brains?"
Oct 2nd, 2005 02:53 AM
