It's like people don't read my words or understand the difference im pointing out lmfao.
Like you keep arguing the same shit I agree with. Sure, I agree that swordsmanship requires mastering Haki output. Luffy's DF proficiency also requires this. Both Luffy and Zoro were tought Haki by swordsmen.
What you aren't getting is that Haki output by itself has nothing to do with swordsman proficiency, same thing with Luffy's DF proficiency. Once again you can be the top Haki user in the world, pick up a blade, and be entirely shit at it. Luffy would, for example, lose to Zoro in a situation like this.
Of course, this is not Roger/Rayleigh/Shanks. Could Mihawk beat them in sword fight? Sure, he's the WSS. I can see it. But not one of these men can actually be compared to Mihawk, simply because they carry and fight with a blade. Mihawk never beat Shanks. Mihawk never beat Roger. Mihawk never beat Rayleigh. You say these things as if any of these men either tried to become the WSS or LOST trying to do so. A black blade indicates peak swordsman proficiency, it does not indicate that Mihawk is a stronger haki user than any other top character in this series.
Maybe, like, wait before trying to claim Shanks is anything less than Mihawk at this point, especially considering Shanks has far FAR more presence in the plot compared to Mihawk overall lmao.