Josh vs Abe

General: this (https://i.imgur.com/o5j1gG0.png) is perhaps the worst argument I have ever seen in my life. Don't use arguments like this, don't use arguments like this as if they're some sort of silver bullet. This is illegible nonsense and completely unconvincing. I hate it and I hate that you use it so many times like its some kind of silver bullet

Mario vs Mahito:

Mahito wins. There is like so little clash actually happening in this debate. I buy the soul argumentation josh brought up and that's literally practically the only point at which there is an argument here. Josh keeps arguing Mario wins primarily because his strength feats are better than Mahito's strength feats, but this literally doesn't matter. Neither debater does like literally anything to establish their characters durability other than the fact that Mahito has regen. So the only like point of this debate I think I can rule on is Mahito's speed. Josh demonstrates that Yuji's feat where he dodges the blood projectiles is faster than the tier projectiles, and all Josh does to respond to this in the 2nd response is go "I think these characters are the same speed" They aren't the same speed, Abe like actually establishes why Mahito is faster than the speed equalization. With that being the case I am unconvinced Mahito can't hurt Mario and Josh's win condition is reliant on him having won this speed argument. So Mahito wins

Morlun vs Luigi:

Luigi wins. This fight is a lot more reasonable on Josh's end. He shows that Luigi's strength is better than Morlun's durability, he shows that Luigi's durability is sufficient to take hits, and he also argues down Spider-Man's speed to a reasonable level. I think in particular the stuff about how Morlun is a really inefficient fighter here hurts his chances a lot. A lot of the feats Abe relies on and feats Josh shows involve Morlun getting hit by Spider-Man, and he also hits Spider-Man back very little. I think there's enough here to say that Luigi wins.

Mega Man vs Hanami:

This debate is like, really bad. Abe's win condition is that Hanami is faster, but never ever says why Hanami being faster means Hanami would win. This is a question with an obvious answer. Josh's win condition is that Mega Man can kill Hanami with projectiles. These two win conditions have really obvious interplay. If Hanami is actually really fast, then they can dodge all of Mega Man's projectiles. If Hanami isn't fast, they're at risk of getting hit or killed. This seems obvious, but Abe literally never once mentions it. This debate has another real massive lack of clash that makes it really really hard to actually figure out who won. Which is really frustrating because if Abe at literally any point argued "Hanami can dodge Mega Man's projectiles" he would've just won outright.

As it stands, I think Josh's argument against the Maki speed feat is like bad, but I get what he's saying. Abe never establishes anything other than a reaction time. There's no argument in this debate about Hanami's ability to move. This is also weird because there are so many better vectors to attack this scaling than this one. Josh also like totally misunderstands Abe's point about Hanami's fire resistance, since the point is the fire is hot enough to instantly burn human flesh away, so it has to be hot enough to do that instantly, but then Abe also just like doesn't finish that argument he goes "yea so its probably somewhere far about 850, maybe even close to 8000 but i dont know"

I guess ultimately Josh's win condition is better explained. I feel like Josh was really vague about what he was going for in his speed argument, and Abe like didn't understand what he was trying to get at, but I guess that it isn't well established in what way Hanami is fast other than the raw ability to react, and therefore Mega Man's win condition is better founded. Mega Man Wins.

Josh wins 2-1