Chapter Discussion Luffy was Knocked out before Zoro. This proves that Zoro's endurance is superior to Luffy's.

ZenZu

The only one who can beat me is me
.
That's the thing though, I haven't ignored those factors. I've stated them in this very thread.
In addition, I've also stated, it being a block vs a clean hit us irrelevant in itself because what is used to measure Endurance is damage taken.

So; did Zoro take more damage in blocking Hakai than Luffy did in getting cleanly hit bey Ragnarok and vice versa?
That's the entire point of the thread and it is very simple.

If you think Zoro took less damage then you can argue that Luffy has the better endurance, if otherwise then Zoro has the better endurance.

Nowhere have I compared the two to mean an equivalent situation. I've provided, as we all know, that Zoro only momentarily blocked the attack.
Claiming that those two situations can't be compared in determining endurance is completely false since endurance is dependent on damage
Not only did you compare them, you used Luffy getting knocked out in a completely different situation and Zoro not getting knocked out in a completely different situation as "proof," and keep running to the oversimplification of damage taken.

I've been pretty clear here. Damage taken is not the sole factor for determining if a person gets KOd or can keep fighting. You're just making me repeat the same thing in different ways. (AKA Zoro pulling off the hakai feat doesn't guarantee he doesn't get KOd by a clean hit by Ragnarok)

You saying you've never claimed the situations were equivalent, is irrelevant. Idk why you keep repeating that like it justifies this thread or addresses anything I've said.
 
After you were corrected so your entire argument is worthless
One wrong notion doesn't throw away an entire argument. That's a fallacy
Post automatically merged:

Ragnarok doesn't even begin to compare to Hakai, AdCoA or not.

Zoro didn't even get Ko'd by Thunder Bagua last we saw him. He was still convulsing from the strike. We'll have to wait for the next time we see Zoro, but Zoro may not even be out cold.

FWI I love when people jump on one possible error thinking that'll win the whole argument. Histarics I tells ya.
 
Last edited:
Luffy was put to rest a little bit but he was not highly injured neither he needs time to recover, especially Kiado told every one that Luffy still glaring at him. Luffy is unconscious for a bit but his haki is still threatening Kaido. and was only merely a minute till he gained his consciousness again and is stronger than ever.
 
Not only did you compare them, you used Luffy getting knocked out in a completely different situation and Zoro not getting knocked out in a completely different situation as "proof," and keep running to the oversimplification of damage taken.

I've been pretty clear here. Damage taken is not the sole factor for determining if a person gets KOd or can keep fighting. You're just making me repeat the same thing in different ways. (AKA Zoro pulling off the hakai feat doesn't guarantee he doesn't get KOd by a clean hit by Ragnarok)

You saying you've never claimed the situations were equivalent, is irrelevant. Idk why you keep repeating that like it justifies this thread or addresses anything I've said.
Which it is proof because like I said one was still fighting with all his bones broken, meaning he took the most damage which you have already agreed with.
What is the oversimplification here? I've already provided that Zoro only blocked it momentarily and I've acknowledged that Luffy took the hit cleanly.
What I've said is that those situations are inconsequential in determining who has the higher Endurance because it is damage which determines endurance

Damage taken is the sole indicator when two people take an attack which they are fully aware of leading to only one being able to keep fighting.
You can argue that Zoro wouldn't be able to take Ragnarok without getting knocked out but the burden of proof will be on you.


It is relevant when you imply that I am comparing two things which can't be compared and equating them.
If I was comparing Kidd taking Big Mom's punches to Luffy's Ragnarok and concluding that Kidd had the highest endurance, what would be the obvious counter?
It would be that Ragnarok is far superior to that nameless punch and does more damage.

Post automatically merged:

He didn't take a full Haikai though, just a moment of it before being saved by Law.
That is something we all know.
He took the full hit momentarily
 
Last edited:
Not only did you compare them, you used Luffy getting knocked out in a completely different situation and Zoro not getting knocked out in a completely different situation as "proof," and keep running to the oversimplification of damage taken.

I've been pretty clear here. Damage taken is not the sole factor for determining if a person gets KOd or can keep fighting. You're just making me repeat the same thing in different ways. (AKA Zoro pulling off the hakai feat doesn't guarantee he doesn't get KOd by a clean hit by Ragnarok)

You saying you've never claimed the situations were equivalent, is irrelevant. Idk why you keep repeating that like it justifies this thread or addresses anything I've said.
Hakkai himself mean coquering the sea (of course there is CoC there), The point is how in the world can you put Hakkai with Ragnarock.
Oda clearly said from Luffy this is a big One, I ve no doubt that this attack cant be compare to anything Kaido will used just because is a duo combo with full Yonko Power (they are channelling the attack before they launched) Kaido@Big Mom they prepare that stance to lunch this attack.

As for what we saw now, Hakkai got stop for a moment by Zoro himself (kid said thank for bloking the attack even if it his for a moment).

Zoro was hit fair in square by that blast.

Ragnarock hit fair and square Luffy.

The point @Geo is saying is that:

Zoro that got hit by Hakkai (which is the strongest attack that we saw so far let say in this arc) wasnt enough to KO Zoro. I repeat Kid said: <<Thank you for blocking even if it is for a moment) >> To block something even for a moment mean you have to resist and not get crush when you block the action which Zoro did.

In Luffy case, we have Ragnarock that connected with Luffy body. Luffy was KO at the start of the fight.

I know that you are saying that Ragnarock has CoC which Hakkai doesnt so you cant compare the 2 because Zoro would have being KO too?

I am not sure, If Zoro is able to survive (even for a short moment) a way stronger attack why should I accept that Ragnarock would have KO Zoro?

You gona say, but Zoro got KO with thunder bagua in this chapter, well I gona say that Zoro didnt have any energy left + previous hakkai dmg.

In any case, both are endurance monster, but Zoro is more tanky than Luffy.

Oda could have made Luffy <the endurance monster> by puttimg him in front of Hakkai which he didnt. I mean Luffy call this is a big One yet didnt do a shit to block it.. Oda used Zoro there, a valid reason is? Well Zoro is a pure endurance monster (which is something that we already knew from previous arcs).
 
Last edited:

ZenZu

The only one who can beat me is me
.
Ragnarock hit fair and square Luffy.
Correct

Zoro was hit fair in square by that blast.
And that's where your post should have ended. As it literally didn't.



You can argue that Zoro wouldn't be able to take Ragnarok without getting knocked out but the burden of proof will be on you.
I'm not making that claim, you're essentially making the inverse of that claim.

Burden of proof lies on you. Not me.
 
Top