Who would win in a fight? Crab People or Lobster people? I say Crab people!

First, my opponent claims that he never conceded, but he had dropped the arguments I had supplied and even refused to make an objection to make claim that we would be comparing normal sea creatures rather than contributing speculation over the features of crab people. Not only that, but here is what my opponent stated: "My opponent has the very good arguement, in fact i agree with what he has posted, in fact most crab species are smaller than Lobster pecies . . . " So yes, my opponent did concede. Next, my opponent points out that my Lobster citation concerned the larged Lobster ever and that Japanese spider crab's were that size on average, however, through viewing his source, we clearly see that the maximum size is what my opponent had listed. Observe: http://en.wikipedia.org... "The Japanese spider crab, Macrocheira kaempferi, is the largest living arthropod; fully grown it can reach a leg span of almost 4 m (13 ft), [a body size of up to 37 cm (15 inches) and a weight of up to 20 kg (44 lb)."] Read the line within the brackets as the maximum size is implied within it. And for those who may be confused, my previous citation applied to Lobsters in general rather than American Lobsters alone. My opponent then attempts to use my point against me by pointing out that crabs had the advantage in numbers. Although this is true, this doesn't reflect upon my point as I didn't make the claim that "working together" would be beneficial until I pointed out some more lobster attributes. For instance, I suggested (and cited) that Lobsters could move at a speed of 5 meters per second. With this unique speed and the fact that they could adjust to all areas of the sea rather than merely one portion, this is how working in groups becomes effective for Team Lobster. Also, to further add injury to my opponent's argument, I merely compared one species of Lobster to one species of crab (you can check my wording if you don't believe me). My opponent commits the fallacy of false dichotomy by claiming that animal planet list a crab for loudest animal. This is false as shown here on animal planet's website: http://animal.discovery.com... "The blue whale is also the loudest creature on our planet. Its low-frequency whistles can be heard for hundreds of miles underwater and are often 40 to 50 decibels louder than a jumbo jet. These powerful, highly structured sounds may help them find food or mates." Another reason my opponent is incorrect is the description itself. He states that there is a crab which STUNS it's pray by smashing it's claw against a surface loud enough to produce sound waves equivalent to the sound waves produced by 4 jets combined. Considering the size and fragility of the prey crabs hunt after, such a blast would not merely stun its pray but would kill it instead. As for the King Crabs, they lose for mostly the same reasons the Spider Crabs do. My opponent states that Crabs (in general) have a much narrower claw when compared to Lobsters, but this is irrelevant. Lobsters still have a thick shell and super strength to rely on. This is not something many opponents of a Crab have to offer in battle. Who says Japanese Crabs are low on numbers? Lets check out my opponent's source: "It is considered a specialty around Suruga Bay, but numbers of the crab have diminished over recent years, and there are efforts to protect them. In Wakayama Prefecture, the crabs are caught when they move to shallower waters in the spring." Besides, there is a reason it is referred to as a "living fossil." My opponent states that this battle takes place on dry land on the beach, but he did not define this to be the terms of the battle in the resolution or during round one. He is basically shifting his argument. Therefore, I am justified to ignore this conditions that he created on the last round. As for this stuff about being part human advantages, this is baseless conjecture from my opponent. In round one, I had already explained that we have no way of observing the results of a Crab-Human / Lobster-Human transmutations, so the attributes which my opponent provides (and on his last round no doubt) are dismissible. Although to pacify my opponent, the world is 75% water and Lobsters are incredible swimmers, so they have control over most of the battlefield. Closing Statements: My opponent has dropped my arguments, has provided false info, and has attempted to change his argument on the final round. On the other hand, I have provided information that suggest Lobsters to have the advantage over crabs in general. Thus, in a theoretical battle between Lobster people and Crab people, most of the evidence points towards the lobster people as being victorious. With that said, I thank my opponent for taking the time to debate with me and I thank the audience for reading. Good night! =D