Break Week ZKK Wasn't a "Baseless" or "Delusional" Theory
- Thread starter Cinera
- Start date
It was a cope theory.
Some of the more rabid fans like HA01 and Nik were unbearable at some points.
The shifting of the goal posts was always funny though.
Zoro will get last shot in 2 v 1.
Zoro will heal up and go straight to roof top.
Zoro will fight King then go to rooftop.
Zoro will wake up and defeat awakened Kaido over capital after Luffy falls unconscious.
Like most people have said it wouldn't have been to bad if it wasn't for the toxic Zoro fans.
Some of the more rabid fans like HA01 and Nik were unbearable at some points.
The shifting of the goal posts was always funny though.
Zoro will get last shot in 2 v 1.
Zoro will heal up and go straight to roof top.
Zoro will fight King then go to rooftop.
Zoro will wake up and defeat awakened Kaido over capital after Luffy falls unconscious.
Like most people have said it wouldn't have been to bad if it wasn't for the toxic Zoro fans.
The big problem with the ZKK theory is that it became an almost cultist movement.
"ZKK" itself and how many users repeated it mindlessly (still remember Finalbeta spamming that ZKK triptych of covers) pretty much evolved into a political motto; sometimes it felt like by questioning the theory you were questioning the identity of those defending it; and let's not forget that proving it false affected its proponents in quite abnormal ways: HAA01 disappeared out of the blue, Finalbeta had a mental breakdown, Cinera yourself seemingly stopped writing your long essays...; and let's not talk about nik87, the walking Dunning-Kruger effect).
As I said many times, the biggest problem with ZKK is that it stopped being just a theory but became exactly that, a cult almost entirely focused on this forum; I can assure you other forums I'm in had it as a delusion and barely discussed it. Some of the arguments could make sense, but the counterarguments were vastly superior, especially:
1) Having Zoro kill Kaidou above the Flower Capital, probably in a double page similar to that of Ryuma, would feel completely out of place for an author that uses euphemisms for "killing" and more or less portrays his characters as the good guys. Zoro isn't doing something so explicitly gruesome which would also rob Luffy the spotlight; also, it was clear from day one his real versus was King as opposed to Sanji fighting Queen.
2) The narrative behind Kaidou being a dragon to be potentially slayed by the second Ryuma isn't as powerful as the actual narrative behind the character, which was, way before his dragon revelation, that of a depressed man bored of life and looking for a place to die who ultimately decided to wait for Joy Boy. This narrative, which again was more important than Ryuma's, was fulfilled when Joy Boy came back and defeated the sad man with a burst of enjoyment.
That's pretty much it. ZKK shouldn't have been more than your average theory and this is exactly how it was treated outside this forum, but for some reason users here went crazy for it and we all know how it ended.
"ZKK" itself and how many users repeated it mindlessly (still remember Finalbeta spamming that ZKK triptych of covers) pretty much evolved into a political motto; sometimes it felt like by questioning the theory you were questioning the identity of those defending it; and let's not forget that proving it false affected its proponents in quite abnormal ways: HAA01 disappeared out of the blue, Finalbeta had a mental breakdown, Cinera yourself seemingly stopped writing your long essays...; and let's not talk about nik87, the walking Dunning-Kruger effect).
As I said many times, the biggest problem with ZKK is that it stopped being just a theory but became exactly that, a cult almost entirely focused on this forum; I can assure you other forums I'm in had it as a delusion and barely discussed it. Some of the arguments could make sense, but the counterarguments were vastly superior, especially:
1) Having Zoro kill Kaidou above the Flower Capital, probably in a double page similar to that of Ryuma, would feel completely out of place for an author that uses euphemisms for "killing" and more or less portrays his characters as the good guys. Zoro isn't doing something so explicitly gruesome which would also rob Luffy the spotlight; also, it was clear from day one his real versus was King as opposed to Sanji fighting Queen.
2) The narrative behind Kaidou being a dragon to be potentially slayed by the second Ryuma isn't as powerful as the actual narrative behind the character, which was, way before his dragon revelation, that of a depressed man bored of life and looking for a place to die who ultimately decided to wait for Joy Boy. This narrative, which again was more important than Ryuma's, was fulfilled when Joy Boy came back and defeated the sad man with a burst of enjoyment.
That's pretty much it. ZKK shouldn't have been more than your average theory and this is exactly how it was treated outside this forum, but for some reason users here went crazy for it and we all know how it ended.
You said "that" would be losing and I don't understand in context. What would be losing which aspect? I said Luffy would lose the battle but not the fight, same as Oden did. Most people saw the climax of the arc drawing parallels with the story of Oden in one way or another, such as how Kaido kept going on about how he wished a samurai was strong enough to kill him. The problem a lot of us had tbf was biting on clues that Oda didn't actually plant, but the result is a lot of stuff happened with no real follow up in the story.
Like on a completely different note we're told CP0 guy was written off as a sacrifice and then maybe he kinda sorta survived. Like why bother with that whole plot then lol
2. A "mugi god guy" is exactly who killed Kaido. Indirect or direct again, doesn't matter. That's not a legal defense and if someone in the story says that Luffy killed Kaido, he's not gonna sit there and split hairs.
Like on a completely different note we're told CP0 guy was written off as a sacrifice and then maybe he kinda sorta survived. Like why bother with that whole plot then lol
2. A "mugi god guy" is exactly who killed Kaido. Indirect or direct again, doesn't matter. That's not a legal defense and if someone in the story says that Luffy killed Kaido, he's not gonna sit there and split hairs.
1. That would have been losing, that's the context. If Kaido was standing in the end and Luffy did not, that would be losing. All the rest is just trying to cope with that.
Kaido himself KOed Luffy, but still lost because, as I said, the only winner is the one who remains last.
And the first Emperor to fall was always going to per defeated (truly and permanently) by Luffy;
2. That's merely your opinion, which, sorry to say, is not the point here.
I stated facts, not opinions: mugi don't kill directly, they don't crush the skull, they don't cut throats, they don't kill directly. Whether you like it or not that distinction, is not my concern or ours. This is just how things are.
So, having a mugi killing a person like a villain, like a cold blood murderer, was never a thing.
Kaido himself KOed Luffy, but still lost because, as I said, the only winner is the one who remains last.
And the first Emperor to fall was always going to per defeated (truly and permanently) by Luffy;
2. That's merely your opinion, which, sorry to say, is not the point here.
I stated facts, not opinions: mugi don't kill directly, they don't crush the skull, they don't cut throats, they don't kill directly. Whether you like it or not that distinction, is not my concern or ours. This is just how things are.
So, having a mugi killing a person like a villain, like a cold blood murderer, was never a thing.
Everyone who got up when Luffy was still out in the cold fighting 1vs1 has beaten Luffy.
And no, again. Trying to apply real law and what a court of justice would say is a sorry move. Pretty objective lol.
We are in a manga about pirates, and as I already said the protagonist did beat people, but not kill them directly . That, again, is not an opinion, just a fact.
And no, again. Trying to apply real law and what a court of justice would say is a sorry move. Pretty objective lol.
We are in a manga about pirates, and as I already said the protagonist did beat people, but not kill them directly . That, again, is not an opinion, just a fact.
Therapy thread for the anti-ZKK victims 
. It's like ZKK kept u guys up at night in a panic, the way some of you mfs are talking about it.
Relax it was the best OP theory ever made, too bad kamikaze Loda was just too pussy to go through with it. Gave us lava flame dragon instead as compensation
. It's like ZKK kept u guys up at night in a panic, the way some of you mfs are talking about it.Relax it was the best OP theory ever made, too bad kamikaze Loda was just too pussy to go through with it. Gave us lava flame dragon instead as compensation
Last edited:
If it was different, you'd explain how. Luffy was "out in the cold" when Krieg was up, Sanji saved Luffy and Gin stopped Krieg. Unless you can actually explain the contradiction, there isn't one on my end.
There's also no unconditional precedent in fiction. You don't assume that conventions don't hold up, they're established by the writer. For example until the author says starvation is impossible you would assume it's possible in the story, until the author says ____ isn't against the law you'd assume it is, etc. Oda doesn't bother to specify the difference between killing Kaido vs letting him die, so you're jumping through your own hoops.
There's also no unconditional precedent in fiction. You don't assume that conventions don't hold up, they're established by the writer. For example until the author says starvation is impossible you would assume it's possible in the story, until the author says ____ isn't against the law you'd assume it is, etc. Oda doesn't bother to specify the difference between killing Kaido vs letting him die, so you're jumping through your own hoops.
Honestly, I don't remember clearly the dynamic and maybe I'll read the fight again, but quoting a battle that happened 1000 chapters back in time does not change the fact that: for 1vs1 purposes the last man standing Is the winner.
Simple as that, and always has been. It was literally how the fight with Katakuri ended or how the one with Lucci ended.
And as far as killing goes, that is also a question of your moral compass, but I am merely stating what happened: Luffy or Zoro or Sanji never killed an enemy of theirs directly. As I said, they never shot to death someone like Kaido or make a hole in them like Akainu, they never crushed the skull of someone or cut their throats.
It is not like agreeing or not, it has never happened because they are the "good guys".
Simple as that, and always has been. It was literally how the fight with Katakuri ended or how the one with Lucci ended.
And as far as killing goes, that is also a question of your moral compass, but I am merely stating what happened: Luffy or Zoro or Sanji never killed an enemy of theirs directly. As I said, they never shot to death someone like Kaido or make a hole in them like Akainu, they never crushed the skull of someone or cut their throats.
It is not like agreeing or not, it has never happened because they are the "good guys".
What cope? Are you gonna tell me the fact King is using an attack with a dragon form is a cope ? Or maybe Kaido using also a magma form at the end is a cope?
Or the fact Ryuma's anime adaptation has the title of "Dragon Damnation" ?
A compensation prize ? Exactly what I said. Oda made that because Zkk wasn't going to happen.
Or the fact Ryuma's anime adaptation has the title of "Dragon Damnation" ?
A compensation prize ? Exactly what I said. Oda made that because Zkk wasn't going to happen.