Worstgen
Cinera
Shanks and him were equals while Shanks had two arms. Shanks sacrificed some of his potential for Luffy.
Natalija
It’s unfounded to say that Shanks hasn’t grown stronger without his arm. The fact that Mihawk is a prideful gentleman to fight a guy he respects because of one arm doesn’t mean Shanks can’t put up a same or better fight. I wouldn’t feel good about a match against a one armed tennis player either.
Natalija
Okay, fair enough.
Cinera
He had to adapt his swordsmanship to his other arm, and that would have weakened him at the time and slowed down his growth in combat ability.
Cinera
2 armed Shanks >= Mihawk (he was younger and a bearer of the Strawhat so he may have had more potential) > 1 Shanks.
Natalija
I think he’s grown stronger and managed to make up for his missing arm, he’s no joke
Natalija
Hahaha but that would be a pure storytelling flaw then: since Luffy mirrors Shanks and Zoro mirrors Mihawk, the first has to be stronger than the second
Cinera
I think he's stronger than when he lost his arm. I also think he's weaker than he would have been had he not lost his arm. Losing your dominant arm as a swordsman is a huge deal.
Natalija
In reality 100%. In manga, since Oda is setting up Shanks as Luffy’s idol; no. He has to be stronger than before
Cinera
I don't agree with the Luffy mirrors Shanks arguments. Shanks isn't Luffy's goal, it's Roger. It's Roger that could hear the voice of all things. Roger that became the Pirate King. It's Roger that Luffy needs to surpass not Shanks.
Natalija
Goal and idol are two different terms, dear ;) he wants to be pirate king but wants to surpass and prove himself to his idol: Shanks
Cinera
I also think Shanks sacrificing some of his potential makes thematic fit. He bet his arm on the new generation, _sacrificed_ it for Luffy. If Shanks is exactly as strong as he was had he counterfactually not sacrificed his arm, then there was no sacrifice at all.
Cinera
A sacrifice implies forsaking something. What you're suggesting is that Shanks didn't forsake anything. He didn't actually lose anything. He didn't make any sacrifice.
Cinera
I think this really cheapens Shanks sacrifice at the beginning of the story and undermined his character.
Natalija
Yes. Definitely.
But as you said, he is probably stronger than his old self either way. Which for me is a good enough reason to give him a perfectly fair benefit of the doubt against Mihawk
But as you said, he is probably stronger than his old self either way. Which for me is a good enough reason to give him a perfectly fair benefit of the doubt against Mihawk
Cinera
I think Shanks giving Luffy the Strawhat further alludes to his sacrifice. He was sacrificing his potential and relinquishing his claim to the Pirate King throne.
Cinera
Well Mihawk is also substantially stronger than the Mihawk that fought Shanks. Both of them grew over the 12 years, it seems to me that Mihawk has to have grown more.
Cinera
Finally, Mihawk isn't Zoro's idol. Mihawk never inspired Zoro. Zoro had no personal connection to Mihawk. He simply wanted to become the World's Strongest Swordsman, so as the current wielder of the title, Mihawk was Zoro's target.
Cinera
Mihawk is Zoro's Roger not his Shanks. Zoro doesn't really have a Shanks analogue (the closest would be Kuina).