My opponent will not be able to win this debate

Rebuttals to my opponent's arguments1. "Beginner's luck"You do not simply win a debate by luck. Debates require skill and knowledge. Thus, this argument is irrelevant. 2. "Brevity is Efficiency"Only if you know how to speak a lot while speaking few words. You are not Eddie Murphy. You did not live on for one whole week while only being able to speak around one thousand words. You have not proven that you can be more efficient while using fewer words than me. Plus, it must be noted that the best debates on the site, whether it's most views, comments, or votes, all have loads and loads of characters. Take Mikal, for example. Let's put a few of his debates here: http://www.debate.org..., and http://www.debate.org.... All of these debates show Mikal winning, but he uses massive 8000 character arguments in all of them in order to ensure his victory. As you can see, while being brief might be efficient, it is usually better to use up all your characters in your argument.3. "I am stronger" First, off, elude is used wrongly. It means "to avoid or escape", as shown in http://dictionary.reference.com.... I'm pretty sure you meant allude. This shows your grammar misuse, and I have done nothing wrong grammatically, so I cannot use in S & G. Now, my opponent tries to argue he is much more confident than me. I have already demonstrated my confidency by starting this debate and purposefully setting it so that I would battle someone with a higher elo than me. If my opponent really is more confident, that is actually arrogancy, because I am already at the borderline between confidence and over-confidence. My opponent's over-confidency can lead to his downfall, because he would underestimate my limits, as he claims to have rebutted all my arguments in the first round, and he more than likely thinks he can rebut my arguments within this round.4. "Conduct is too be seen"It's "to be seen". Another spelling error. Clearly my opponent will lose in S & G. "Babies are cuter than puppies."Well, baby puppies are cuter than both of those combined together!! Now, to bring in a new point in this debate: 5. I have more and better sources My opponent has 3 sources. However, 2 are useless, since they are about luck and probability. As I have already stated, debates do not depend on luck but rather skill. Now he only has one relevant source. I have four relevant and helpful sources, clearly outnumbering my opponent's sources.And to stress the weakness of being over-confident, my opponent was so confident he failed to rebut two arguments within my first round, showing concession. I will repost them here to stress them. 6. I haven't even loss against another debater who is much better than MhykielIn another debate presented here: http://www.debate.org......, it is shown I didn't lose against Teemo, who has a massive amount of 3,000 elo, an impressive feat for having only done 14 debates. Mhykiel only has a 2,115 elo, how could he possibly best me? (And I already refuted his "beginner's luck" argument, and thus this argument stands)7. I am serious about this debate and agree with it strongly I haven't lost any of my "school uniform" series of debates. It was because I was serious and agreed with it strongly that I gained victory over others.Oh, and another point just to mess you up. :P8. I have "fact-attacked" youUsing many strong arguments yet again, with rebuttals to your previous arguments, I have once again proven my skills to be better than yours, and thus, I will win against you in this debate.