@$abZ:
If I'm speculating that it is a rough overview, then you are speculating that it isn't.
READ DAMMIT READ!!!!!
If a graph isn't what it is showing it must be SPECIFIED!! e.g NOT TO SCALE, ROUGH ESTIMATE.
If neither is shown you MUST GO BY WHAT IT SAYS.
Oda said nothing about how he contructed it. That's where the flaw in your theory begins. Is 6 fixed, or a sixth? We don't know.
If it isn't SPECIFIED it has no significance and the chart must be read how it is presented.
One Inch Punch, the best you can draw from that chart is "On a scale of one through six, Luffy and Zoro were equals at the point the chart was created." Anything else is speculation.
READ DAMMIT READ!!!!!
If a graph isn't what it is showing it must be SPECIFIED!! e.g NOT TO SCALE, ROUGH ESTIMATE.
If neither is shown you MUST GO BY WHAT IT SAYS.
How can you go by what it says when you don't know if 6 is fixed or if it's a sixth. 6 being fixed isn't specified either…
so Oda left it out. You're in the same position as me. It's just that I look deep into detail in charts.
With a quote, there's no backfiring.
One Inch Punch, the best you can draw from that chart is "On a scale of one through six, Luffy and Zoro were equals at the point the chart was created." Anything else is speculation.
Exactly. Except for my view on them never being equal.
why does it matter so much if luffy or zoro are equal?
isn't dexterity and intelligence important in the outcome of a fight?
so, going by the chart… zoro > luffy
hahaha theres a possibility this might have been said already, but i can't go through 50 pages in a day.
One Inch Punch, the best you can draw from that chart is "On a scale of one through six, Luffy and Zoro were equals at the point the chart was created." Anything else is speculation.
They've each improved and each have new states, neither has anything that puts them above the other.
Also the chart stands until changed, don't forget Oda has his ending planned out. He knows what the strength should be in each data book and knows if and when it needs changing.
And don't say he doens't bring out the books because the yellow one is on its way as we speak. It seems he is ready to change a few things.
@$abZ:
How can you go by what it says when you don't know if 6 is fixed or if it's a sixth. 6 being fixed isn't specified either…
IT HASN'T BEEN SPECIFIED SPECIFIED SPECIFIED SPECIFIED SPECIFIED SO IT DOESN'T EXIST.
so Oda left it out. You're in the same position as me. It's just that I look deep into detail in charts.
It isn't SPECIFIED!! so the chart is only what you see NOTHING MORE!!
With a quote, there's no backfiring.
Exactly. Except for my view on them never being equal.
Already answered that.
LOL
OIP.
With what we get… is the problem. Oda hasn't told us if with what we've got 6... is a sixth or a fixed number.
Neither has been specified. So again... YOU'RE IN THE SAME SITUATION AS ME. Accept this is for my arguement, and against yours.
@$abZ:
LOL
OIP.
With what we get… is the problem. Oda hasn't told us if with what we've got 6... is a sixth or a fixed number.
Neither has been specified. So again... YOU'RE IN THE SAME SITUATION AS ME. Accept this is for my arguement, and against yours.
If a CHART does not **SPECIFY "**SIX IS A SIXTH OR FIXED NUMBER" It means they AREN'T, they are just what you see. A graph is only what you see UNLESS it is SPECIFIED that six is a sixth.
HIGHLIGHT the parts you do not understand
If a CHART does not **SPECIFY "**SIX IS A SIXTH OR FIXED NUMBER" It means they AREN'T, they are just what you see. A graph is only what you see UNLESS it is SPECIFIED that six is a sixth.
Well that's just your interpretation of the chart. A rather narrow intepretation but still an intepretation
If a CHART does not **SPECIFY "**SIX IS A SIXTH OR FIXED NUMBER" It means they AREN'T, they are just what you see. A graph is only what you see UNLESS it is SPECIFIED that six is a sixth.
HIGHLIGHT the parts you do not understand
Are you serious?
Going by what we see…
what's that then? Answer me this and I will carry on my point.
Don't forget, it's only a scale of 1 to 6. This means that, at the very least, that every person UP TO Luffy's level withh be placed on a number between one and six.
So if a random marine is a 1… and Luffy's a 6... there's only four levels of strength in between?
If Sanji is a five, would Arlong place a 5 too? He is obviously weaker than Luffy, so they're not equal. What about Blueno? Would Bleuno be the same as Sanji and Arlong at 5? A 4? What about Jabura? He lost to Sanji, but would that make him a 4? But it's obvious Jabura is much stronger than Blueno... so is Blueno a 3? A 2, even? Just above a random marine? Where would Django fall? Blueno's level, a step below?
You see what I'm getting at? There simply isn't a large enough range of numbers to accurately place everybody's strength. The best we can say; "On a scale of one to six, they're equal." But people on the same level at one through six don't have to be equal in fighting strength. If both Blueno and Jabura place a 5, they don't have to be equal. If Jabura is the same as Sanji, it doesn't make him and Sanji equal.
Now I can hear the counter-point now, and let me head it off. "But Oda planned it through. If he needed to show the difference between Zoro and Luffy, he would have used a larger scale going beyond six."
And here's the counter-point to that. I agree Oda wouldn't do somehting like that without thinking about it; but what if it was his goal to remain vague about their relative power? What if he didn't want to reveal who was the stronger, leaving it to inferences in the manga to show us?
That doesn't make them equal, it means Oda left it as vague as "They're on the same playing field."
Which seems very much like Oda to me.
@yvj:
Well that's just your interpretation of the chart. A rather narrow intepretation but still an intepretation
NO that is LAW, that is how a chart must be made if published in any type of book.
You see what I'm getting at? There simply isn't a large enough range of numbers to accurately place everybody's strength. The best we can say; "On a scale of one to six, they're equal." But people on the same level at one through six don't have to be equal in fighting strength. If both Blueno and Jabura place a 5, they don't have to be equal. If Jabura is the same as Sanji, it doesn't make him and Sanji equal.
Now I can hear the counter-point now, and let me head it off. "But Oda planned it through. If he needed to show the difference between Zoro and Luffy, he would have used a larger scale going beyond six."
And here's the counter-point to that. I agree Oda wouldn't do somehting like that without thinking about it; but what if it was his goal to remain vague about their relative power? What if he didn't want to reveal who was the stronger, leaving it to inferences in the manga to show us?
That doesn't make them equal, it means Oda left it as vague as "They're on the same playing field."
Which seems very much like Oda to me.
Beautiful stuff here
OIP… Oda didn't specify 6 as a fixed number OR as a sixth.
So with what we get... can only be either of the two. He specifies none, so there's nothing to go by.
You don't understand.
Quote:
Originally Posted by yvj
Well that's just your interpretation of the chart. A rather narrow intepretation but still an intepretationNO that is LAW, that is how a chart must be made if published in any type of book.
Now you're just insane what makes it LAW you…LOL
You're intepretating the chart the way you want.
Don't forget, it's only a scale of 1 to 6. This means that, at the very least, that every person UP TO Luffy's level withh be placed on a number between one and six.
If Oda didn't want zoro to be a 6 he didn't need to, using there is only a max of 6 isn't good enough. Both luffy and zoro's bars reach the end of the chart, if oda wanted zoro's could have gone 1 mm less.
So if a random marine is a 1… and Luffy's a 6... there's only four levels of strength in between?
The chart is only for the strawhats not marines.
If Sanji is a five, would Arlong place a 5 too? He is obviously weaker than Luffy, so they're not equal. What about Blueno? Would Bleuno be the same as Sanji and Arlong at 5? A 4? What about Jabura? He lost to Sanji, but would that make him a 4? But it's obvious Jabura is much stronger than Blueno… so is Blueno a 3? A 2, even? Just above a random marine? Where would Django fall? Blueno's level, a step below?
It's only for the strawhats, everyone else is determined by douriki which isn't fighting ability.
You see what I'm getting at? There simply isn't a large enough range of numbers to accurately place everybody's strength. The best we can say; "On a scale of one to six, they're equal." But people on the same level at one through six don't have to be equal in fighting strength. If both Blueno and Jabura place a 5, they don't have to be equal. If Jabura is the same as Sanji, it doesn't make him and Sanji equal.
Once again it's for the strawhats so the range is fine.
Now I can hear the counter-point now, and let me head it off. "But Oda planned it through. If he needed to show the difference between Zoro and Luffy, he would have used a larger scale going beyond six."
And here's the counter-point to that. I agree Oda wouldn't do somehting like that without thinking about it; but what if it was his goal to remain vague about their relative power? What if he didn't want to reveal who was the stronger, leaving it to inferences in the manga to show us?
If he didn't he wouldn't have made a data book.
That doesn't make them equal, it means Oda left it as vague as "They're on the same playing field."
Which seems very much like Oda to me.
Data book says otherwise.
OIP… I think you missed a post... XD.
@AD-HD:
It doesn't matter what chart says. Why?
Because it's old. Anyone with a brains can understand that things have changed.
AD-HD, Since the book is old…...MIHAWK IS STRONGER THAN YOUR FAVORITE CHARACTER IN SHANKS…...(Go ahead, tell the mods......)
@$abz: YOUR ARGUMENT IS RECYCLED!!!
I'll respond to your point when you make one, since my original post rebuffs your counter-point without further addition.
@yvj:
Now you're just insane what makes it LAW you…LOL
You're intepretating the chart the way you want.
Are you serious?
Bloody look it up if you want, graphs in published books have to specify if they aren't to scale, or if six is a sixth, or if it's rough estimate, or an approximation, or an average.
If not a graph is definite that's how it goes, if you can't understand that i suggest you spend more time at school
I'll respond to your point when you make one, since my original post rebuffs your counter-point without further addition.
Your original post has done nothing, so when you post something that isn't complete speculation I'll respond to it.
Are you serious?
Bloody look it up if you want, graphs in published books have to specify if they aren't to scale, or if six is a sixth, or if it's rough estimate, or an approximation, or an average.
If not a graph is definite that's how it goes, if you can't understand that i suggest you spend more time at school
Was it specified that 6 was a fixed number?
Final End… get this in your head...
You get it in your head!!!!! the chart is not a "rough overview!"
Oda doesn't say if 6 is fixed or a sixth… so you're in the same position as me. He also never says that he didn't use maths.
I see a 6!!!!!!!! which means its canon. I dont see a sixth!!!!!! which means it is not canon!
If the numbers where fixed it would have said that!!!!!! does it say the numbers are fixed??? NO!!! its not canon!!!!!
EDIT: Humanity is at its end.
your the reason!!!!!
@$abZ:
Was it specified that 6 was a fixed number?
NOOOOOOOOO so it has no RELEVANCE TO THE CHART!!!!!!
WHY CAN'T YOU UNDERSTAND SIMPLE FACTS, you keep biggin yourself in the maths department yet you can't understand something as simple as that.
@Final:
I see a 6!!!!!!!! which means its canon. I dont see a sixth!!!!!! which means it is not canon!
HAHAHAHA
Oda wouldn't write sixth. 6 could represent that. Go back and read what I said… you're embarrasing yourself.
OIP... it has no relevance in the chart. 6 being fixed. Lol... that means that 6 = 6 (both being fixed) has no relevance in the chart. Got it.
LOL.
HAHAHAHA
….................you love to ignore canon.
Oda wouldn't write sixth. 6 could represent that. Go back and read what I said… you're embarrasing yourself.
No friend thats all guess work! 6 = 6 I dont see a sixth or any trash that your implying.
@$abZ:
HAHAHAHA
Oda wouldn't write sixth. 6 could represent that. Go back and read what I said… you're embarrasing yourself.
OIP... it has no relevance in the chart. 6 being fixed. Lol... that means that 6 = 6 (both being fixed) has no relevance in the chart. Got it.
LOL.
NO It means you can't READ what I'm writing, you are through my post and the LAW has proven you wrong.
IGNORANCE IS NOT AN EXCUSE
@AD-HD:
WHITEBE… I'm sorry, Final End is having a bad mood today.
Look at my avatar…...now look a my user name......it says Final End not WHITEBEARD.
NO It means you can't READ what I'm writing, you are through my post and the LAW has proven you wrong.
IGNORANCE IS NOT AN EXCUSE
Lol you and law.
You call that a counter?
No time. Later.
@$abZ:
Lol you and law.
You call that a counter?
No time. Later.
NO It means you can't READ what I'm writing, you are through my post and the LAW has proven you wrong.
IGNORANCE IS NOT AN EXCUSE
…...................
@$abZ:
No time. Later.
Yea…..its No use OIP, Sabz knows Oda, and drinks with him, and gives Oda pointers for his manga. Yo sabz how about next time you could have Oda answer a few of our question.
Look at my avatar…...now look a my user name......it says Final End not WHITEBEARD.
LOL Check the Chart Whitebeard = Final End
@Final:
Yea…..its No use OIP, Sabz knows Oda, and drinks with him, and gives Oda pointers for his manga. Yo sabz how about next time you could have Oda answer a few of our question.
Yeah haha
I've got my answer prepared for him anyway.
NO It means you can't READ what I'm writing, you are through my post and the LAW has proven you wrong.
IGNORANCE IS NOT AN EXCUSE
EDIT.
@yvj:
LOL Check the Chart Whitebeard = Final End
When are you lot going to stop talking behind WHITEBEARDS back? You lot just couldn't take the guy ripping apart every opinion and speculative post here.
I expect this from AD HD since he was traumatized by WHITEBEARD but not everyone who lost to the guy.
@yvj:
LOL Check the Chart Whitebeard = Final End
LMAO check it….......we both have a 6, but using your logic six dont = six.
When are you lot going to stop talking behind WHITEBEARDS back? You lot just couldn't take the guy ripping apart every opinion and speculative post here.
now ive got no real problems with his arguments they were often fairly good(tho i dont remember any mass ripping on his part he won some arguments and lost some just like everybody else) but my and probably some other peoples main gripe with him wasnt his arguments but rather the "if someone disagrees with me i must be a complete ass to him" attitude he so often displayed, had he just learned some manners id have had not problem what so ever with him and i dont think to many else would have either.
ps i do recall Final and whitey arguing fiercly over something a while back so if he isnt schizophrenic or very very dedicated to the bluff hes probably no Whitey.
I expect this from AD HD since he was traumatized by WHITEBEARD but not everyone who lost to the guy.
Lost? Who's losing to him?
If he's not repeating six = six like a parrot he's quoting other people's stuff because they can explain his intepretations better than he can.
And hopefully he has a sense of humor…...because we know WB=FE...and it's pretty damn funny.
now ive got no real problems with his arguments they were often fairly good(tho i dont remember any mass ripping on his part
he won some arguments and lost some just like everybody else) but my and probably some other peoples main gripe with him wasnt his arguments but rather the "if someone disagrees with me i must be a complete ass to him" attitude he so often displayed, had he just learned some manners id have had not problem what so ever with him and i dont think to many else would have either.
I don't really remember him losing arguments since he used 100% CANON, but that isn't the problem. It's these people who talk behind others backs, they're being cowards. Maybe they're going to call me WHITEBEARD soon since I've found using facts is best in an argument.
And everyone can start to get a bit out of hand in a debate, me included especially when people ignore facts. I mean ignore my opinion if you want but how can you ignore facts and not look like an idiot.
ps i do recall Final and whitey arguing fiercly over something a while back so if he isnt schizophrenic or very very dedicated to the bluff hes probably no Whitey.
They're just traumatized by the guy, they'll think you're WHITEBEARD next since you posted this
Are we talking about the banned or how Luffy = Zoro?
It's these people who talk behind others backs, they're being cowards. Maybe they're going to call me WHITEBEARD soon since I've found using facts is best in an argument.
And everyone can start to get a bit out of hand in a debate, me included especially when people ignore facts. I mean ignore my opinion if you want but how can you ignore facts and not look like an idiot.
Stop acting so high and mighty. How are we talking behind his back when he's right there?
There is a difference between ignoring and disputing the validity of a chart from years ago with vague data. Luffy and Zorro will always tie because Six = Six does not hold up and it's the only "Fact" that you have.
Stop acting so high and mighty. How are we talking behind his back when he's right there?
Where??:wassat:
There is a difference between ignoring and disputing the validity of a chart from years ago with vague data. Luffy and Zorro will always tie because Six = Six does not hold up and it's the only "Fact" that you have.
What do you have? (six dont = six) we also have wiskey peek, where Luffy and Zoro tied…........lets not forget about KMA's post that you all ignored.
we also have wiskey peek, where Luffy and Zoro tied…........lets not forget about KMA's post that you all ignored.
See if you weren't ignoring us you'd see that most of that was discussed especially the Whiskey PeaK alleged fact
So really there's no use you say we ignore stuff, I say you ignore stuff. What's the next most controversial topic in One Piece we can argue.
See if you weren't ignoring us you'd see that most of that was discussed especially the Whiskey PeaK alleged fact
LOL…...Data Book, Luffy and Zoro are equals,(FACT) we already seen them fight, and they tied!(FACT) the only thing that is going to dismiss the Data Book is the Yellow Data Book.(Fact)
So really there's no use you say we ignore stuff, I say you ignore stuff. What's the next most controversial topic in One Piece we can argue.
NO, I didnt ignore anything?…... it just that you and Sabz need to stop talking as if you best friends with Oda.......... and making @#$% up like the chart is a "rough overview" and making more @#$% up like "6 is a sixth and six dont equal six." Again you all ignored KMA's post, and Cosmic, and Phenom.
NO, I didnt ignore anything?…... it just that you and Sabz need to stop talking as if you best friends with Oda.......... and making @#$% up like the chart is a "rough overview" and making more @#$% up like "6 is a sixth and six dont equal six." Again you all ignored KMA's post, and Cosmic, and Phenom.
Wow do you know what ignored means? We're debating the validity of your 'facts"….ignoring them would be if we didn't even aknowledge their existence!
Please Final End let KMA and OIP handle the workload ok....Thanks!
Stop acting so high and mighty. How are we talking behind his back when he's right there?
????
There is a difference between ignoring and disputing the validity of a chart from years ago with vague data. Luffy and Zorro will always tie because Six = Six does not hold up and it's the only "Fact" that you have.
They will tie until ODA decides they don't, the yellow book will decide this.
You also don't seem to know much about charts, remember this?
Originally Posted by yvj
Now you're just insane what makes it LAW you…LOLYou're intepretating the chart the way you want.
Are you serious?
And I answered
Bloody look it up if you want, graphs in published books have to specify if they aren't to scale, or if six is a sixth, or if it's rough estimate, or an approximation, or an average.
If not a graph is definite that's how it goes, if you can't understand that i suggest you spend more time at school
Wow do you know what ignored means? We're debating the validity of your 'facts"….ignoring them would be if we didn't even aknowledge their existence!
Fact is 6 = 6….......its not a "sixth," and no where in the Data Book does it say its a "rough overview?"
Please Final End let KMA and OIP handle the workload ok….Thanks!
Yet you never aimed any thing at KMA, Phenom, or OIP, or me, just cuz you reply with something slow like "Oda said its a rough overview, but he didnt write it down in the Data Book, but I know it is because he called me and told me." Fact is your making up @#$^, and have yet to disprove anything! you cant disprove canon.
All you do is ignore it, I already proven you and sabz wrong…...yet you say the same thing over and over.
Edit:Let Kma? hell he owned all of you with his last post, all I got to do is quote him.
Here are some facts:
-Oda has never said that equal strength in the data book meant a tie in a fight
-Oda has never said that strength in the databook meant total fighting ability
-Luffy and Zoro have never finished a fight
-Luffy has defeated enemies that Zoro could not
Now, in order to prove that Zoro and Luffy would tie in a fight, you'd need the following formal implication:
strength(Luffy,Zoro) -> tie(Luffy,Zoro)
Where strength is true when params are equal in strength (based on databook), and tie is true when params would tie in a fight.
Oda has never made that implication (empirically or otherwise). The only other way to prove it is using a chain of implications, but you won't, because it doesn't exist. Plus you probably wouldn't know how, because your logic is made up of failure and more failure.
So far, your arguments have been logical fallacies, more specifically known as red herrings (also ignoratio elenchi) and equivocation. You have only given ipsedixitism for the formal argument given above (6=6 must mean they'd tie? FALSE, no where is that implcation made. Fail, fail, and more fail). Of course, you'll probably reply to this with ignorance (a bunch of nonsense gibberish and even more red herrings) or brush it off as proving nothing (both untrue).
You can literally PROVE yourselves to be correct, but you won't, because you're too busy circle jerking eachother.
vegetarian luffy
Here are some facts:
-Oda has never said that equal strength in the data book meant a tie in a fight
-Oda has never said that strength in the databook meant total fighting ability
-Luffy and Zoro have never finished a fight
-Luffy has defeated enemies that Zoro could notNow, in order to prove that Zoro and Luffy would tie in a fight, you'd need the following formal implication:
strength(Luffy,Zoro) -> tie(Luffy,Zoro)
Where strength is true when params are equal in strength (based on databook), and tie is true when params would tie in a fight.
Oda has never made that implication (empirically or otherwise). The only other way to prove it is using a chain of implications, but you won't, because it doesn't exist. Plus you probably wouldn't know how, because your logic is made up of failure and more failure.
So far, your arguments have been logical fallacies, more specifically known as red herrings (also ignoratio elenchi) and equivocation. You have only given ipsedixitism for the formal argument given above (6=6 must mean they'd tie? FALSE, no where is that implcation made. Fail, fail, and more fail). Of course, you'll probably reply to this with ignorance (a bunch of nonsense gibberish and even more red herrings) or brush it off as proving nothing (both untrue).
You can literally PROVE yourselves to be correct, but you won't, because you're too busy circle jerking eachother.
…...................
Originally Posted by ONEinchPUNCH
I've explained this before it isn't something new, in all shounen strength is fighting ability. Whitebeard was introduced at basically the same time as the redbook (just after alabasta) and he has strongest (strength) in his title. We then get strength in the data book, this is no coincidence it's Oda following basic shounen law.It is a shounen manga you can't expect him to remove all shounen basic laws from it.
The manga also supports them being equal with the whiskey peak fight, constant strength comparisons and zoro fighting jabura and kaku at the same time. Also the fact asura has been proven to be a state (like gear2) and the move used in it, dismissed amanedachi and killed kaku in the space of a second.
Luffy and zoro are always potrayed equal through the manga, the data book and whitebeard isn't mere coincidence.
That doesn't prove a formal implication. In fact, that's another fallacy called a hasty generalization. Just because it applies to one set of shonen doesn't mean it applies to all of them.
Fail some more.
vegetarian luffy
That doesn't prove a formal implication. In fact, that's another fallacy called a hasty generalization. Just because it applies to one set of shonen doesn't mean it applies to all of them.
All shounen are like that bar maybe 1 or 2, you're trying to tell me all this is coincidence? The great Oda accidently doing all that? I don't think so, you just won't accept it.
Fail some more.
I'll be mistaken for you if I do that.
Here are some facts:
Not again…...
-Oda has never said that equal strength in the data book meant a tie in a fight
Well they are equals…..what do equals do when they fight??? tie, Luffy and Zoro also fought as equals.
-Oda has never said that strength in the databook meant total fighting ability
Well I guess Whitebeard is the strongest man in the world because he can lift the most and beat anyone in an arm wrestling contest.:getlost:
-Luffy and Zoro have never finished a fight
They would have killed each other…......plus they were fighting as equals.
-Luffy has defeated enemies that Zoro could not
Same goes for Zoro…....Luffy cant defeat guys that Zoro has beat.
Now, in order to prove that Zoro and Luffy would tie in a fight, you'd need the following formal implication:
Yea we have 6 = 6…..
Strength is fighing power in this manga you know.(Whitebeard nuff said)
So far, your arguments have been logical fallacies, more specifically known as red herrings (also ignoratio elenchi) and equivocation. You have only given ipsedixitism for the formal argument given above (6=6 must mean they'd tie? FALSE, no where is that implcation made. Fail, fail, and more fail). Of course, you'll probably reply to this with ignorance (a bunch of nonsense gibberish and even more red herrings) or brush it off as proving nothing (both untrue).
The debate is about them being equals? 6 = 6 luffy and Zoro are equals, and equals tie in fights or kill each other, if Luffy and Zoro kept fighting they would have killed each other then it would have been the end of one piece.
That doesn't prove formal implication. It can be your opinion, but it isn't fact.
Again, argue all you want, but calling it a fact is untrue, and makes you look like a fool. You might also want to look up what a logical fallacy is, since you've written 10 pages full of it.
vegetarian luffy
@Final:
The debate is about them being equals? 6 = 6 luffy and Zoro are equals, and equals tie in fights or kill each other, if Luffy and Zoro kept fighting they would have killed each other then it would have been the end of one piece.
Equals in what? It's never implied what it is. Fail more like your buddy OneInch. You're just using ipsedixitism.
vegetarian luffy
