its as simple as that. If you use a sword, you are a swordsman. If you don't use a sword, you are not a swordsman. This isn't up for debate, it is the literal definition of the word "swordsman."
Yet, apparently, this is a somewhat controversial statement in the fandom. Because apparently there is some sort of distinction between "real swordsmen" and "fake swordsmen". According to some fans, the real world definition of a swordsman does not apply to the world of one piece and that for some reason, Oda came up with his own fake definition of this word that governs the series.
This is ultimately nonsense. Throughout the series, there has been no distinction between swordsmen in which swordsmen who use DFs, or some other style of fighting , are considered less of a swordsman. And if not for the existence of two characters, nobody would claim that such a distinction exists.
The only reason people make the absurd claim that people who use swords are not swordsmen is due to the existence of Zoro and Mihawk. Any attempt to make a distinction between "fake swordsmen" and "real swordsmen" by fans is almost always an attempt to, in most cases, downplay the powerlevel of Mihawk and EoS zoro.
Keep in mind that when fans denote a character as a "fake swordsman" they are almost never talking about characters who almost never use swords, nor are they talking about characters like Luffy, who have been shown wielding a sword but have shown zero swordsmanship skills. Rather, they refer to characters who by feats, are actually some of the strongest swordsmen in the verse, characters who have insane swordsmanship feats.
Specifically, I see see controversy over whether or not Big Mom and Kizaru are swordsmen. Let me break it down.
Ikoku is one of the strongest swordsman feats we have seen in the series. In fact it is so strong that the only character who has ever done something better was mihawk himself. Like seriously, this is a slash that goes through the seducing woods, through a fucking mountain, and then creates a tsunami on the way out. How can Big Mom not be a swordsman if she is stronger than 99% of swordsman with her sword alone?
what's more is that she has a defined swordsmanship style. She uses the same style of swordsmanship as the giants of elbaf. She isn't recklessly swinging her sword around, like I heard some fans claim she would when Napoleon was first revealed to be a sword, no she uses an actual style of swordsmanship.
furthermore, not only is Ikoku one of the strongest swordsmanship feats we have seen, it is one of the strongest moves big mom has ever shown. I've seen some people claim that her powerlevel might not be effected if she didn't have her sword. This is blatantly false as she'd lose access to a big source of AoE and DC. She'd still be top tier, but that's only because big mom is so overpowered that even when she is utterly nerfed, she can still neg diff a yonko commander like queen.
Lets not forget that with her sword, she was able to clash on par with Kaido's club, the same club that 1 shotted G4 Luffy. Again, so called "true swordsman" zoro would have been 1 shot if he was in big mom's place.
Now for Kizaru
Similar to big mom, Kizaru used a named sword technique, ama no murakumo. While Kizaru does have other techniques, Rayleigh is the strongest person Kizaru has ever 1v1ed. In this fight, he chose not to use any of his kicks or his laser beams but rather used Ama no murakumo. This at least implies that Ama no murakumo is one of his strongest techniques and that he has exceptional swordsmanship.
Rayleigh is one of the strongest swordsmen in the verse, boasting the rare internal destruction CoA as well as barrier CoA. Only someone who is likewise an expert at swordsmanship could ever clash on par with him.
similarly, it doesn't make sense for Kizaru not to be a swordsman when he showed better feats than 99% of swordsmen.
Ultimately, anyone who uses a sword is a swordsman. The reason for this is simple, it is the basic definition of the word.
Yet, apparently, this is a somewhat controversial statement in the fandom. Because apparently there is some sort of distinction between "real swordsmen" and "fake swordsmen". According to some fans, the real world definition of a swordsman does not apply to the world of one piece and that for some reason, Oda came up with his own fake definition of this word that governs the series.
This is ultimately nonsense. Throughout the series, there has been no distinction between swordsmen in which swordsmen who use DFs, or some other style of fighting , are considered less of a swordsman. And if not for the existence of two characters, nobody would claim that such a distinction exists.
The only reason people make the absurd claim that people who use swords are not swordsmen is due to the existence of Zoro and Mihawk. Any attempt to make a distinction between "fake swordsmen" and "real swordsmen" by fans is almost always an attempt to, in most cases, downplay the powerlevel of Mihawk and EoS zoro.
Keep in mind that when fans denote a character as a "fake swordsman" they are almost never talking about characters who almost never use swords, nor are they talking about characters like Luffy, who have been shown wielding a sword but have shown zero swordsmanship skills. Rather, they refer to characters who by feats, are actually some of the strongest swordsmen in the verse, characters who have insane swordsmanship feats.
Specifically, I see see controversy over whether or not Big Mom and Kizaru are swordsmen. Let me break it down.
Ikoku is one of the strongest swordsman feats we have seen in the series. In fact it is so strong that the only character who has ever done something better was mihawk himself. Like seriously, this is a slash that goes through the seducing woods, through a fucking mountain, and then creates a tsunami on the way out. How can Big Mom not be a swordsman if she is stronger than 99% of swordsman with her sword alone?
what's more is that she has a defined swordsmanship style. She uses the same style of swordsmanship as the giants of elbaf. She isn't recklessly swinging her sword around, like I heard some fans claim she would when Napoleon was first revealed to be a sword, no she uses an actual style of swordsmanship.
furthermore, not only is Ikoku one of the strongest swordsmanship feats we have seen, it is one of the strongest moves big mom has ever shown. I've seen some people claim that her powerlevel might not be effected if she didn't have her sword. This is blatantly false as she'd lose access to a big source of AoE and DC. She'd still be top tier, but that's only because big mom is so overpowered that even when she is utterly nerfed, she can still neg diff a yonko commander like queen.
Lets not forget that with her sword, she was able to clash on par with Kaido's club, the same club that 1 shotted G4 Luffy. Again, so called "true swordsman" zoro would have been 1 shot if he was in big mom's place.
Now for Kizaru
Similar to big mom, Kizaru used a named sword technique, ama no murakumo. While Kizaru does have other techniques, Rayleigh is the strongest person Kizaru has ever 1v1ed. In this fight, he chose not to use any of his kicks or his laser beams but rather used Ama no murakumo. This at least implies that Ama no murakumo is one of his strongest techniques and that he has exceptional swordsmanship.
Rayleigh is one of the strongest swordsmen in the verse, boasting the rare internal destruction CoA as well as barrier CoA. Only someone who is likewise an expert at swordsmanship could ever clash on par with him.
similarly, it doesn't make sense for Kizaru not to be a swordsman when he showed better feats than 99% of swordsmen.
Ultimately, anyone who uses a sword is a swordsman. The reason for this is simple, it is the basic definition of the word.
