My opponent will not be able to win this debate

So far, so good. No one has broken any rules yet.So, what makes me so sure that my opponent won't win this debate? Well, I have a bunch of reasons.1. He only wins against dumb noobiesAt first, it seems I have no chance of winning. Mighty Teemo has racked up a 100% win percentage, and he has a respectable elo of 2,823. However, a closer examination reveals all his wins were against dumb noobies all with below 2000 elo. See some profiles of the noobs he won against:http://www.debate.org..., http://www.debate.org.... These all show Teemo's victories, yes, but these are all dumb noobs. I am considered one of the worse debaters on this site, yes, but at least I have over 30 wins, unlike those dumb noobs who challenged Teemo.2. I more effectively use up my characters4000 characters are allowed in arguments. I have far more characters than Teemo, with a grand 286 just in the first round in comparison to the minuscule 9 characters Teemo used as acceptance. Sure, he can use up more characters this round, but the first round gave me an advantage and a clear showing that I made more effort in my argument than Teemo's.3. Teemo is about to die, while I am happily bouncing aboutTeemo is 110 years old. Scientists hypothesize that humans can only reach the age of 120 years old due to cell division limits, and I doubt they will breakthrough anything within 10 years. See this source:http://theconversation.com...4. Teemo will have a hard time catching upSo far I have three points before this point. Teemo will have to refute them all within a limited amount of time, and because he is 110 years old, he is most likely too tired in bed to type up his rebuttal.5. I am serious about this debate and agree with it stronglyWhy is this important? Because I haven't lost any of my "school uniform" series of debates. It was because I was serious and I agreed strongly that I could research it easily, be interested, and post strong rebuttals and statements to win against my opponents. I was so powerful that I blew away my opponents, and they forfeited. My strongness in this debate could have an effect on my opponent's demeanor, and because he is 110 years old, he is most likely to have a heart-attack from reading such a strong argument, and he would forfeit all the rest of the rounds, forcing the win to me.6. I am a troll, and if I decide to go all wacky, troll arguments are very hard to win againstTroll arguments occasionally have more than one meaning hidden in them, and usually they lack in logic and evidence. However, they are very powerful, as demonstrated by many of imabench's argument, in real serious debates, they can be used effectively to debunk arguments. One great example is my troll debate concerning school uniforms. I state that "an evil genius scientist is plotting to take over the world", and give "evidence" by showing the similarity of the children. Yes, the evidence is just coincidence. Yes, the burden of proof is on pro to prove that there really is an evil genius scientist inventing some weird uniform in order to turn students into his minion robots. On the other hand, it must be noted that troll arguments are very funny and the evidence really doesn't have to make a lot of sense. While Teemo could attempt to use serious arguments to contrast my troll arguments, I could still manage to strengthen my argument. One example I'll give is that school uniform debate. Had my argument been debunked in that way, I could say "my evil genius is my brother. It's lucky I'm an incredible actor. He believes in me, and I have to do this debate in secret. However, I cannot stop him on my own. The government must ban school uniforms!" And this would make a lot of sense and be very humorous compared to the opponent's argument, and the voters would more than likely decide me as the winner.