Plo Koon and Kit Fisto vs Darth Tenebrous and Darth Vader

@lord_tenebrous:

Being an acrobatic fighter isn't the sole reason anyone would be disadvantaged in close quarters. The source states that Grievous has a ranged fighting style

A rangy fighter wouldn't logically be hindered on a catwalk. Dooku is an example of a rangy fighter who uses his one-armed stance for extra reach to pick at his opponent from a respectable distance. If they were fighting in a confined space with no room to back up, then yeah a rangy fighter would be disadvantaged by an inside fighter, but on a catwalk, all Grievous has to do is keep at a comfortable distance and fight Kenobi from the outside. He doesn't have to get inside Kenobi's attacks.

In practice, Grievous is more of a swarmer who gets in close to smoother his opponent with a relentless barrage of lightsaber strikes in the attempt to overwhelm his defense. Just like the quotes that say a non-acrobatic Qui-Gon is hindered in the confined area against the very agile Maul who used his agility to great effect in an open area previously, the quote is nonsense. As you yourself acknowledge, an official source can be wrong and at odds with both common sense and what we see on screen.

Yes, but it especially disrupts Grievous because his style relies heavily on its randomity and unpredictability. Obi-Wan knowing what he'll do negates his unorthodox technique.

Fair point, but all the same, Dooku who has even more of a knowledge advantage over Grievous than Kenobi, plus a mental edge, was pressured by Grievous in sparring. Toe-to-toe Grievous and his monstrous physicals are always going to pressure any humanoid Force user regardless of experience. Grievous is faster than any human, which includes Dooku, Mace, and Sidious. And strikes harder than anyone Mace has ever crossed blades with which includes Yoda and Darth Maul.

No, the source states that he became enraged due to losing his other hand.

Does it really matter? It was a fully focused Grievous who lost his hand in the first place. What's stopping Kenobi from doing it again to a focused Grievous who now has fewer means to pressure him with the missing hand?

If someone performs a certain way under disadvantageous circumstances, it logically follows that under even circumstances, they'd perform a lot better

What would Grievous do differently in a spacious environment that would give him more of an advantage over Kenobi here, based on any of his previous fights, if not exactly what he did of the walkway and try to overwhelm Kenobis defense in a toe-to-toe exchange? He never used any lateral movement in any of his previous fights. Typically he either follows you in a straight line or fights in a stationary position.

As for the knowledge advantage, I already pointed out Dooku, whom I'm sure you hold above Grievous overall as well as the Council Members below Mace. And though this is dipping into non-canon I would argue on the basis of the novel, which was written under the pretense this was the first time Kenobi and Grievous fought, that Kenobi is at least capable of beating Grievous convincingly without a knowledge advantage. Feats from non-canon should still be considered imo, as long as they don't contradict feats from higher canon. Maul sustaining wounds from Jinn and Kenobi, for example, should be ignored as it contradicts the movie performance where Maul makes it by without any wounds, and Anakin pressuring Dooku with strength alone as Dooku visibly handles it just fine. But feats like Yoda stonewalling Dooku or Jinn dislodging Maul from the ramp, and likewise Kenobi handling Grievous's offense in a first-time encounter should be perfectly valid to use from a performance standpoint, continuity semantics notwithstanding, they don't contradict canon feats.

You misunderstand my point. If someone hardpresses you in a fight, they're close to you in fighting ability.

Grievous and Kenobi are so different they really can't be directly compared. As a stylistic match up Kenobi as of RotS has his number always. As far as overall effectiveness goes Kenobi's defensive application is limited and his offense isn't top tier unlike his defense, but his craftiness and tactical mindset make up for it. Grievous has the best physicals of his era and great versatility in skills, but is mentally weak, and enslaved to form and can be easily suckered by anything not directly related to lightsaber technique, as demonstrated by Mace.

If someone performs a certain way under disadvantageous circumstances, it logically follows that under even circumstances, they'd perform a lot better.

If Grievous fought Kenobi in a spacious area he'd go at him, based on all his fights, in the exact same way, try in vain to pierce his guard, Kenobi would as he did in the novel alter his defensive angles start cutting his hands, Grievous gets frustrated - a mental shortcoming not a disadvantage - and it gets even easier from there.

As for the bit about Fisto and Nahdar, that's contradictory. If a heavily disadvantaged Grievous could still push Nahdar+Fisto to their max limits, then in a 1v1 Fisto should have been stomped since he was already losing badly with a number of circumstances in his favour.

He was pushing them to their limits with his sheer strength in a blade lock. There's no visual contradiction between the novel and the episode itself on that point. And that's the point Grievous's physicals are all ways going to give most top PT fighters a rough time with his speed and strength alone, even Dooku and Windu level fighters. Fisto is more skilled than that version of Grievous, yeah, but then pretty all Council tier Jedi are.

Also, in regard to Mace vs Grievous, that's hardly a legitimate showing. Grievous used his computers to replicate Mace's offensive, so in essence Mace was briefly fighting himself. That's no more of a skill showing than Iron Man using Friday to beat Cap in Civil War.

Grievous never overwhelmed Kenobi with sheer lightsaber skill anyways. In their first fight, he had assistance from a mangaguard forcing Kenobi to split his focus before he took it out, after a brief exchange, Grievous used his legs - something he didn't use on Fisto - to floor Kenobi and later leaned on him with all his weight but Kenobi miraculously finds the strength to push him off, then of course he TK'd him and Grievous calls it quits. On Kamino, he used his arms to surprise Kenobi - the same thing he used to kill Adi before the retcon and again a tactic he didn't utilize against Fisto. In the Utapau arc for TCW same thing, he used his extra arm and leg to overpower Kenboi, not superior saber skill. Fisto outperforming Grievous in saber technique doesn't mean he's superior to prime RotS Kenobi in that area.

Canon Grievous was never portrayed as a technical artist unlike his Legends counterpart, and even there it lacked the finesse of the other top PT greats. It's mainly his physicals and the computers slaved to his brain that makes him such a formidable opponent.

By feats, General Grievous is simply better than Obi-Wan.

In a stylistic match up? No way.

In offensive prowess, physicals, and combative versatility? Sure absolutely.

As an overall combatant? Naw Kenobi's the more complete fighter. Even Dooku agrees when criticizing Grievous's lack of finesse and artfulness:

"Do I need to demonstrate what responses you can expect from Cin Drallig or Obi-Wan Kenobi? From Mace Windu or, stars help you, Yoda?" - LoE

@kilius:

"A rangy fighter wouldn't logically be hindered on a catwalk. Dooku is an example of a rangy fighter who uses his one-armed stance for extra reach to pick at his opponent from a respectable distance. If they were fighting in a confined space with no room to back up, then yeah a rangy fighter would be disadvantaged by an inside fighter, but on a catwalk, all Grievous has to do is keep at a comfortable distance and fight Kenobi from the outside. He doesn't have to get inside Kenobi's attacks. In practice, Grievous is more of a swarmer who gets in close to smoother his opponent with a relentless barrage of lightsaber strikes in the attempt to overwhelm his defense. Just like the quotes that say a non-acrobatic Qui-Gon is hindered in the confined area against the very agile Maul who used his agility to great effect in an open area previously. As you yourself acknowledge, an official source can be wrong and at odds with both common sense and what we see on screen| What would Grievous do differently in a spacious environment that would give him more of an advantage over Kenobi here, based on any of his previous fights, if not exactly what he did of the walkway and try to overwhelm Kenobis defense in a toe-to-toe exchange? He never used any lateral movement in any of his previous fights. Typically he either follows you in a straight line or fights in a stationary position." 

It does hinder a ranged fighting style though. Grievous has no room to maneuver, and we saw this as he tried to cut at Kenobi who was darting in and out around his sides. All Kenobi had to do was flip over him to get close, and Grievous had no real way of generating the momentum required to force him off. In fact that's when Grievous lost his first hand. He managed to keep Kenobi in front of him for the second half but at that point he'd let his focus slip and lost another hand as a result. 

"Fair point, but all the same, Dooku who has even more of a knowledge advantage over Grievous than Kenobi, plus a mental edge, was pressured by Grievous in sparring| As for the knowledge advantage, I already pointed out Dooku, whom I'm sure you hold above Grievous overall as well as the Council Members below Mace." 

The excerpt says this was only for brief moments during extensive sparring sessions, Dooku tires relatively quickly so this can be chalked up to exhaustion. Even setting that aside, that's just good for Grievous. We know that in this one situation, Kenobi's knowledge directly benefited him.  

"Toe-to-toe Grievous and his monstrous physicals are always going to pressure any humanoid Force user regardless of experience. Grievous is faster than any human, which includes Dooku, Mace, and Sidious. And strikes harder than anyone Mace has ever crossed blades with which includes Yoda and Darth Maul." 

That's from Mace's point of view, and he has a nasty track record of hyping up other people. That said, Mace wouldn't make such a statement unless Grievous' strength was giving him considerable strain, so I'll concede that Grievous' raw strength should be comparable to that of Sidious and Yoda. Not better than, or equal to. But similar.   

"Does it really matter? It was a fully focused Grievous who lost his hand in the first place. What's stopping Kenobi from doing it again to a focused Grievous who now has fewer means to pressure him with the missing hand?" 

Kenobi with max effort took one hand with an environmental advantage. Grievous semi-overcame this afterward but at that point he'd lost focus which enabled Kenobi to take another hand anyway. It's likely that if he hadn't lost focus, he could have powered through Kenobi's defenses as he's done before.  

"And though this is dipping into non-canon I would argue on the basis of the novel, which was written under the pretense this was the first time Kenobi and Grievous fought, that Kenobi is at least capable of beating Grievous convincingly without a knowledge advantage. Feats from non-canon should still be considered imo, as long as they don't contradict feats from higher canon. Maul sustaining wounds from Jinn and Kenobi, for example, should be ignored as it contradicts the movie performance where Maul makes it by without any wounds, and Anakin pressuring Dooku with strength alone as Dooku visibly handles it just fine. But feats like Yoda stonewalling Dooku or Jinn dislodging Maul from the ramp, and likewise Kenobi handling Grievous's offense in a first-time encounter should be perfectly valid to use from a performance standpoint, continuity semantics notwithstanding, they don't contradict canon feats."

I disagree. Except in the case of using non-canon/removed content to argue directorial or authorial intent, you can't use non-canon feats because those feats simply did not happen. It is as though they don't exist. A non-canon excerpt has no more validity than fanfiction. It's simply, non-canon. Plus, that Qui-Gon bit was a big error. IIRC. He uses his saber like a club to knock Maul off. Whoever wrote the scene must have briefly forgot what a lightsaber is. And, the intent of Yoda stonewalling Dooku was visibly retconned, since Dooku in the movie despite being already tired out, managed to hold off Yoda for almost 40 seconds. A Yoda who, going by the original script, was trying to kill Dooku. Which is a good example of intent that was not retconned, as there's nothing to suggest that it was. Moreover, the movie and script heavily implied that Kenobi and Grievous had a history together, that it was not the first time they'd met. 

"Grievous and Kenobi are so different they really can't be directly compared. As a stylistic match up Kenobi as of RotS has his number always. As far as overall effectiveness goes Kenobi's defensive application is limited and his offense isn't top tier unlike his defense, but his craftiness and tactical mindset make up for it. Grievous has the best physicals of his era and great versatility in skills, but is mentally weak, and enslaved to form and can be easily suckered by anything not directly related to lightsaber technique, as demonstrated by Mace." 

The way they fight is kind of irrelevent though unless there's an inherent form advantage. Also, I would argue that Kenobi's offense is not significantly below his Soresu skills. Presumably, setting aside the mandatory Shi-cho instruction, Kenobi trained almost entirely in Ataru for the better portion of his pre-Order 66 life. Given that even as of ROTS, OOU sources still proclaim Kenobi to be a master of Form IV, and that Kenobi would in fact need a good offensive ability for tandem fighting which he regularly engaged in with Anakin, I see no reason to believe that Kenobi didn't also continue to hone his Ataru skills throughout the war despite placing his focus more heavily on Soresu. Plus, it makes logical sense anyway to balance Soresu with a more aggressive technique. Soresu places the emphasis on outlasting an opponent, holding them off until they make a mistake, or tire, or even lose focus through emotion. That opens up their guard. But in order to take advantage of that opening, you need to be able to perform well offensively. Luminara had Shien and Ataru to balance her Soresu, and if you go composite, Depa has Juyo+Soresu. 

"If Grievous fought Kenobi in a spacious area he'd go at him, based on all his fights, in the exact same way, try in vain to pierce his guard, Kenobi would as he did in the novel alter his defensive angles start cutting his hands, Grievous gets frustrated - a mental shortcoming not a disadvantage - and it gets even easier from there." 

I disagree. Unhindered, Grievous likely wouldn't be disarmed in the first place. Granted, Kenobi might land a Force Push or kick, but not something that will enrage him. Kenobi will make a fight of it but eventually be overwhelmed, because he's just not as skilled. He lost pretty decisively in season 5, and even as of ROTS he's still inferior to people like Anakin who via feats is comparable to a MagnaGuard. 

"He was pushing them to their limits with his sheer strength in a blade lock. There's no visual contradiction between the novel and the episode itself on that point. And that's the point Grievous's physicals are all ways going to give most top PT fighters a rough time with his speed and strength alone, even Dooku and Windu level fighters." 

IIRC, the source states that it was taking all they had to hold off his advances, which would make reference to his lightsabers attacks. So, not the bladelock.  

"Fisto is more skilled than that version of Grievous, yeah, but then pretty all Council tier Jedi are." 

Judging by how Fisto not only no-sold Grievous' offensive but went above and beyond stonewalling via actually maintaining a steady advance while defending himself, I'd wager that there's a pretty decent gap between AOTC Grievous and AOTC Fisto. Also, Shaak Ti was not. She was admittedly outclassed on Hypori, and while she was disadvantaged, they aren't heavy enough to account for how decisively he dispatched her. Under even circumstances, she would give him one heck of a fight, as would Anakin or Obi-Wan, but she'd still lose. Also, Adi Gallia too, though the gap is slimmer. Grievous beat her in Threepio's episode, though they traded ground which indicates that she was close. Plus, the fact that she was beating him quickly in Grievous Intrigue when she had circumstances in her favor. 

"Grievous never overwhelmed Kenobi with sheer lightsaber skill anyways. In their first fight, he had assistance from a mangaguard forced Kenobi to split his focus before he took it out, after a brief exchange, Grievous used his legs - something he didn't use on Fisto - to floor Kenobi and later leaned on him with all his weight but Kenobi miraculously finds the strength to push him off, then of course he TK'd him and Grievous calls it quits."

Not at all. With the on-and-off aid of a MagnaGuard, they clashed for about 5 seconds, and it's pretty clear that Grievous wasn't actually trying. After being shoved off, he just sits around and watches as the MagnaGuard fights Kenobi for 34 seconds. And they are conversing at the same time. Neither opponent was really serious initially. When Kenobi got serious, he stomped the MagnaGuard. When Grievous got serious, he stomped Kenobi. Grievous using his legs doesn't make the flooring illegitimate, kicks are as valid a hit as a pommel strike, Force Push or punch. Grievous didn't tag Fisto because he couldn't, or he would have. Fisto on the other hand took a hand and later got in a Push as well.  

Miraculous is definitely the word for it. Grievous is supposed to be Kenobi's marked physical superior, yet in this episode he is repeatedly overpowered. 

According to the episode guide, Kenobi in the 9-second exchange despite being in close quarters was in desperation. Then he got tackled by an unarmed Grievous despite being fully ready and having his weapon poised to execute a fatal blow. Then, Grievous runs off for some reason. 

"On Kamino, he used his arms to surprise Kenobi - the same thing he used to kill Adi before the retcon and again a tactic he didn't utilize against Fisto. In the Utapoa arc for TCW same thing, he used his extra arm and leg to overpower Kenboi, not superior saber skill." 

Unlike Adi though, Kenobi saw Grievous seperate his arm, brandish it, and then use it. Kenobi just wasn't able to prevent Grievous from piercing his guard. He was no more surprised than Roron Corobb and Foul Moudama were. And, thank you! I'd forgotten about the Utapau bout. I'll have to edit that in to my other reply. That's 19 bby Kenobi if I'm not mistaken, who also would be fully aware of Grievous' four arms and their use.  

"Fisto outperforming Grievous in saber technique doesn't mean he's superior to prime RotS Kenobi in that area." 

He outperformed Kenobi in skill. Fisto casually outfought Grievous, Kenobi has been repeatedly creamed throughout TCW and in ROTS only took the upper hand with circumstances in his favour, and even then, only narrowly. 

"Canon Grievous was never portrayed as a technical artist unlike his Legends counterpart, and even there it lacked the finesse of the other top PT greats. It's mainly his physicals and the computers slaved to his brain that makes him such a formidable opponent." 

I disagree. Grievous in ROTS takes great pride in his skill, as shown when he boasts that Dooku himself trained Grievous in the Jedi arts. TCW places a heavier emphasis on his physical stats, but he still has to have the necessary skill in order to land physical blows in the first place. 

"In a stylistic match up? No way. In offensive prowess, physicals, and combative versatility? Sure absolutely. As an overall combatant? Naw Kenobi's the more complete fighter. Even Dooku agrees when criticizing Grievous's lack of finesse and artfulness:"

Kenobi only has an edge in experience, on-the-fly tactics(probably), and mental fortitude. Grievous is a more skilled fighter, a more knowledgeable one, has superior physicals, and to top it off can fall back on Iron Man-esque computers to develop appropriate countermeasures. Dooku's opinion obviously holds great weight but in the end it's just his subjective opinion. Though I do believe it helps show that the gap between Kenobi and Grievous isn't large. But, make no mistake, Grievous is the superior combatant. And by default, so are Kit Fisto, Eeth Koth, Ki-Adi Mundi, etc. Which as I've said before, fits perfectly since the latter two are significantly older than Kenobi and have had far more time to hone their skills, which all Jedi do until they die. I place a heavy stock on age, which is why I generally chafe at the rapid growth of young prodigies like the Outlander or Jacen Solo. Long-lived beings like Naga Sadow, Darth Krayt, Yoda and Oppo Rancisis are more-so my kind of fighters.

@lord_tenebrous:

Grievous has no room to maneuver, and we saw this as he tried to cut at Kenobi who was darting in and out around his sides.

As you can see in the gif above, when Kenobi maneuvers around Grievous his first instinct, even in a relatively spacious environment, is to simply turn around and face Kenobi just like he did on Utapau. He doesn't manuver to the side or try to create some distance as Kenobi comes in close, which is what a "rangy fighter" like Dooku would want to do.

Grievous using his legs doesn't make the flooring illegitimate, kicks are as valid a hit as a pommel strike, Force Push or punch.

It's a legitimate H2H skill showing yes, but it had nothing to do with saber skill, which is what you are trying to scale other Jedi's success over Grievous with. Kenobi was never outclassed by Grievous blade-to-blade in terms of technique, only in physicals and H2H. Pretty much all of Grievous's success in TCW, against any character, came by way of H2H or outright cheating, not superior blade-work.

He outperformed Kenobi in skill.

TCW Kenobi sure. Fisto cutting off one of Grievous's hands when he merely threw one shot and overextended and wasn't attacking isn't as impressive as RotS Kenobi cutting off his hands under a relentless barrage while defending himself at the same time with only one saber against four, as oppose to two sabers to defend against three. And don't say Fisto is less comfortable with Jar Kai, if it wasn't beneficial against Grieovus's style he would have stuck with one.

Kenobi has been repeatedly creamed throughout TCW

Kenobi forced Grievous retreat on the ship, forced him to retreat on Kamino, they had three other indecisive bouts can't remember the episodes, and the Utapau episode Grievous's sole legitimate win over Kenobi. And in none of them was Grievous getting the better of him blade-to-blade which is the only point of comparison relevant in a debate over Kenobi vs the other Council Members in terms of skill. Yes, Kenobi used the Force, but then so did Fisto and Koth. I actually think Fisto is better than early TCW Kenobi, but RotS Kenobi dismantled Grievous in a more impressive fashion than Fisto did.

@kilius:

"As you can see in the gif above, when Kenobi maneuvers around Grievous his first instinct, even in a relatively spacious environment, is to simply turn around and face Kenobi just like he did on Utapau. He doesn't manuver to the side or try to create some distance as Kenobi comes in close, which is what a 'rangy fighter' like Dooku would want to do." 

This is one instance, we don't know Grievous' mind and people often deviate on occasion for any number of reasons. This is a weaker Kenobi too, Grievous simply might not have needed to as opposed to when he fights an opponent of ROTS Kenobi's calibre. The fact remains that on the walkway Grievous was unable to maneuver away from Kenobi who weaved around him and took a hand as a result. Kenobi got close and with the aid of the environment effectively nullified Grievous' style. 

"It's a legitimate H2H skill showing yes, but it had nothing to do with saber skill, which is what you are trying to scale other Jedi's success over Grievous with. Kenobi was never outclassed by Grievous blade-to-blade in terms of technique, only in physicals and H2H. Pretty much all of Grievous's success in TCW, against any character, came by way of H2H or outright cheating, not superior blade-work." 

It is 100% a showing of skill in lightsaber combat. It takes combative skill to be able to identify an opening in an opponent's guard, and take advantage of it. Whether one chooses to use a Force Push, a kick, a punch, etc, is simply another means of exploiting the opening. The other fighter wasn't skilled enough to prevent it from happening. You seem to have reversed positions from when we last argued on Count Dooku vs Anakin Skywalker in regard to the armlock Anakin got Dooku in. Reality is, physical strikes are an aspect of lightsaber combat. Grievous is demonstrably superior to Kenobi in this arena, as are Fisto, Koth, and Mundi to Grievous. 

"TCW Kenobi sure. Fisto cutting off one of Grievous's hands when he merely threw one shot and overextended and wasn't attacking isn't as impressive as RotS Kenobi cutting off his hands under a relentless barrage while defending himself at the same time with only one saber against four, as oppose to two sabers to defend against three."

Grievous was absolutely attacking, it was that he overextended during his attack that caused the loss of his hand. Which was his own mistake skillwise. Obi-Wan took both the hands with circumstances aiding him, while Fisto took a hand, landed a Force Push, and badly overwhelmed Grievous in an even bout and to top it off did so with a form that's inherently flawed in lightsaber combat. That's definitely more impressive.    

"And don't say Fisto is less comfortable with Jar Kai, if it wasn't beneficial against Grieovus's style he would have stuck with one." 

Star Wars directors seems to have an unfounded belief that having two blades instead of one is an inherent advantage even if you don't specialize in the form, as seen with Anakin vs Dooku on Geonosis, Kenobi vs Maul and Savage, and this instance. The fact of the matter is, two blades may allow for slightly more options, but this is at the expense of decreased power and limited movement. Furthermore, unless you're at least equally practiced in the art it's not really going to do you any good to abandon your primary style. 

Also, Fisto was probably just reclaiming the blade of his fallen pupil. It's a sense of ironic justice for Grievous to be overpowered with the weapon of someone he murdered. And, we don't know if it's Jar Kai he used. Forms with enough practice by an advanced master can be adapted to uses they're not originally intended for. Sora Bulq used Vaapad with twin sabers, Zannah used Soresu with a saberstaff, Ventress used Makashi with two blades as did Ahsoka but with Shien. Shi-Cho is not intended for lightsaber combat period but as we can see Fisto was able to still use it, a testament to his skill. Same with Ataru, as Yoda commented on in The Jedi Path in regard to battling multiple foes. The use of dual blades isn't necessarily restricted to Niman and Jar'Kai practitioners. 

"Kenobi forced Grievous retreat on the ship," 

The first instance was PIS, Grievous had been creaming Kenobi before and even did so when relatively unarmed despite being held at bladepoint in close quarters. The Force slam didn't disarm him, so really Grievous running made zero sense. In the second duel, Grievous was fleeing the ship in general because his forces were losing. He needed to escape.

"forced him to retreat on Kamino," 

Nah, Kenobi had managed to use a Force Push to put a good amount of distance between him and Grievous. That's a major red flag, because now Grievous is fully open to Force abuse by Kenobi. If he'd tried to charge him, Kenobi could have used the Force to incapacitate him. Grievous made a tactical retreat and lured Kenobi to the platform. Even then, despite actively hunting him, you can tell that Kenobi looks pretty worried as they square off. The platform ends up collapsing, Kenobi seemingly dies, so Grievous leaves. 

"they had three other indecisive bouts can't remember the episodes," 

In season 1, Grievous has an armed encounter with Kenobi but it never amounts to a duel. They engage in a long chase, and exchange like one or two lightsaber blows. In the youngling-pirate arc, Grievous faces Kenobi during a boarding raid and two-shots him. In the Deserter arc, Kenobi attacks Grievous from behind when he's unprepared, and manages to deprive him of a blade. However, Grievous then beats him and leaves Kenobi incapacitated long enough for Grievous to successfully flee the planet. 

"and the Utapau episode Grievous's sole legitimate win over Kenobi. And in none of them was Grievous getting the better of him blade-to-blade which is the only point of comparison relevant in a debate over Kenobi vs the other Council Members in terms of skill. Yes, Kenobi used the Force, but then so did Fisto and Koth. I actually think Fisto is better than early TCW Kenobi, but RotS Kenobi dismantled Grievous in a more impressive fashion than Fisto did." 

Using the Force as well as physical blows are indeed an aspect of lightsaber combat and representative of your skill in that area. That said, Koth and Kenobi both used the Force when Grievous was not engaged in active combat, which is why if you've not noticed, I haven't flaunted Koth's stunning telekinetic use as evidence of his being the better combatant. Unlike Koth and Kenobi, Fisto and Depa were able to tag Grievous with the Force in the heat of the duel. 

If you ignore the fact that Kenobi only took the hands in a circumstantial bout thus rendering his edge illegitimate, I would agree that scoring a hit with a lightsaber -- disarming, especially -- is a more impressive breach of guard than landing a kick or Force Push. In that regard, Kenobi outperformed Fisto, who took only one hand, with his second tag being a Force Push. But, this is compensated for by the fact that Fisto in the ensuing battle clearly demonstrated that he wasn't excessively strained or endangered in that fight. The cherry on top being that Grievous conceded he was losing. By comparison, Kenobi was factually hardpressed in his fight and Grievous in the end with two blades still thought that he was going to win.

So even setting aside the fact that Kenobi's fight was extremely circumstantial, Fisto still outperformed him and retains his superiority in the arena of lightsaber combat.

Lol, Koon is legitimate fodder, and Fisto probably stomps Vader, but gets beaten narrowly by Tenebrous.

Per G-Canon, Vader is both sub-TPM Kenobi as a duelist (who is incidentally > Koon), and he is also (not G-Canon, but still C-Canon), either an equal, or inferior to Ben Kenobi, a "Shadow of his former self". Meaning that he ANH Vader <<<<<<<< ROTS Kenobi. Incidentally, AOTC to ROTS Kenobi is not that great of a growth, that Obi Wan literally jumped several ragdoll tiers. Also, Fisto tooled mid-TCW Kenobi. Checkmate. Tenebrous might beat him, but there's no real telling, he's too obscure.

@lord_tenebrous

It is 100% a showing of skill in lightsaber combat. It takes combative skill to be able to identify an opening in an opponent's guard, and take advantage of it.

...

You seem to have reversed positions from when we last argued on Count Dooku vs Anakin Skywalker in regard to the armlock Anakin got Dooku in. Reality is, physical strikes are an aspect of lightsaber combat.

The difference is that unlike most examples of superior skill, Grievous has an inherent size advantage over most of the humanoids he faces. The reach advantage of those legs, in particular, is insane. TPM Maul landing kicks on Jinn and Kenobi while fighting them both at the same time or SOD Maul kicking Secura while dueling Mace is a demonstration of great defense, agility, timing, and finesse, and are truly excellent skill showings. But TCW Maul with his similarly oversized Grievousisc legs, kicking and killing Bruu Jun in a blunt manner after he was outclassed martially isn't really a feat of skill so much as him abusing his size, reach, and killing power. It's the reason weight classes exist in real life, because superior skill simply can't overcome the strength and reach advantage in most scenarios.

One could even see as a form of CIS that he doesn't abuse his physicals more often in a lightsaber duel. If one is in a blade-lock, there's very little one could do to prevent oneself from being kicked by those long legs or be prevented from being grabbed by those sneaky little arms. If he had used the same tactics on in RotS, he might have had better success against Kenobi. Chalk it up to early installment weirdness I guess, that Grievous relied on his blade-work to defeat Kenobi in the film, in which area he was thoroughly outclassed.

@kilius:

"The difference is that unlike most examples of superior skill, Grievous has an inherent size advantage over most of the humanoids he faces. The reach advantage of those legs, in particular, is insane. TPM Maul landing kicks on Jinn and Kenobi while fighting them both at the same time or SOD Maul kicking Secura while dueling Mace is a demonstration of great defense, agility, timing, and finesse, and are truly excellent skill showings. But TCW Maul with his similarly oversized Grievousisc legs, kicking and killing Bruu Jun in a blunt manner after he was outclassed martially isn't really a feat of skill so much as him abusing his size, reach, and killing power."

You raise a good point. I'll concede to the fact that the length of Grievous' limbs would allow him greater reach and therefore make it easier to tag someone physically. However, this is compensated for by the fact that it also makes his limbs a bigger and easier target when he's in the process of executing the strike. So in the end, it balances itself out. That's why lightstaffs are constructed* with Phrik alloy handles. The greater reach is also a greater vulnerability.  

"It's the reason weight classes exist in real life, because superior skill simply can't overcome the strength and reach advantage in most scenarios." 

Weight classes exist in unarmed combat because your skill is irrelevent if your strikes are incapable of hurting your opponent. This isn't applicable to a saber duel wherein unless you're wearing unique armor, the fact that you're both wielding a lightsaber largely levels the playing field. Physical strikes may not be effective, as we saw with Adi Gallia vs Savage Opress, but it's the same case with two different Force users. If they're more powerful than you, you might find an opening to use a Force Push, but their shields will simply no-sell it anyway because they're stronger in the Force. 

"One could even see as a form of CIS that he doesn't abuse his physicals more often in a lightsaber duel. If one is in a blade-lock, there's very little one could do to prevent oneself from being kicked by those long legs or be prevented from being grabbed by those sneaky little arms. If he had used the same tactics on in RotS, he might have had better success against Kenobi. Chalk it up to early installment weirdness I guess, that Grievous relied on his blade-work to defeat Kenobi in the film, in which area he was thoroughly outclassed." 

Kenobi could disengage, or maneuver his blade to address the threat or take advantage of Grievous' split focus. Most medieval duels consisted mainly of a bladelock in which you had to outmanuever your opponent. Now obviously the two disciplines are different, but the principle remains. Grievous has consistently shown himself to be the superior lightsaber combatant, and his final fight on Utapau does not contradict this. It's not a large gap to be sure, I'd hold the two on the same level. But Grievous is better.

@idrisiangraecus:

Vader isn't below TPM Kenobi. That's ludicrous. George was explicitly referencing the speed of the fighters, here's the full quote:

"I was looking for a kind of swordfighting that was reminiscent of what was in the movies that we'd already done. But a more energized version of it because we've actually never seen real Jedis at work, we'd only seen crippled, half-droid half-men, and young boys as learned from these old people. So, to see a Jedi in his prime, fighting in the prime of the Jedi, I wanted it to be a much more, energetic, and fast version of what we've been doing." 

-- George Lucas 

He's constantly talking about the energy and speed of the fighting, and then goes out of his way to reference the age and physical state of Vader and Kenobi. To conclude that he's talking about fighting prowess is the height of inanity. Can you honestly look me in the eye and tell me that if you asked George Lucas if every Jedi we saw in the prequels was better than suited Vader, he'd say yes?

The Insider excerpt has been retconned in regard to Vader. Here is the full quote you're referring to:

"When Obi-Wan Kenobi duels his former apprentice Darth Vader on the Death Star, both combatants know that they are but shadows of their former selves. Neither has fought another lightsaber-wielder in many years."

-- Insider #62

The article specifically lists them being out-of-practice as the reason why they're not as good as they were before. Vader in both legends and canon continuity regularly does battle with lightsaber-wielding foes, whether its Jedi hunting or personal training. This quote therefore only applies to Ben.

TPM Kenobi only beat Plo in a sparring session, this means nothing because Council members are known to battle Padawans in training. Heck, even Battlemasters and Grandmasters do it. This doesn't indicate superiority at all.

And even if it was legitimate, that's TPM Plo. CW Plo outfought AOTC Ventress with an injury, who is comparable to AOTC Anakin. Are you saying TPM Kenobi &gt; AOTC Anakin?

@lord_tenebrous: Dear god, I said TPM Kenobi > Vader in sabers. And not only that one Insider quote, but plenty of other sources verify that Kenobi is vastly post prime. Hes out of practice, and hasn’t grown in the force. He still manages to stalemate/beat Cader.

@idrisiangraecus:

Yes, that's what I'm disputing. Ignoring the fact that GL was referring to physicals only in his quote, ANH Vader has had 13 years of lightsaber training as the most unrivaled prodigy ever, plus an additional 19 years of higher quality training with a potential that's 80% of Sidious' who himself is a mega-prodigy. TPM Kenobi has had less training and is less talented. Logically, it's 100% impossible for him to be better.

I don't dispute the fact that Kenobi is out of practice as a swordsman. But he is indeed more powerful and masterful a Force user. Vader stalemating him then just goes to show how slim the gap is between a prime Kenobi and Vader.

@lord_tenebrous: Dude, ROTS Kenobi manages to beat a tier 9 MFV. ANH Vader has jackshit on that. He literally becomes weaker after ROTS. Ben is weaker than ROTS Kenobi by miles.

@idrisiangraecus:

ROTS Vader isn't anywhere near tier 9. Nick Gillard isn't an official source on character levels.

Plus, the G-canon movie shows otherwise. For swordsmanship, he struggled against IG-102, and was clowned by Dooku with Obi-Wan for backup. In terms of power, he was straining to defend himself against Kenobi's Force Push, while circumstantially enraged.

Ben is slightly weaker than his ROTS incarnation. Vader gets stronger after ROTS, and he even says so in ANH. "Now I am the master."

@lord_tenebrous: Lolololol. The idea that Vader > KFV is ludicrous.

@idrisiangraecus:

Why? Ignoring the many statements that establish it as fact, the concept itself makes logical sense in terms of swordsmanship.

Vader's injuries wouldn't cause any loss of Skill on his part. They made him lose significant amounts of power then and there, and curbed his potential massively. But he was still enormously talented. He had 80% of Sidious' potential, and Sidious himself is one of the most talented prodigies in the mythos.

Post-Mustafar Vader, 19-18 bby, still has the exact same amount of lightsaber skill he did when he was Anakin/Vader. He's only not as good right then because he has to get used to his new suit. His main form, Djem So, is tailor made for someone of his new physical state, so adapting to his suit isn't a significant disadvantage, and is one that would be overcome in maybe a year or two at best. From then on, Vader would just be getting better as a swordsman. He has the entire resources of the galaxy at his disposal: any environment, setting, information or training droid he wants. Plus, those 19 years are peppered Jedi hunting. By ANH, Vader would by logic alone be a more skilled fighter.

So even if you refuse to acknowledge his power growth, you can't deny his progression as a duelist.

@lord_tenebrous

Well regardless of everything said I still say Grievous's style plays into Kenobi's style.

Take away the narrow catwalk and take away their mutual knowlege and Kenobi's style still hard counters Grievous offensive style that is open to deft counterstrikes for those who can weather his onslaught such as Kenobi in his absolute mastery of Soresu.

Same can be said of Fisto. He's a very head-strong duelist and easily swept up in the moment. He's not the most tactical of duelists, he's an instinct-based fighter and that can be lethal against someone like Kenobi who surrenders himself wholely to the Force to anticipate his foe's moves. His wild aggressive style is just perfect for Kenobi's defensive style to counter, on paper. Prime-for-prime Fisto would break himself against Kenobi's defensive wall, either exhausting himself or leave himself open to a counter with his wild furries.

@kilius:

"Well regardless of everything said I still say Grievous's style plays into Kenobi's style." 

It's an excellent answer to Grievous' technique to be sure, but I don't think it's enough to keep Grievous from beating him.

"Take away the narrow catwalk and take away their mutual knowlege"

And Grievous wins.

"and Kenobi's style still hard counters Grievous offensive style that is open to deft counterstrikes for those who can weather his onslaught such as Kenobi in his absolute mastery of Soresu." 

Grievous isn't going to expose himself or relent in his offensive. He'll just keep going until he inevitably breaks Kenobi's guard. He'll work for it, yes, but it will happen.

"Same can be said of Fisto. He's a very head-strong duelist and easily swept up in the moment. He's not the most tactical of duelists, he's an instinct-based fighter and that can be lethal against someone like Kenobi who surrenders himself wholely to the Force to anticipate his foe's moves. His wild aggressive style is just perfect for Kenobi's defensive style to counter, on paper. Prime-for-prime Fisto would break himself against Kenobi's defensive wall, either exhausting himself or leave himself open to a counter with his wild furries." 

This would only be the case if Fisto was as neck-and-neck with Kenobi as Anakin was. But he's not. As early as AOTC he was pretty significantly above Kenobi. Kenobi grew of course, but so would Fisto. Kenobi should grow at a decently faster rate but by ROTS it's not enough for him to close the gap enough for his Soresu to outlast Fisto. Especially since Insider #100 states that Fisto, Kolar and Saesee are Mace's finest warriors which would level them above all the other Jedi as fighters, and this would include Kenobi.

@lord_tenebrous

I disagree. Except in the case of using non-canon/removed content to argue directorial or authorial intent, you can't use non-canon feats because those feats simply did not happen. It is as though they don't exist. A non-canon excerpt has no more validity than fanfiction.

The material in question was approved by Lucasfilm and provides us with valuable insights on a fighter's ability, which automatically makes it worth more than fanfiction and headcanon. The reason they are technically non-canon has to do with pacing and condensing not that it contradicted the creator's vision of the character's fighting ability. The feats themselves are still useful for debating purposes unless a higher or a more up to date source contradicts it.

If you maintain a super strict visual continuity rules all policy you have to render much of the EU invalid and no one debating serious Star Wars match ups wants that. Canon policy is just a guideline, not a rule we viners have to follow to the bone.

The films and TCW for example established that even Dooku tier Jedi can't handle groups of enemy fodder of more than 30. Most dismiss this in debates unless lowballing as it is obviously in conflict with the EU power scale.

We also have to dismiss faster than eye movement feats as Jedi move in speeds that are quite perceptible to human senses. It's only headcanon that they are actually moving in speeds greater than what we see unless we get confirmation from one with authority.

The novels may not follow the choreography to the letter but they are generally consistent with the EU at large and thus more useful in debates.

That's why Kenobi stonewalling Dooku is perfectly valid. In the movies and TCW all we see is Kenobi using Ataru against Dooku, we never see him take a defensive stance in the show or the movie. Only in the novel, and it tells us exactly what would happen if Kenobi took a defensive stance against Dooku as well as Grievous. Much more productive to simply accept a Lucasfilm approved excerpt than to dismiss it over continuity semantics that doesn't even contradict the creator intent.

@lord_tenebrous

Kenobi grew of course, but so would Fisto.

Which is completely unquantifiable and conjecture. No two fighters develop at the exactly the same rate and it's not always an upward climb. Real-life fighters have peaks and valleys, periods of inactivity due to injuries and complacency. Fisto for all we know may have already reached his full potential and the limits of his abilities by CD. For debating purposes that's the only established scaling along with any feats with have of him afterwards to work with.

it's not enough for him to close the gap enough for his Soresu to outlast Fisto.

He doesn't need to outlast Fisto to beat him. Fisto's style is wild and ripe for precision counters as Ventress demonstrated. As I said Fisto isn't a measured tactical duelist he lets himself get swept up by the Force and channel himself into a whirling vortex of destruction that won't be enough to break Kenobi's Soresu and would more likely be countered. It's basically Windu's Vaapad minus the finesse, tactical mindset, and presence of mind.

@lord_tenebrous

Grievous isn't going to expose himself or relent in his offensive.

Grievous emphasis on attack-attack-attack inevitably leaves himself open to counters it's just most have a hard time dealing with his offensive to exploit an opening because they are too busy defending themselves. As Dooku stated he's wild and lacks finesse. He's skilled but he hasn't really mastered the art of lightsaber combat. Dooku compares his knowledge do a chess player who memorises all the classical openings and counter moves, but still not being a master because when faced with an inexperienced but still competent player who doesn't know anything about traditional strategies he's at a loss for how to proceed because he hasn't really mastered the key principles opening theory like genuine master of the game would have.

Kenobi, however, is perfectly capable of withstanding his maximum 20 strikes per second output and countering by simply altering the angles of this defensive wall:

Grievous was frustrated because he wasn't initially getting through his defence so he ramped up the speed and intensity and as a result, he overcommitted and Kenobi was able to take advantage of openings in his guard while not leaving himself exposed to Grievous's still mounting onslaught.

It's the type of response Dooku warned Grievous of should he ever face Kenobi and it seems he was well justified in his criticism of Grievous.

Inb4 continuity semantics.

@kilius: Ant is annoyed that people post on CV. Post on SI more... I don’t give a damn what you do, but I want to see Goat post this on Slorg (which I dunno if you’re on).

SI can get a bit too toxic at times and it has a lot of the same problems CV had: too many lazy one-word contentless responses and over-reliance on ABC logic. I still post there regularly as O-Siri, but honestly, CV seems like a better venue to express myself these days.

@kilius: I suppose you're right. With Az and Ant's new rules on how we need explanations, and their cutting down on one word answers (they banned HP at one point, and they did DC as well), SI has gotten better. The real reason I prefer SI is because here the debaters are either trolls, or they rely overtly on G-Canon logic (see Lord_Tenebrous and MyGod). They also believe that Fact Files are canonically reliable, etc. SI's toxicity can get a bit much tbh.

Oh and by the way, nobody report me for putting the link to Az, Ant, Elm, etc's new forum:

suspectinsight.forumotion.com

@idrisiangraecus:

I love how you're actually complaining about people abiding by the canon guidelines of the legends continuity as laid out by Leland Chee. Yes, god forbid we use valid facts and not non-canon material to form our views.

@lord_tenebrous: I meant, that you are interpreting that quote hyperliterally. If Stover's ROTS novelization contradicts parts of the movie, you don't throw it out. In fact, the movie is one of the most fallacious sources in Star Wars. Furthermore, I was talking about the use of the 80% of Sidious shit MyGod spews and then tries to scale Vader by ROTJ > Yoda.

@idrisiangraecus:

I've never argued for throwing the whole novel out. My position, in accordance with the canon guidelines, is to discard specific instances wherein the material contradicts higher canon: 

"Lastly there is non-continuity 'N' which we rarely use except in the case of a blatant contradiction..."

-- Leland Chee 

"In a nutshell, anything created by the author would be C-level. Anything in the the novels created by George Lucas (whether it comes from unpublished early script versions, unpublished author interviews with George, or George's revisions to the novelization manuscript) would be G-level unless contradicted by the films."

-- Leland Chee

"If something in a novelization contradicts the movies, then we defer to the movies. I.E., the ROTJ novelization says that Obi-Wan and Owen Lars were brothers. This wasn't in the movie, and has since been discounted." 

-- Sue Rostoni 

If something in the novel conflicts with the movie, it becomes non-canon. It's very simple.

@caffineandshiny:

I'll get back to you in a bit, I've got like half a dozen posts I gotta compile responses for.

@kilius:

"Which is completely unquantifiable"

Not at all. Fisto isn't a lot older than Kenobi. If he's significantly better than him as of AOTC, with his age advantage, it's easy to conclude that they're similarly talented, and would progress at comparable rates.

"and conjecture. No two fighters develop at the exactly the same rate and it's not always an upward climb. Real-life fighters have peaks and valleys, periods of inactivity due to injuries and complacency. Fisto for all we know may have already reached his full potential and the limits of his abilities by CD. For debating purposes that's the only established scaling along with any feats with have of him afterwards to work with."

Incorrect. Fisto would be engaging in consistent and constant lightsaber training during this period, as all Jedi engage in this from the moment they stand till the day they die: 

"Jedi learned how to wield lightsabers in childhood in the Old Republic, and continued to practice with the weapons throughout their lives." 

-- Star Wars: The Ultimate Visual Guide 

"As soon as [Jedi] are old enough to stand, they are instructed in the proper handling of a lightsaber, and this instruction never truly ends until a Jedi has become one with the Force." 

-- The Jedi Path

"Jedi train constantly with their lightsabers, whether alone on long field assignments or with colleagues at the Temple."

-- Attack of the Clones: Visual Dictionary 

Complacency is not an issue. Plus, young Jedi Masters are exceedingly rare: 

"Even experienced Jedi Knights who have years of service under their belts pause to show a Jedi Master the proper respect, and those who come to the rank at a young age (such as Obi-Wan Kenobi) are both rare and revered." 

-- Threats of the Galaxy 

Which would imply that the standard Jedi Master is old. The Jedi Path, a manual/guidebook for Jedi, would be written to the rule, not the exception. And it records that it's an expected thing for the average Jedi Master to have experienced growth since their first mission as a Knight to the time they become a Master: 

"Yet because your Jedi skills will have deepened since your first solo mission as a Knight, you may also wish to consider a teaching role that suits your talents." 

-- The Jedi Path 

Since Fisto is not old, he has not escaped this time period of expected growth. There is no reason to think that he would not have improved just like Kenobi. 

"He doesn't need to outlast Fisto to beat him."

He absolutely does, because Fisto is a superior fighter who will end up beating him if he doesn't become exhausted. 

"Fisto's style is wild and ripe for precision counters as Ventress demonstrated."

Ventress had a noticeable form advantage among other things, the randomity and rawness of his technique is irrelevent here because Kenobi will be too occupied defending himself to capitalise on this alleged vulnerability. 

"As I said Fisto isn't a measured tactical duelist he lets himself get swept up by the Force and channel himself into a whirling vortex of destruction that won't be enough to break Kenobi's Soresu and would more likely be countered. It's basically Windu's Vaapad minus the finesse, tactical mindset, and presence of mind." 

Not true, Fisto is stated to have an especially intense focus in combat: 

"As a Jedi Master, Fisto has an intense focus, particularly in combat."

-- StarWars.com: Databank

Fisto is a better fighter than Kenobi is, according to multiple OOU sources and feats. Take both of them at their primes, and Kenobi is incapable of winning through pure combative merit.

@lord_tenebrous.:

Not at all. Fisto isn't a lot older than Kenobi.

He probably is. Kenobi was 36 by Cetus Deception. Fisto was already an established Jedi with an apprentice by 41 BBY when Kenobi was only 16.

Incorrect. Fisto would be engaging in consistent and constant lightsaber training during this period, as all Jedi engage in this from the moment they stand till the day they die:

This would be the case if all Jedi had the same potential, peaked at the same rate, and if father time wasn't a factor. Otherwise we wouldn't have young prospects surpassing the old masters and there are plenty of documented cases of that happening. Since we don't know if Fisto peaked or not his CD comparison with Kenobi whom we know is a late bloomer in regards to his Soresu mastery is all we have to work with.

He absolutely does, because Fisto is a superior fighter who will end up beating him if he doesn't become exhausted.

How is he going to beat him? Stop looking at skill levels like an RPG game, there are different kinds of skills that clash with different styles. Fisto has never cracked a defensive wall as tight as Kenobi's(only Grievous came close and he left himself exposed in the process) and Kenobi has seen Fisto's style which is somewhat reliant on its initial unpredictability, and it's part of the reason Ventress was able to counter it as she was able to observe his style before she engaged him.

Kenobi can counter under pressure of Grievous's maximum offensive output, which is logistically higher than anything Fisto can realistically dish out. He has the proven feats and skillsets to offset Fisto's skills.

It doesn't matter if Fisto has better offensive skills, Kenobi's defensive skills are the perfect stylistic nightmare for Fisto and he has the first-hand experience to deal with his unpredictability whereas Fisto has never faced RotS Kenobi's complete skills. Fisto only wins if Kenobi is stupid enough to engage with Ataru.

Ventress had a noticeable form advantage

Not brought up in the novel. The novel emphasized Ventress observing Fisto and Kenobi fighting beforehand to get a measure of their styles and tendencies as her advantage. Fisto obviously knows the fundamentals of modern lightsaber dueling much like Dooku knows the fundamentals of blaster deflection despite Makashi being bad for blasters.

Kenobi will be too occupied defending himself to capitalise on this alleged vulnerability.

Ventress was able to capitalize on his proven vulnerability, his own defense isn't impeccable and Kenobi is one of the best counterattackers. His proven feat of defending and counterattacking Grievous whos offensive output outstrips Fisto's is enough to conclude Kenobi has favorable winning chances.

Not true, Fisto is stated to have an especially intense focus in combat:

Conceded. He's still vulnerable to RotS Kenobi level counterattacks based on both their track records.

Fisto is a better fighter than Kenobi is,

He doesn't have the right skills to beat Kenobi no more than Fraizer has the right skills to beat Foreman or Foreman has for Ali. He's better in some areas but not in the areas that matter.

@kilius:

"He probably is. Kenobi was 36 by Cestus Deception. Fisto was already an established Jedi with an apprentice by 41 BBY when Kenobi was only 16." 

He could easily have been a newly-made Jedi Knight in his early 20s then, who had decided to take on an apprentice immediatly. During the battle of Khorm, Plo Koon refers to Fisto as "young one." At at worst, he's in his early 40s. 

"This would be the case if all Jedi had the same potential, peaked at the same rate, and if father time wasn't a factor. Otherwise we wouldn't have young prospects surpassing the old masters and there are plenty of documented cases of that happening." 

Prodigies are far and few. Padawans surpassing Knights or Masters is the exception, not the rule. For the vast majority of instances, Jedi of higher rank are superior to Jedi of lower ranks in practically every category, including the Force. Training is not an issue, as all Jedi train constantly with a lightsaber from toddlerhood until they die. Logically, as a general rule, those who have trained longer (i.e., are older) are better. 

We can gauge Fisto's potential/talent based on how fast he grew. Since he and Obi-Wan are comparable in age, yet in AOTC he was solidly better, we can conclude that the two are at least neck-and-neck in talent. 

"Since we don't know if Fisto peaked or not his CD comparison with Kenobi whom we know is a late bloomer in regards to his Soresu mastery is all we have to work with." 

Kenobi is only a "late bloomer" because he started focusing on Soresu at the beginning of his career as a Knight. Prior to that, he'd concentrated primarily on Shi-Cho, and then Ataru.

"How is he going to beat him?"

Via being a better fighter.

"Stop looking at skill levels like an RPG game, there are different kinds of skills that clash with different styles."

Not really.

"Fisto has never cracked a defensive wall as tight as Kenobi's"

No one has done anything until they do it. Fact of the matter is, Fisto is both stated and shown to be a better fighter than Kenobi. Logically, that means he would prevail in a fair fight.

"(only Grievous came close and he left himself exposed in the process)"

Because, he, in a state of rage, had lost focus and became sloppy. 

"and Kenobi has seen Fisto's style which is somewhat reliant on its initial unpredictability, and it's part of the reason Ventress was able to counter it as she was able to observe his style before she engaged him." 

That's sort of irrelevent since Fisto himself would be intimately familiar in Kenobi's style, not only because he started extensively with him, but because Fisto spent several years training in Soresu: 

"Young Jedi spend their first few years studying Form I, and then a year or two with each additional Form before completing their training." 

-- Insider #62  

"As a Jedi who has reached the rank of Knight, you have received instruction in Forms I-VI combat." 

-- The Jedi Path 

"Kenobi can counter under pressure of Grievous's maximum offensive output, which is logistically higher than anything Fisto can realistically dish out. He has the proven feats and skillsets to offset Fisto's skills." 

Kenobi can only counter an environmentally hindered Grievous or one who is unfocused and sloppy because of rage. Fisto will simply break his defenses if he doesn't become exhausted.  

"It doesn't matter if Fisto has better offensive skills, Kenobi's defensive skills are the perfect stylistic nightmare for Fisto and he has the first-hand experience to deal with his unpredictability whereas Fisto has never faced RotS Kenobi's complete skills. Fisto only wins if Kenobi is stupid enough to engage with Ataru." 

Problem is, the statements that level Fisto above Kenobi don't say he's a more skilled fighter, they outright say he's a better fighter:

"Anakin loyally delivered news of this discovery to Windu, and Mace gathered a team of his finest Jedi warriors to arrest the Chancellor."

-- Insider #100

"Mace gathered a team of his finest Jedi warriors -- Saesee Tiin, Agen Kolar and Kit Fisto -- to arrest the Chancellor."

-- StarWars.com: Databank(old)

I.E., Fisto in a fight is better than Kenobi. 

"Not brought up in the novel. The novel emphasized Ventress observing Fisto and Kenobi fighting beforehand to get a measure of their styles and tendencies as her advantage. Fisto obviously knows the fundamentals of modern lightsaber dueling much like Dooku knows the fundamentals of blaster deflection despite Makashi being bad for blasters." 

Makashi is described as the ultimate refinement of lightsaber combat, while Shi-Cho is the most ancient form that does not address lightsaber combat. Shi-Cho is more vulnerable to Makashi than any other form. Obviously these can be adapted to uses they're not intended for, but they will still be at a disadvantage. And obviously this particular form advantage is significant since Fisto was able to outclass Kenobi who in turn outclassed Ventress on Teth. 

"Conceded. He's still vulnerable to RotS Kenobi level counterattacks based on both their track records." 

Actually I was sort of hoping you'd push back because I dug up some more quotes about his focus in combat. Ah well.

Immediately* and sparring*

@lord_tenebrous:

Problem is, the statements that level Fisto above Kenobi don't say he's a more skilled fighter, they outright say he's a better fighter:

"Anakin loyally delivered news of this discovery to Windu, and Mace gathered a team of his finest Jedi warriors to arrest the Chancellor."

-- Insider #100

"Mace gathered a team of his finest Jedi warriors -- Saesee Tiin, Agen Kolar and Kit Fisto -- to arrest the Chancellor."

-- StarWars.com: Databank(old)

I.E., Fisto in a fight is better than Kenobi.

Where does it "outright say" Fisto is better than Kenobi? "Of the best" is not an exhaustive list. It isn't preclusive of other Jedi being better.

If a Mafia crimelord says "I lost three of my best men" it doesn't mean he lost ALL his best men, especially if he's excluding his right hand. Just the three that were lost. Similarly, Mace picked three of the best that was available, excluding Kenobi and Yoda as they were away on business and Skywalker was too emotionally conflicted.

@kilius:

That's not what it says though. You're reading the quotes as though they say "Mace gathers a team of some of his finest warriors." Or, "Mace's team were among the finest warriors." Or, "Mace gathers the finest warriors avalible." Etc. It doesn't say that. It outright says they are Mace's finest warriors. His best. His team is comprised of his best warriors. This doesn't include Yoda, because he's not under Mace's authority. This does, however, include all other Jedi.

@lord_tenebrous:

And if we want to play the quotes game I have this:

“Given the strain on our current resources, ” Mace Windu said, “I recommend we send only one Jedi—Master Kenobi.” Which would leave Mace and Agen Kolar—both among the greatest bladesbeing the Jedi Order had ever produced—here on Coruscant in case Sidious did indeed take this opportunity to make a dramatic move. Not to mention Anakin, who was a brigade’s worth of firepower in his own right." - RotS Novel

Both Fisto and Tiin are excluded from Mace's calculations. Kenobi was considered a loss and Anakin's presence was considered a reassurance.

@kilius:

Those quotes aren't exclusive though. Anakin being powerful doesn't mean the others aren't, while Agen, Saesee and Kit being the best warriors is completely exclusive.

What on earth.. what kind of a battle is this .-.

Vader kinda solos.

Either sith soloes

@lord_tenebrous:

The databank takes all its inspiration from the source material, it's only secondary in class, and the main sources make it clear Fisto Tiin and Kolar are merely among the best, not the absolute best:

“I have chosen four of our best. Master Tiin, Master Kolar, and Master Fisto are all here, in the Temple. They are preparing already.” “What about Skywalker? The chosen one.” “Too much of a risk, ” Mace replied. “I am the fourth.” - RotS Novel

The databank even includes a lot of outdated material, such as Skywalker being goaded into action by Sidious even though in the final cut he did it on his own volition. Since the information regarding Fisto Tiin and Kolar being among the best likely was influenced by the novel, as is the information of Skywalker being goaded by Sidious, we should defer to the novel as the ultimate authority on this matter, as it provides clarity on two equally plausible interpretations.

@lord_tenebrous:

Makashi is described as the ultimate refinement of lightsaber combat, while Shi-Cho is the most ancient form that does not address lightsaber combat. Shi-Cho is more vulnerable to Makashi than any other form

It's still entirely speculative and not backed up by a single official source. For one Fisto didn't grow up in the ancient era, he was taught the basics of modern lightsaber combat when the art evolved.

If Fisto is vulnerable to a technical duelist then Kenobi is again a perfect stylistic nightmare for him.

Kenobi can only counter an environmentally hindered Grievous

Kind of like me arguing Maul can only beat an "environmentally hindered Jinn" on the basis of one BS secondary quote that says Jinn was hindered in a constricted environment, never mind Jinn is a straightforward fighter who never uses agility and would benefit from a close-quarters engagement where Maul can't dance away, unlike Maul who always abuses his agility and would logically be the one who would be hindered in a constricted environment:

“The relatively confined area would favor Maul's fighting style, making it incredibly difficult for the Jedi to counter him.” (Starships and Vehicles)

All other sources as the ones I outlined in #70 emphasis Grievous's lack of finesse and frustration of not being able to penetrate Kenobi's defense. Secondary sources can be dismissed if they are internally inconsistent with the lore and it clearly is in this case as Grievous never under any circumstances utilized lateral movement in any of his fights and wouldn't logically be hindered in a constricted environment.

That's sort of irrelevent since Fisto himself would be intimately familiar in Kenobi's style, not only because he started extensively with him, but because Fisto spent several years training in Soresu

Novice level Soresu isn't even remotely comparable to Kenobi's level of Soresu. And Kenobi was far from his peak in Cestus Deception.

And obviously this particular form advantage is significant since Fisto was able to outclass Kenobi who in turn outclassed Ventress on Teth.

Ventress beat Kenobi in CD too; Kenobi won the underwater battle but that was a battle of adaptability not saber skill on neutral ground, in the fight indirectly taking place after Fisto's fall she beat him swiftly. And she wasn't "outclassed" on Teth she disarmed him, scored a kick, and tanked his Force push without falling down. It was a back and forth fight in which Kenobi ended up the victor, not at all one-sided. A reasonable explanation is that Kenobi improved or adopted a better strategy than he did previously.

"Stop looking at skill levels like an RPG game, there are different kinds of skills that clash with different styles."

Not really.

Yes really. Styles make fights. Frazier beat Ali, but loses to Foreman, who subsequently lost to Ali, who in turn never decisive beat Fraizer or Norton in the same devastating fashion Foreman did. Or for a more recent example, Parker beat Andy Ruiz who lost to Joshua, who in turn recently lost to Ruiz. Different skills are needed to combat different styles. ABC logic doesn't work here.

@darthadi:

What has Vader done to suggest that he can take down both Jedi?

@kilius:

"It's still entirely speculative and not backed up by a single official source."

It's simple logic that a practitioner of a style that does not address lightsaber combat:

"Because the ancient Jedi did not have lightsaber-wielding enemies, Form I does not address the lightsaber-to-lightsaber combat."

-- Jedi vs Sith: The Essential Guide to the Force

"Form I is the foundation upon which the remaining forms build. It is not the best style for blaster deflection, or for lightsaber-to-lightsaber dueling..." 

-- The Jedi Path 

...Would be at a disadvantage against the ultimate style for lightsaber combat:

"Form II, also called Makashi, represents the ultimate refinement of lightsaber-to-lightsaber combat." 

-- Jedi vs Sith: The Essential Guide to the Force 

"Form II represents the ultimate refinement of lightsaber-to-lightsaber combat." 

-- Jedi vs Sith: The Essential Guide to the Force 

And we can gauge just how vulnerable it is based on Fisto's fights. He lost to AOTC Ventress, who herself is significantly inferior to AOTC Kenobi who is solidly inferior to Grievous who is solidly inferior to Fisto. 

"For one Fisto didn't grow up in the ancient era, he was taught the basics of modern lightsaber combat when the art evolved." 

Problem for your theory is, this quote is from Cin Drallig, the prequel era Battlemaster: 

"Because the ancient Jedi did not have lightsaber-wielding enemies, Form I does not address the lightsaber-to-lightsaber combat."

-- Jedi vs Sith: The Essential Guide to the Force

The other is from Skarch Vaunk, the Battlemaster after Lord Hoth. All very modern lightsaber instructors. 

"If Fisto is vulnerable to a technical duelist then Kenobi is again a perfect stylistic nightmare for him." 

Fisto is at a disadvantage in general in blade-to-blade lightsaber combat, especially against styles that are optimized for 1v1 dueling(e.g., Djem So, Ataru, Juyo, etc). And massively against Maskashi, as demonstrated by his loss to someone he's vastly superior to going by feats. 

He IS disadvantaged against Kenobi, but not only does his skill outweigh Kenobi's, but he's also confirmed to be a better fighter, which means he will win. 

"Kind of like me arguing Maul can only beat an 'environmentally hindered Jinn' on the basis of one BS secondary quote that says Jinn was hindered in a constricted environment, never mind Jinn is a straightforward fighter who never uses agility and would benefit from a close-quarters engagement where Maul can't dance away, unlike Maul who always abuses his agility and would logically be the one who would be hindered in a constricted environment" 

The quote doesn't say that Qui-Gon was hindered, it said that Maul's style was favoured. And, you can't use that quote to invalidate his superiority over Qui-Gon, as that's not why he's better. Maul is better because: 

A) He's stated to be 

B) He was beating Qui-Gon on Tatooine 

C) He was beating Qui-Gon+Kenobi

Kenobi meanwhile has done nothing to suggest he can beat Grievous in a balanced fight and indeed the avalible evidence indicates otherwise. He's inferior to people who struggle against Grievous' inferiors, and was still pushed to his absolute limits by a hindered Grievous.

"All other sources as the ones I outlined in #70 emphasis Grievous's lack of finesse and frustration of not being able to penetrate Kenobi's defense. Secondary sources can be dismissed if they are internally inconsistent with the lore and it clearly is in this case as Grievous never under any circumstances utilized lateral movement in any of his fights and wouldn't logically be hindered in a constricted environment." 

Grievous' lack of finesse has not hindered him in any of the other fights where he dominated Kenobi, and it didn't stop Grievous from heavily pressuring ROTS Kenobi with his attack. And again, it wasn't Grievous' inability to penetrate Kenobi's defenses that caused him to become frustrated. It was the fact that he lost a hand.

And that passage never happened. The first portion of the movie duel is Kenobi weaving in and out around Grievous and eventually taking a hand. The second part is Grievous full-on driving back Kenobi with a steady assault until he loses another hand. Neither of these disarming were legitimate because the first occurred when Grievous was environmentally hindered, and the second occurred when Grievous had lost focus.

The novel is also a secondary source but one that is absurdly unreliable and inaccurate. Grievous WOULD be logically hindered, as I've said before: Grievous has no room to maneuver, and we saw this as he tried to cut at Kenobi who was darting in and out around his sides. All Kenobi had to do was flip over him to get close, and Grievous had no real way of generating the momentum required to force him off and keep him in front. In fact that's when Grievous lost his first hand. He managed to keep Kenobi in front of him for the second half but at that point he'd let his focus slip and lost another hand as a result. 

"Novice level Soresu isn't even remotely comparable to Kenobi's level of Soresu."

I never said that it was. But the fact remains that Fisto isn't going to be at all ignorant about Soresu, as he spent several years studying it. 

"And Kenobi was far from his peak in Cestus Deception." 

I'm pretty sure that after 10 years of practice, Kenobi knows all Soresu maneuvers, he has only to improve in how skilled he is in their use. In addition to spending several years studying the form, Fisto has sparred extensively with one of its eminent practitioners. 

My bringing up there facts was only in counter to your implication that since Kenobi has witnessed Fisto's style, he would have some sort of advantage over him which is demonstrably untrue, as Fisto is also armed with not so inconsiderable knowledge of Soresu. 

"Ventress beat Kenobi in CD too; Kenobi won the underwater battle but that was a battle of adaptability not saber skill on neutral ground, in the fight indirectly taking place after Fisto's fall she beat him swiftly."

Overruled by T-canon, wherein Kenobi outclasses Ventress. 

"And she wasn't 'outclassed' on Teth she disarmed him,"

Then got humiliated by an unarmed Kenobi.

"scored a kick, and tanked his Force push without falling down. It was a back and forth fight in which Kenobi ended up the victor, not at all one-sided. A reasonable explanation is that Kenobi improved or adopted a better strategy than he did previously" 

All because Kenobi was toying with her. She was indeed outclassed. Kenobi was relaxed in that duel, just buying time for Anakin. She wasn't even a threat to him: 

"It was a lot of fun to do this scene with James. Kenobi, most of the time has to play the serious one. But here we get to see him relax and just have a bit of fun banter with Ventress. He's very relaxed, he ultimately is in no danger from her. He's just buying time for Anakin..."

-- Dave Filoni

She's nowhere near him at that point. I'm willing to believe that by 19 bby, she's close enough to genuinely hold her own, but not as early as AOTC. 

"Yes really. Styles make fights. Frazier beat Ali, but loses to Foreman, who subsequently lost to Ali, who in turn never decisive beat Fraizer or Norton in the same devastating fashion Foreman did. Or for a more recent example, Parker beat Andy Ruiz who lost to Joshua, who in turn recently lost to Ruiz. Different skills are needed to combat different styles. ABC logic doesn't work here." 

I'm not aware of the time frames of those fights or the stamina of those fighters. And, it's a different arena. Prove that styles make fights in SW. 

I'll concede that Soresu as a style can heavily influence the outcome of a fight in general, because it's defensive properties apparently lend it an automatic edge in a fight -- but only because The Essential Guide to the Force (and Luminara Unduli) state that Form III Masters are [considered] invincible. And, because the former source also contends that no Soresu master has ever been defeated. 

Fisto will still win though, as Kenobi is not invincible even with Soresu, and Fisto is the superior fighter.

Those* not "there"

@kilius:

"The databank takes all its inspiration from the source material," 

That's what almost every source does when writing on something that's happened in other material. It doesn't change the fact that the databank is its own source.

"it's only secondary in class, and the main sources make it clear Fisto Tiin and Kolar are merely among the best, not the absolute best:" 

No, it's not, and the quote you cited is subjective, and doesn't exclude the databank's statement.

"The databank even includes a lot of outdated material, such as Skywalker being goaded into action by Sidious even though in the final cut he did it on his own volition."

And those specific instances of contradiction are non-canon, but not anything else.

"Since the information regarding Fisto Tiin and Kolar being among the best likely was influenced by the novel, as is the information of Skywalker being goaded by Sidious, we should defer to the novel as the ultimate authority on this matter, as it provides clarity on two equally plausible interpretations" 

Prove it. You're speculating without basis at this point. Fact of the matter is, according to two sources, Fisto, Tiin and Kolar are Mace's finest warriors.

@lord_tenebrous:

Prove it. You're speculating without basis at this point. Fact of the matter is, according to two sources, Fisto, Tiin and Kolar are Mace's finest warriors.

If Mace took only Tiin and Kolar they would still consist of "a team of Mace's finest warriors" even though Fisto was excluded because "a" and "of" aren't exclusive adjectives.

Fact is the novel is a more influential source than the databank and it says the B-Team or only among the best.

Secondary sources often oversimplified the narrative. Sidious outright overpowered Yoda, Dooku straight stalemated Yoda if we treat them as the bible even though the main novels and movies make it clear Yoda wasn't overmatched outright and Dooku was completely outclassed by Yoda.

Stick with novels and film production notes. Secondary sourcebooks can go to hell. They don't influence the narrative in the same way the main novels do. Very few authors use them as a source of inspiration.

Ultimately though this is a moot point because being a better warrior overall doesn't guarantee victory which leads to my next point:

Prove that styles make fights in SW.

...

"How is he going to beat him?"

Via being a better fighter.

Fisto is a better fighter than Ventress according to your worldview, why didn't Fisto beat Ventress via being the better fighter?

Oh yeah because styles make fights and Fisto didn't have the right skills to beat her and there's a strong case to be made he doesn't have the right skills to beat Kenobi yet Kenobi most certainly has the right abilities to counter his style. You can't have it both ways you can't say A beats B because "muh more skilled" and then make an exception for C. Fact is styles will always clash, you need to apply better critical thinking than "muh more skilled" and call it a day.

Fisto doesn't beat Kenobi just because he's supposedly the better fighter, you need to make a case based on his tactics and tendencies and compare how his blade work, physical abilities match up with Kenobi's. Based on the evidence Kenobi's defensive skills and precise counterattacks will be the perfect hard counter for Fisto in theory.

@lord_tenebrous:

You might have a point regarding Shi-Cho, good sources.

I'll also concede the point regarding Kenobi's performance on Teth: I had heard of the Filini quote but hadn't seen it. Good points.

Though the Teth quote may actually help Kenobi's case. Kenobi losing to Ventress in CD but outclassing her on Teth is strong evidence he was massively below his peak when Fisto outclassed him.

@lord_tenebrous:

Grievous' lack of finesse has not hindered him in any of the other fights where he dominated Kenobi, and it didn't stop Grievous from heavily pressuring ROTS Kenobi with his attack.

You don't need finesse to pressure someone with sheer volume work.

The reason pre-RotS beat Kenobi in season 7 is that he didn't use saber skill, he used his unarmed skill. He should have relied on it against RotS Kenobi and Fisto instead of trying to out fence them. He might have won, but then Grievous is kind of an idiot and a constant victim of CIS. TCW Grievous thrives on roughhouse tactics, pure blade work isn't his forte.

And that passage never happened. The first portion of the movie duel is Kenobi weaving in and out around Grievous and eventually taking a hand. The second part is Grievous full-on driving back Kenobi with a steady assault until he loses another hand. Neither of these disarming were legitimate because the first occurred when Grievous was environmentally hindered, and the second occurred when Grievous had lost focus.

It's Grievous's own damn fault he lost focus and chose to fight on Kenobi's terms, to begin with. Don't make excuses for him, if he was a better fighter he would have beaten Kenobi in his own backyard. He lost focus because he can't deal with adversity. It's why a lot of physically gifted fighters never become champions. Fighting is 90% mental. Kenobi beat him mentally as well as physically. He's a better fighter period.

The novel is also a secondary source but one that is absurdly unreliable and inaccurate. Grievous WOULD be logically hindered, as I've said before: Grievous has no room to maneuver,

He always turns around when someone flips over him.

and we saw this as he tried to cut at Kenobi who was darting in and out around his sides.

And his first response is to turn around. What would he have done had he chose not to stupidly fight on Kenobi's terms? Step to the side like he didn't do on Kamino in a similar situation?

All Kenobi had to do was flip over him to get close, and Grievous had no real way of generating the momentum required to force him off and keep him in front.

He failed to "keep Kenobi" in front in a similar situation on Kamino.

In fact that's when Grievous lost his first hand. He managed to keep Kenobi in front of him for the second half but at that point he'd let his focus slip and lost another hand as a result.

His own damn fault he lost focus. He got beat mentally and then physically, that's how Kenobi does you.