its cannot be taken into account when skill in swordsmanship is being considered.. definitely not
ik but its is a separate skill from his way of blade.. which is my point
Always been Shanks ~ Mihawk for me
don't mind Mihawk > Shanks its just it cannot be proven as it stands and i don't think the marines's have much substance to what they are claiming... and if we break it down you have massive holes.. and false premises for this who claim Mihawk > Shanks
its either that what navy claims takes only skill into account or not, even if it does with that if we assume that Shanks just uses his swords and nothing else.. its hard to say Mihawk or Shanks are superior to each other as there is over a decade long drought since their confrontations.. and we have none novel ones or even recent accounts of them clashing and either of the seeming to inferior..
to paraphrase.. Mihawk's diametric superiority cannot be proven
but i don't disagree with the notion that he's around (above or below) Shank's caliber
ik but its is a separate skill from his way of blade.. which is my point
Always been Shanks ~ Mihawk for me
don't mind Mihawk > Shanks its just it cannot be proven as it stands and i don't think the marines's have much substance to what they are claiming... and if we break it down you have massive holes.. and false premises for this who claim Mihawk > Shanks
its either that what navy claims takes only skill into account or not, even if it does with that if we assume that Shanks just uses his swords and nothing else.. its hard to say Mihawk or Shanks are superior to each other as there is over a decade long drought since their confrontations.. and we have none novel ones or even recent accounts of them clashing and either of the seeming to inferior..
to paraphrase.. Mihawk's diametric superiority cannot be proven
but i don't disagree with the notion that he's around (above or below) Shank's caliber