teach is technically part of the Worst Generation even though he's 40 and a year older than Shanks. He just laid low until the right time.
Teach is part of the Worst Generation simply coz he laid low and came into prominence at the same time they did.
Doesn't really change the fact that he's technically part of Shanks Generation and he's far from being young blood.
Regardless, that isn't the point I'm trying to make.
The person I'm quoting seems to think the "New Gen > Old Gen" so of course Shanks loses to Kidd but is picking and choosing who to include in that "Old Gen" category. If the New Gen > Old Gen argument is so full proof then logically speaking Teach and IM would lose to Kidd and Law too no?
By the way I completely understand, why he exempts those two except I also think Shanks should be exempted for the same exact reason. I'm simply pointing out that his "New Gen > Old Gen" argument is flawed.