RESOLVED: In a fight to the death, Darth Vader would defeat Darth Revan

>>>RE 1:"You wouldn't site a source for the U.S. economy from when Reagan was president." PRO completely avoids my argument. The point I'm making is that the force wielders of the OT/Prequel time period say Vader/Anakin as the chosen one, or rather what I'm really getting at, as a really powerful jedi, but as pointed out, much of the force knowledge of Revan's time had been lost over the 4000 years between his time and Vader's. Thus, for Anakin/Vader to be well regarded as "top notch" means little given that his age was an age of weak ignorant force wielders who don't even compare to the force wielders of the past. >>>RE 2: "This could not be farther from the truth." Do we see Vader amassing large forces based on his own influence as was the case for Revan? No, Do we see Vader calling all of the shots as Revan did for his army? No, he is merely the lap dog of the emperor. Heck, note the following line taken from a New Hope: LEIA: "Governor Tarkin, I should have expected to find you holding Vader's leash. I recognized your foul stench when I was brought on board." Holding Vader's leash? PRO would like you to believe that Vader was second in the chain of command for the military, but lines like these make it rather apparent that this was not the case. Heck, when Vader was force choking someone, Tarkin ORDERED him to stop and Vader complied without hesitation as if he were a slave. Speaking of all previous Sith Lords, who was second in command for Sidious previously? Was it a mere human? Of course not. It was count Dooku. So why is it that Vader didn't get promoted until a mere human died? >>>RE 3:"Despite what my opponents third contention says Vader tried several times to overthrow the Emperor" Nowhere in my third contention do I insist that Vader hasn't tried to overthrow the Emperor. My argument is simply that there have been no results for Vader and that Vader's will power is weaker than Revan's. As far as trying to have Vader killed, this clearly doesn't say much as if the Emperor really considered him a threat, he would have killed Vader himself. Clearly, he hasn't in spite of the many opportunities he has had. At best, Vader attempts were nothing more than a nuisance comparable to that of a housefly buzzing around one's head. As for Revan not turning most of the the jedi to his cause, my opponent is directly contradicting the source material itself. "Ah, but to make officers turn on their own people, to bomb innocent worlds to make pacts… strong influence, indeed." ―Kreia (in reference to Revan) Thus, it was not his minions, but Revan himself who caused Jedi to be persuaded and turned to the dark side (it should be noted that I didn't mean training to any other extent than that his actions in causing the jedi to go the dark side made them become more powerful). >>>RE 4: "My opponent's fourth point is completely irrelevant since both Revan and Vader started off as Jedi (and as far as we know, Revan ended up a Jedi and forgot his Sith powers)" How is Revan having more knowledge than Vader (someone who is from a time where A GREAT DEAL of force knowledge was lost) in terms of the main weapon being used during this battle (the force) irrelevant when the topic concerns who'd more likely be victorious in battle? Just because both started off as jedi, it means nothing in terms of who has more knowledge. Also, if Revan did in fact end up losing his Sith powers, then PRO should provide some evidence (since he brought up this point). Otherwise, we have no reason to believe this, especially considering that what we do know is that Revan simply went off to even learn MORE about the Sith given that his knowledge he had acquired otherwise was already at its max. >>>RE 5: "this point is completely muted based on the fact that Revan's skills varied depending on how you played the game." I covered this sufficiently in the previous round (and PRO doesn't address that in this round, so extend it). Also, my opponent's analogy is a false analogy (primarily because it assumes that the Jedi from the New Republic had improved in spite of the fact that they didn't') . In terms of Starwars, it's like the force wielders from the Old Republic had machine guns nuclear bombs whereas the force wielders from the New Republic are limited to bows and arrows. Much knowledge was lost over time. >>>>>IN RESPONSE TO PRO'S CASE: >>>RE POINT 1) Yes, I did agree that Vader was one of the best fighters of his time just as I might agree that in a group of 5 mentally retarded children, one retarded child might excel mentally moreso than the others. In other words, it's not saying much about Vader considering he comes from a time of pathetic force wielders. Also, this debate isn't about proving whether or not Revan is the greatest force wielder of his time (whether he was or wasn't, I'd still have plenty of room to claim that Revan > Vader) , so I won't bother covering that red herring. As far as the cut scene goes, we don't see any fight, so it shouldn't be regarded as a means of determining who was more powerful. Even so, I would assume that Revan got in a defensive stance because that's one any fighter does when preparing to engage in a fight. As for the force wielders who remained after "Order 66", they were hardly powerful. Even the Apprentice from the New game wasn't quite as powerful as Vader yet, but was able to handle them with ease. As for Obi Wan, even if we are to go so far as to say that he knew Anakin's every move, we would also have to acknowledge that Anakin would know every one of his moves, thus, there is no advantage here as this balances out. Second, the point I'm making is that in spite of Anakin's power, he was beaten by someone FAR weaker than himself. By acknowledging that Obi-wan won by skill, you're acknowledging skill beats strength. RE POINT 2: No, Vader was not REALLY prepared for Luke. If he were prepared, how did he lose? And yeah, he stopped Luke from attacking the Emperor (not like the Emperor needed his help), but that's irrelevant. As for Han Solo, I wasn't talking about what he did in Episode 5, only episode 4. For someone with the ability to see into the future, it's pretty pitiful to get shot down by someone who doesn't have the ability to block this power (as any force wielder would). Judging the surroundings in a space battle is simple for someone who can tap into the force. How do you think Luke managed to fire his missiles into the Death Star weak point? As for taking on numerous opponent's, I challenge PRO to show us one instance where Anakin took on a whole army of force wielders. Taking on a couple of people and taking on a legions of people are two completely different situations. PRO ignores my points concerning the video I posted in the previous round. Again, note how pitiful Vader is and note how the Emperor labels him as "weak." RE POINT 3: I provided a reason as to why the Jedi wouldn't have Revan's midicholorian count and that is because much of the knowledge has been lost over the past 4000 years. PRO ignores this, thus consider this point dropped by him. RE POINT 4: No, one mustn't assume that. PRO must present evidence in order for this claim to be accepted. And I challenge PRO to show me a new republic device on par with the Star Forge (a device which uses the force to create matter, hence create an infinite amount of ships and weaponry). Also, Vader's suit was also made up of durasteel, so he is wrong about there being no metal. BOTTOMLINE: Revan has too many advantages over Vader (knowledge, skill, mobility, will power). PRO's arguments are plagued by the fact that they end up having to rely on the prequal Vader and the OT Vader having the same abilities, in spite of the fact that they don't. And finally, Revan was the master whereas Vader always remained as the pawn. Thus, it is clear that in a match, Revan would most likely be t