Kenton Stark Posted February 9, 2016 Share Posted February 9, 2016 I didn't want to side track another poster's thread, so I started a new one. James Steller started a post about the best fighters in Westeros. Great topic but a lot of the lists are arbitrary and very subjective. So I started a list with the fighters given a specific grade. Now I understand the grade is just MHO , but I think I can at least somewhat objectively justify the grade I gave each fighter. Would love to see others thoughts. Feel free to add someone I missed, disagree with my grades, question my rationale, etc. I'm looking forward to hearing what everyone thinks. Arthur Dayne- 98 Gerold Hightower-88 Daemon Blackfyre-96 Aemon the Dragonknight- 96 Daemon Targ- 93 Bittersteel- 92 Fireball--92 Bloodraven- 88 Baelor Breakspear- 92 Duncan the Tall-95 Barristan Selmy- 98 Young Robert Baretheon- 94 Jaime Lannister- 95 Garlan Tyrell- 94 Great Jon- 94 Rhaegar - 88 Loras Tyrell- 93 Halfhand- 90 Mance- 93 Oberyn- 95 Mountain-95 Hound-95 Victorian-90 Andrik- 90 Dagmer- 85 Jorah- 85 Brienne- 93 Blackfish-92 Strongboar- 93 Daemon Sand-87 Roland Storm-88 Iron Emmett-84 Gerold Dayne-75 Balon Swann-92 Areo Hotah- 91 Bronn-86 Lyn Corbray-86 Guy Morrigan-85 Bryce Caron- 85 Phillip Foote-85 Bronze Yohn-92 Robar Royce-85 Arys oakheart- 85 Nute the Barber-80 Hosteen Frey- 81 Black Walder-80 Theon-78 Adam Marbrand- 81 Daven Lannister-78 Jon Snow- 85( could go 92 if matures into promise) Jason Mallister-87 Beric Dondarrion- 86 Thoros-86 Lem-85 Jory Cassel-84 Brandon Stark -92 (Ned's brother) Tormound-85 Asha Greyjoy-76 Donal Noye -78 Ned Stark- 84 Archibald Yronwood,-87 Strong Belwas-92 Khal Drogo-93 Syrio Forel.-93 Daario Naharis-87 Lancel Lannister-70 Trant-75 Blount 65 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moonshield Posted February 10, 2016 Share Posted February 10, 2016 If everyone is a 90, no one is a 90 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Artos Cold Posted February 10, 2016 Share Posted February 10, 2016 What-I dont-I dont understand these grades! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kenton Stark Posted February 10, 2016 Author Share Posted February 10, 2016 The grades are simply my thoughts. If 100 is perfect and 75 is average, then how do all the fighters fall in that scale. Dayne and Selmy are the closest to 100. Everyone is ranked on that reference point. Sorry if its confusing. Think of Madden "overall player rating". Manning, Brady, Montana, Payton, Barry Sanders, Butkus, Jim Brown would all be a 98-99. A hall of fame player like Lynn Swann might be a 94. A 2 X all pro might be a 90. A 3 X Pro bowler might be a 85. A 10 year starter might be an 80 and 1-2 pro bowls would be an 80. A 7 yr starter that never made the pro bowl would be a 75. A sometime starter, long time player would be a 70. Does that clarify it a little? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laughing Storm Reborn Posted February 10, 2016 Share Posted February 10, 2016 I've seen A LOT worse "grades" given OP... But Prime Robert imo, by feats, author and characters comments/quotes is in no way inferior to anyone in Asoiaf... in your grade system, again imo, he (prime self) is between 98 and 100 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VeryLittleGravitasIndeed Posted February 10, 2016 Share Posted February 10, 2016 75 can hardly be considered an average in a 1-100 scale. Secondly the scale is way too clumped up. The Strongboar or Brienne aren't just ever so slightly worse than the Hound or Jaime - they'd fare considerably worse in a fight on equal grounds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bloodofthedragon1995 Posted February 10, 2016 Share Posted February 10, 2016 47 minutes ago, Kenton Stark said: The grades are simply my thoughts. If 100 is perfect and 75 is average, then how do all the fighters fall in that scale. Dayne and Selmy are the closest to 100. Everyone is ranked on that reference point. Sorry if its confusing. Think of Madden "overall player rating". Manning, Brady, Montana, Payton, Barry Sanders, Butkus, Jim Brown would all be a 98-99. A hall of fame player like Lynn Swann might be a 94. A 2 X all pro might be a 90. A 3 X Pro bowler might be a 85. A 10 year starter might be an 80 and 1-2 pro bowls would be an 80. A 7 yr starter that never made the pro bowl would be a 75. A sometime starter, long time player would be a 70. Does that clarify it a little? No this has made it more confusing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kenton Stark Posted February 10, 2016 Author Share Posted February 10, 2016 40 minutes ago, Laughing Storm Reborn said: I've seen A LOT worse "grades" given OP... But Prime Robert imo, by feats, author and characters comments/quotes is in no way inferior to anyone in Asoiaf... in your grade system, again imo, he (prime self) is between 98 and 100 Thanks for the feedback. My rationale was GRRM quote that Dayne and Semly were basically even and Dayne with Dawn was the best. Robert is often compared to The laughing Storm and Duncan beat him one on one. IMHO, a 94 could beat a 95 or 96, 4 out of 10 times. Certainly not written in stone Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kenton Stark Posted February 10, 2016 Author Share Posted February 10, 2016 27 minutes ago, VeryLittleGravitasIndeed said: 75 can hardly be considered an average in a 1-100 scale. Secondly the scale is way too clumped up. The Strongboar or Brienne aren't just ever so slightly worse than the Hound or Jaime - they'd fare considerably worse in a fight on equal grounds. I was thinking 75 as average of the more elite fighters in Westeros not compared to the common fighter. I don't necessarily disagree with you, about Strongboar and Brienne compared to Jamie and the Hound. But my thoughts were, Loras beat Jamie, Brienne beat Loras. Again that was just one specific event and in a fight anything can happen, but it was objective information to justify my thoughts. Probably could take Strongboar down a number or two, but I was remembering somewhere in the text that Strongboar was thought by Jamie to be one of the 7K best fighters after himself and the Cleganes. The scale may be a little clumped up but again in a fight anything can happen , especially between two skilled fighters. Example Ali at 97 Frazier at 96. Ali wins 2-1 Tyson (in Prime) at 97 Buster Douglas at 80- Buster pulls off the Upset. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Prince of Magpies Posted February 10, 2016 Share Posted February 10, 2016 I appreciate the effort you put into developing these grades, Kenton, but I think the premise is flawed. Barristan Selmy himself ruminates on the myriad tiny factors that can determine a fight or joust. If Arthur Dane slips on a root during his fight with the Smiling Knight and is killed, does that mean the Smiling Knight is the best fighter in Westerosi history? Some would call such a situation bad luck, but others would claim it's evidence of the Smiling Knight's superior footwork and reflexes. Also, judging fighting ability isn't assessing a level playing field. Robert killed Rhaegar on the Trident with his hammer in the midst of a huge battle, but would the Dragon Prince have bested him if they fought 1v1 with swords in a Trial by Combat situation? If we accept that Jaime's months in captivity hindered his abilities to the extent that he couldn't defeat Brienne in aSoS, we must also concede there are any number of small day-to-day factors that could positively or negatively impact on a fighter's abilities in a huge variety of ways. You allude to the flaw yourself when you say that " a 94 could beat a 95 or 96, 4 out of 10 times." The thing about fighting is, they won't get 10 times, the loser is usually killed after the first one, leaving us to wonder how big a role luck or skill played. In sports in our world, we can judge what teams are better by looking at the final results of the league table: Team A finished 2nd with 78 points while Team B finished 4th with 71 points. They both played the same teams over the same period of time, ergo Team A is better. We don't get the opportunity for such a rational assessment when most fighters won't get a second chance, or even if they do, the conditions of their fights vary so much as to undermine the value of comparing them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ashur Posted February 10, 2016 Share Posted February 10, 2016 Hey guys, this is not FIFA. I'm a fan of rankings, but trying give each fighter a percentile is too much. Grouping them into categories would be a bit more realistic. I don't know, something like A+ (Arthur Dayne, Daemon Blackfyre, etc... ), A (Rhaegar, Robert, Ned, Barristan Selmy, etc), B+(Jason Mallister, Ballon Swann, etc.), B(Archie Yronwood, Thoros de Myr, etc), C+ (....). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ashur Posted February 10, 2016 Share Posted February 10, 2016 45 minutes ago, The Prince of Magpies said: You allude to the flaw yourself when you say that " a 94 could beat a 95 or 96, 4 out of 10 times." The thing about fighting is, they won't get 10 times, the loser is usually killed after the first one, leaving us to wonder how big a role luck or skill played. You got it absolutely right. At very high level, and lacking the statistics that we have in modern sports, is almost impossible to make tight measurements like X is just 2 above Y. PS: sorry for double-posting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VeryLittleGravitasIndeed Posted February 10, 2016 Share Posted February 10, 2016 2 hours ago, Kenton Stark said: I was thinking 75 as average of the more elite fighters in Westeros not compared to the common fighter. I don't necessarily disagree with you, about Strongboar and Brienne compared to Jamie and the Hound. But my thoughts were, Loras beat Jamie, Brienne beat Loras. Again that was just one specific event and in a fight anything can happen, but it was objective information to justify my thoughts. Probably could take Strongboar down a number or two, but I was remembering somewhere in the text that Strongboar was thought by Jamie to be one of the 7K best fighters after himself and the Cleganes. The scale may be a little clumped up but again in a fight anything can happen , especially between two skilled fighters. Example Ali at 97 Frazier at 96. Ali wins 2-1 Tyson (in Prime) at 97 Buster Douglas at 80- Buster pulls off the Upset. Loras beat Jaime at jousting, Brienne beat Loras at melee. Brienne herself thinks starved, shackled, unarmored Jaime was the toughest fight in her life. That speaks of a massive skill difference. Jaime thinks the Strongboar is one of the biggest, strongest men in Westeros but he doesn't rate him anywhere near the Hound. Basically the methodology is faulty. Yeah anything can happen between fighters of close enough level of skill but the difference between the top 10 and somewhere between 100-200 is very large. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nyrhex Posted February 10, 2016 Share Posted February 10, 2016 99% of these lists is just how the fan sees the character. I've seen people place clear top tier fighters in the shit category because they don't like them, and clear average/poor fighters were ranked high because fans liked them and wanted to pretend that with proper mental gymnastics it means that they are great. No, not every character that the auther throws in as a badass is capable of going into a fight with a clear top tier fighter and survive more than a few seconds. No, there isn't a single person in the Night's Watch or the North that deserves to be ranked with the top tiers. Not the Halfhand, not any of his team, not Jon Snow (young or "older and with more XP), not Mance, not anyone, period. They are top tier fighters in thier own back yard by comparison, not in the rest of Westeros. No, Blount being an ass is not a reason for him to not be a good fighter. I get why people would rank him low now, when the auther goes that extra mile to make sure we get that the KG is rotting and the guy is eating whatever a child fancies to eat every 5 minutes because he is a Butt Monkey joke, but there is no reason to rank others in thier prime and not do the same for him. He would not be considered for the KG if he was not a good fighter, so people putting him in "average" or "below average" is baseless and stems from hate for the character. Bronn is not one of the finest fighters. The auther going out of his way to find excused why he can survive (going against a knight that is loaded with "too much armor" and other nonesense) fights because of a theme does not make him able to go to fight top tier fighters in any reasonable scenario and live. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sullen Posted February 10, 2016 Share Posted February 10, 2016 Most of those are way too high. 22 hours ago, Kenton Stark said: I didn't want to side track another poster's thread, so I started a new one. James Steller started a post about the best fighters in Westeros. Great topic but a lot of the lists are arbitrary and very subjective. So I started a list with the fighters given a specific grade. Now I understand the grade is just MHO , but I think I can at least somewhat objectively justify the grade I gave each fighter. Would love to see others thoughts. Feel free to add someone I missed, disagree with my grades, question my rationale, etc. I'm looking forward to hearing what everyone thinks. Arthur Dayne- 98 Gerold Hightower-88 Daemon Blackfyre-96 Aemon the Dragonknight- 96 Daemon Targ- 93 Bittersteel- 92 Fireball--92 Bloodraven- 88 Baelor Breakspear- 92 Duncan the Tall-95 Barristan Selmy- 98 Young Robert Baretheon- 94 Jaime Lannister- 95 Garlan Tyrell- 94 Great Jon- 94 Rhaegar - 88 Loras Tyrell- 93 Halfhand- 90 Mance- 93 Oberyn- 95 Mountain-95 Hound-95 Victorian-90 Andrik- 90 Dagmer- 85 Jorah- 85 Brienne- 93 Blackfish-92 Strongboar- 93 Daemon Sand-87 Roland Storm-88 Iron Emmett-84 Gerold Dayne-75 Balon Swann-92 Areo Hotah- 91 Bronn-86 Lyn Corbray-86 Guy Morrigan-85 Bryce Caron- 85 Phillip Foote-85 Bronze Yohn-92 Robar Royce-85 Arys oakheart- 85 Nute the Barber-80 Hosteen Frey- 81 Black Walder-80 Theon-78 Adam Marbrand- 81 Daven Lannister-78 Jon Snow- 85( could go 92 if matures into promise) Jason Mallister-87 Beric Dondarrion- 86 Thoros-86 Lem-85 Jory Cassel-84 Brandon Stark -92 (Ned's brother) Tormound-85 Asha Greyjoy-76 Donal Noye -78 Ned Stark- 84 Archibald Yronwood,-87 Strong Belwas-92 Khal Drogo-93 Syrio Forel.-93 Daario Naharis-87 Lancel Lannister-70 Trant-75 Blount 65 The bolded ones don't belong anyway near the 90s mark for instance, which is, I think, reserved to those whose abilities were considered legendary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Makk Posted February 10, 2016 Share Posted February 10, 2016 It's a work of fiction given by unreliable narrators. There is no such thing as an objective grading system because there have only been less than 10 duels between about 50 main characters. It is slightly ironic that out of those duels, where you can try to be objective, you have Brienne lower than Jaime and Loras (yes, yes, there are exonerating reasons excuses for that) despite beating them both. These topics can be fun, but they are never objective. As an aside I think most people dramatically overrate Loras Tyrell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobOsevens Posted February 10, 2016 Share Posted February 10, 2016 1 hour ago, Nyrhex said: 99% of these lists is just how the fan sees the character. I've seen people place clear top tier fighters in the shit category because they don't like them, and clear average/poor fighters were ranked high because fans liked them and wanted to pretend that with proper mental gymnastics it means that they are great. Exactly and just because this list uses numbers doesn't mean that it is objective. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Lannister Posted February 10, 2016 Share Posted February 10, 2016 21 minutes ago, RobOsevens said: Exactly and just because this list uses numbers doesn't mean that it is objective. Agreed. The only "objective grading system" is Martin's mouth. Beyond that, the source material has always been open to interpretation by the fans. Assigning numbers to people doesn't change that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laughing Storm Reborn Posted February 10, 2016 Share Posted February 10, 2016 5 hours ago, Kenton Stark said: Thanks for the feedback. My rationale was GRRM quote that Dayne and Semly were basically even and Dayne with Dawn was the best. Robert is often compared to The laughing Storm and Duncan beat him one on one. IMHO, a 94 could beat a 95 or 96, 4 out of 10 times. Certainly not written in stone That´s fine, it´s just an opinion... but remember Lyonel was pretty well older than Duncan at that time...and we still did not see the fight... Prime Robert has feats and writer/character quotes to make him inferior to no one, superior than Dayne or Selmy he might not be but inferior he surely isn´t imo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Melisandre's White Pubes Posted February 10, 2016 Share Posted February 10, 2016 I think you don't know what "objective" means. I was hoping for a thread where every fighter was ranked against those who they have fought against - e.g. Robert would rank higher than Rhaegar, Sandor would rank higher than Beric, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.