Sawyer vs Tyson Poll Tally

[Navin]

Likewise then whatever there reasons people chose there votes and you don't have the right to ignore their choice (thank you for asserting my point). Similar to above their quotes only represent an incomplete picture of their full thought process and so you don't have the right to determine/modify their decisione for them. No you claiming "won 5 full battles therefore uber strong" is implicitly making a boat load of assumptions regarding 4 of the trainers he beat whereas I'm basing my claims on his performance against HL Ash which by definition means I've made far fewer assumptions than you have lol. So "significant portion" = everyone? If you want me to spell it out for you the set of people that voted for Sawyer would be a subset of the set of people that do not have this negative bias whereas there exists a non-empty subset of people that voted for Tyson that do have this negative bias. As of right now the poll still most closely corresponds to a 5-4-1 result in a 10 match simulation in Sawyer's favor so that's what I'll accept as PAD's consensus whether I personally agree with it or not. And yet you (along with 30+ other people) bothered to vote and debate about this for several pages? Well all you've proven is that PAD care about Alain vs Paul far more (didn't bother doing a tally for that because of how decisively Alain won the first time) not that they don't care about Tyson vs Sawyer.

This is stupidly pointless for me. If you're going to put faith in a poll, and yet handwave off the stuff underlying it because it suits what you want to hear, then go ahead. All this did was confirm series favoritism divides for those who bothered to care.

 

[Genaller]

Well I guess it is a draw (because unlike MAL I'm actually capable of accepting the forum consensus whether it does or doesn't conform with my own views or not).

@MAL I highly doubt you would have gone on your conspiracy tangent had Tyson had the upper hand instead of Sawyer which frankly makes you seem very disingenuous. If you've ever taken a serious Stats course then you would know that any poll on this forum is utterly meaningless by default. I just did this out of fun and curiousty because of how genuinely split this forum is on the topic; however, whatever... this poll tangent was really wasn't fun. Anyway I've been transparent about my argument for how Sawyer would beat Tyson yet you haven't refuted it so I'll take that as your forfeit (the cogency of my argument is what I care about most FYI).

@Frocozone while the recency effect does support that people would have a stronger opinion of Sawyer than Tyson, it doesn't say anything about whether that opinion would be positive or negative hence it's quite possible that the recency effect hurt Sawyer's chances rather than help it.

 

[Frozocrone]

Ideally this poll would have been entirely logical and there would have been a definitive winner (as in logically someone is just better whether it's Tyson being the Champion or Sawyer having the Mega, doesn't matter it's my example to prove that a definitive factor should have made this a blowout if we remove human bias/opinions).

Obviously that's not the case for any opinion based poll so really it's up to human interpretation of the answers to deduce which answers were based on sound reasoning and which ones were biased in response (both positive and negative bias) and remove accordingly (from all options).

In regards to a negative bias from the recency of Sawyer, I could see that reasoning. However, using that as a basis of an argument to refute the 'Sawyer has more votes because he's more recent' argument would require you to prove that a significant amount of people who 'voted Tyson', voted with a bias against Sawyer or for Tyson - as well as prove that a significant amount of people who 'voted Sawyer' did not vote with a bias for Sawyer or against Tyson.

 

[Genaller]

Ideally this poll would have been entirely logical and there would have been a definitive winner (as in logically someone is just better whether it's Tyson being the Champion or Sawyer having the Mega, doesn't matter it's my example to prove that a definitive factor should have made this a blowout if we remove human bias/opinions).

Obviously that's not the case for any opinion based poll so really it's up to human interpretation of the answers to deduce which answers were based on sound reasoning and which ones were biased in response (both positive and negative bias) and remove accordingly (from all options).

In regards to a negative bias from the recency of Sawyer, I could see that reasoning. However, using that as a basis of an argument to refute the 'Sawyer has more votes because he's more recent' argument would require you to prove that a significant amount of people who 'voted Tyson', voted with a bias against Sawyer or for Tyson - as well as prove that a significant amount of people who 'voted Sawyer' did not vote with a bias for Sawyer or against Tyson.

Well for starters Zoruagible states- "Sawyer only beat Ash and Tierno because of Plot Armour" which is a direct reference to Sawyer's unrealistic strength progression (a claim that by itself I completely agree with); however, using that as a basis for stating that Sawyer is weaker than Character X is fallacious since regardless of how Sawyer got much stronger, the fact that Sawyer was much stronger doesn't change. More subtly look how Navin equates A&Cfan's "unrealistic power boost" to "ridiculous plot power" and while such equating could be interpreted as valid, the word "ridiculous" has a far greater negative connotation to it not to mention that the word "plot" used in that manner also carries a negative connotation since otherwise that word wasn't even mentioned by A&Cfan and hence would've been redundant since literqlly everything that happens in the anime is because of plot. Go read any almost thread where Sawyer's character is brought up and you'll notice that the overwhelming majority of posters (myself included) would agree that Sawyer's strength progression was unrealistic. The issue is whether people can put how unrealistic the strength progression was aside and accept that Sawyer did get significantly stronger or whether they would let this fact cloud their judgement about Sawyer's actual current strength because it doesn't conform to their ideal of "trainer strength progression". It's far more unlikely that a given indivdual would form a strong opinion either way of Tyson in general since he didn't have as much screentime nor did he have many defining characteristics (older more experienced trainer that cares about Pokémon and likes to try out different types of cuisine). The issue probably lies more with the concept of "strength of a conference league champion" than it does with Tyson since I would argue that such a title is vague when trying to infer how strong a trainer actually is (e.g. Tobias and Alain also have that title). Of course there could also be bias in favor of Sawyer like XY having better animation making the Pokémon appear stronger than they would've seemed otherwise though there's also this bias that the Hoenn League was grueling because it had the highest number of participants eventhough quantity =\= quality with the Sinnoh League being my prime example.

 

[Navin]

@MAL I highly doubt you would have gone on your conspiracy tangent had Tyson had the upper hand instead of Sawyer which frankly makes you seem very disingenuous. Anyway I've been transparent about my argument for how Sawyer would beat Tyson yet you haven't refuted it so I'll take that as your forfeit (the cogency of my argument is what I care about most FYI).

Um, no, I'd acknowledge it too if it was the reverse. The point of this thread, as you stated, wasn't to debate, but to just get a consensus, so don't know why you're saying I forfeited...?

Well for starters Zoruagible states- "Sawyer only beat Ash and Tierno because of Plot Armour" which is a direct reference to Sawyer's unrealistic strength progression (a claim that by itself I completely agree with); however, using that as a basis for stating that Sawyer is weaker than Character X is fallacious since regardless of how Sawyer got much stronger, the fact that Sawyer was much stronger doesn't change.

Why are you being this obtuse? He's still voting for a versus match-up (whatever his reasons are not up to you decide, otherwise you can just delete any vote if it doesn't conform to what you believe), as opposed to the other poster who voted based on character preference as well as admitting to not remembering the other. To be honest, you don't know any reason for how X posters voted, but there's unequivocally one vote that shouldn't be counted because it wasn't for the thread's stated purpose.

Of course there could also be bias in favor of Sawyer like XY having better animation making the Pokémon appear stronger than they would've seemed otherwise though there's also this bias that the Hoenn League was grueling because it had the highest number of participants eventhough quantity =\= quality with the Sinnoh League being my prime example.

These are no way comparable...In fact, you can't even call the latter bias, because that's actually fact. The league was grueling, not just in raw competitors, but in format and parity in competition and word-of-mouth from a credible source.

Newer series having much better PVs (= making the battles seem much more explosive, dynamic, etc compared to older series battles) is actually a source of bias.

 

[Genaller]

Um, no, I'd acknowledge it too if it was the reverse. The point of this thread, as you stated, wasn't to debate, but to just get a consensus, so don't know why you're saying I forfeited...?




Why are you being this obtuse? He's still voting for a versus match-up (whatever his reasons are not up to you decide, otherwise you can just delete any vote if it doesn't conform to what you believe), as opposed to the other poster who voted based on character preference as well as admitting to not remembering the other. To be honest, you don't know any reason for how X posters voted, but there's unequivocally one vote that shouldn't be counted because it wasn't for the thread's stated purpose.



These are no way comparable...In fact, you can't even call the latter bias, because that's actually fact. The league was grueling, not just in raw competitors, but in format and parity in competition and word-of-mouth from a credible source.

Newer series having much better PVs (= making the battles seem much more explosive, dynamic, etc compared to older series battles) is actually a source of bias.

I know you must really think you would. Sure (or you just can't give a good argument for it and you know it just like with that absurd notion that the HL team and Tyson are actually capable of getting the Peak Hoenn team down to the last Pokémon when the feats really don't support this).

Yeah the question of the thread was "who wins in a battle" to which I like Sawyer more and don't remember Tyson or true trainers don't need Megas and Sawyer has "Plot armour" are both completely irrelevant reasons for voting (which can be determined objectively and you'd know this if you ever took a course in formal reasoning). You don't get decide which reasons are more irrelevant than which so either they both don't count or they both do. Would you like me to explain the R (relevancy) condition to you?

It's an incredibly vague accomplishment at best and you can't deny that whereas I'm basing my claims on his performance against HL Ash.

Except BW had better animation than AG yet most would agree that it had the weakest aggregate trainers. Also the high quality of animation in XY could actually result in a negative bias since impressive feats may be credited more to better PVs than to actual merit (exhibit A: you).

 

[Navin]

I know you must really think you would. Sure (or you just can't give a good argument for it and you know it just like with that absurd notion that the HL team and Tyson are actually capable of getting the Peak Hoenn team down to the last Pokémon when the feats really don't support this).

There have been pages of good arguments already in the Vs Thread, but not my problem if you still can't let this go and need another poll that proves what's already known.

Yeah the question of the thread was "who wins in a battle" to which I like Sawyer more and don't remember Tyson or true trainers don't need Megas and Sawyer has "Plot armour" are both completely irrelevant reasons for voting (which can be determined objectively and you'd know this if you ever took a course in formal reasoning). You don't get decide which reasons are more irrelevant than which so either they both don't count or they both do. Would you like me to explain the R (relevancy) condition to you?

This is plain stupidity if you think those are the same. Stop being desperate.

It's an incredibly vague accomplishment at best and you can't deny that whereas I'm basing my claims on his performance against HL Ash.mExcept BW had better animation than AG yet most would agree that it had the weakest aggregate trainers. Also the high quality of animation in XY could actually result in a negative bias since impressive feats may be credited more to better PVs than to actual merit (exhibit A: you).

People trashed BW animation for being flashy speedline galore. You're just trolling at this point if you think XY PVs weren't a source of bias.

 

[Genaller]

There have been pages of good arguments already in the Vs Thread, but not my problem if you still can't let this go and need another poll that proves what's already known.



This is plain stupidity if you think those are the same. Stop being desperate.



People trashed BW animation for being flashy speedline galore. You're just trolling at this point if you think XY PVs weren't a source of bias.

If you actually gave a good argument then I wouldn't have bothered making a poll XD. Here's my issue with your whole "all this poll shows is series favoritism". There were a lot of other polls that could just as easily have been divided by series preference yet this is the only one that yields such indecisive results which I find to be fascinating and this shouldn't be the case if it were just about who likes what more (the probability that "series favoritism" is the probable explanation is slim).

I'm not arguing by analogy. They both fail the R (relevancy) condition. The subjectivity of an argument is in the G (good grounds) condition and not the R condition. It's not my problem if you lack the competency to determine what does and doesn't satisfy the R condition.

They do? Well guess I learnt something new today (just adds to another point of mine that we can't for granted assume a linear increase in animation quality over time). Anyways XY's PVs are certainly capable of causing bias when it comes to evaluating Pokémon capabilities though whether that's positive or negative can vary from person to person (I already explained how for the negative case in the last post).

 

[Navin]

If you actually gave a good argument then I wouldn't have bothered making a poll XD. Here's my issue with your whole "all this poll shows is series favoritism". There were a lot of other polls that could just as easily have been divided by series preference yet this is the only one that yields such indecisive results which I find to be fascinating and this shouldn't be the case if it were just about who likes what more (the probability that "series favoritism" is the probable explanation is slim).

There's a clear difference in the age of accounts and post count between the two groups. I can also easily pick out all the pro-XY fans in Sawyer's group.

I'm not arguing by analogy. They both fail the R (relevancy) condition. The subjectivity of an argument is in the G (good grounds) condition and not the R condition. It's not my problem if you lack the competency to determine what does and doesn't satisfy the R condition. Anyways XY's PVs are certainly capable of causing bias when it comes to evaluating Pokémon capabilities though whether that's positive or negative can vary from person to person (I already explained how for the negative case in the last post).

I don't know if you're just unbelievably stubborn, or actually this obtuse, but if he believes X character wins in a battle (which is what the poll is asking), it doesn't matter if his reasoning is pure **** or not - his vote counts. The fact that you think that's somehow irrelevant, or comparable to a post that admits to not even remembering one character and voting based on non-battling reasons....is just pathetic. Trying to bring in R and G conditions in an attempt to make yourself sound smart and logical only make this worse. Nevermind the fact you're reaching so hard to minimize obvious XY bias or handwaving off other stuff like one poster saying it could go either way based on prep or no prep.

 

[Genaller]

There's a clear difference in the age of accounts and post count between the two groups. I can also easily pick out all the pro-XY fans in Sawyer's group.



I don't know if you're just unbelievably stubborn, or actually this obtuse, but if he believes X character wins in a battle (which is what the poll is asking), it doesn't matter if his reasoning is pure **** or not - his vote counts. The fact that you think that's somehow irrelevant, or comparable to a post that admits to not even remembering one character and voting based on non-battling reasons....is just pathetic. Trying to bring in R and G conditions in an attempt to make yourself sound smart and logical only make this worse. Nevermind the fact you're reaching so hard to minimize obvious XY bias or handwaving off other stuff like one poster saying it could go either way based on prep or no prep.

I'm sorry but post count =\= amount of time spent watching the series but do whatever you want.

Dude you're objectively wrong here (if you genuinely believe that Zoruagible's claims aren't irrelevant) and it seriously isn't a matter of opinion. Determining whether given reasons provide any evidence at all for a conclusion (R condition) is not a subjective process; however, determining how much evidence given reasons provide for a conclusion (G condition) is where the subjectivity lies. Really not trying to show that I'm smart; I just use the knowledge that I learn (shouldn't we all ). Calling me "pathetic" doesn't really help your case but if it makes you feel better then go for it . I don't make the rules of reasoning I just follow them (if you really have an issue with my reasoning then take it up with your local PHIL department). I never said that there isn't any signifcant XY bias though you're the one who's stretching it if you believe that it's only positive bias. Ask CMB yourself what he would pick as of right now if you have so much of an issue with that. I interpret his vote + reasons to mean that Sawyer wins by a greater margin with prep than he looses without prep making him the overall net winner.

 

[Navin]

I'm sorry but post count =\= amount of time spent watching the series but do whatever you want.

...? I never said that.

Dude you're objectively wrong here (if you genuinely believe that Zoruagible's claims aren't irrelevant) and it seriously isn't a matter of opinion. Determining whether given reasons provide any evidence at all for a conclusion (R condition) is not a subjective process; however, determining how much evidence given reasons provide for a conclusion (G condition) is where the subjectivity lies. Really not trying to show that I'm smart; I just use the knowledge that I learn (shouldn't we all ). Calling me "pathetic" doesn't really help your case but if it makes you feel better then go for it . I don't make the rules of reasoning I just follow them (if you really have an issue with my reasoning then take it up with your local PHIL department).

Tf are you talking about...?

FFS, you can't seem to accept that a vote has to taken away from Sawyer, so to compensate, you're going off on this nonsensical argument about how Zorua's vote should also be taken away, even though he very clearly voted for the intended topic. What's irrelevant is whether or not you agree with it.

Ask CMB yourself what he would pick as of right now if you have so much of an issue with that. I interpret his vote + reasons to mean that Sawyer wins by a greater margin with prep than he looses without prep making him the overall net winner.

This is the same problem as above - you are interpreting stuff because it suits what you want to hear. He very clear said that if Ash used new Pokemon that Sawyer didn't prepare for, Sawyer would "lose horribly." Likewise, "Tyson wins if we go by current stuff", but he picked Sawyer on the assumption that the latter is given indefinite time to construct an anti-Tyson team. Absolutely nothing about comparative margin of victories/defeats. Ergo, if you had specified in your initial post that Sawyer isn't given time to prepare, or not much time (say this is the next round of a league conference), he'd have picked Tyson. Comprende?

 

[Genaller]

...? I never said that.



Tf are you talking about...?

FFS, you can't seem to accept that a vote has to taken away from Sawyer, so to compensate, you're going off on this nonsensical argument about how Zorua's vote should also be taken away, even though he very clearly voted for the intended topic. What's irrelevant is whether or not you agree with it.



This is the same problem as above - you are interpreting stuff because it suits what you want to hear. He very clear said that if Ash used new Pokemon that Sawyer didn't prepare for, Sawyer would "lose horribly." Likewise, "Tyson wins if we go by current stuff", but he picked Sawyer on the assumption that the latter is given indefinite time to construct an anti-Tyson team. Absolutely nothing about comparative margin of victories/defeats. Ergo, if you had specified in your initial post that Sawyer isn't given time to prepare, or not much time (say this is the next round of a league conference), he'd have picked Tyson. Comprende?

If the mods removed the vote then no issues though if they didn't then either both that vote and the Zoruagible vote count or they both don't (because they both fail the R condition). Once again; if you don't like how I reason then complain about it with your local PHIL department.

Well you're a pretty vague guy so try being more clear about what you're actually trying to say.

Pretty sure you're the one with the confirmation bias. Just ask him yourself if you want it cleared up. His current opinion doesn't have to reflect the opinion he stated then.

EDIT: Oh yeah and if Ash opens with Peakachu and Sceptile then Tyson gets demolished 6-1 decisively so it's not like he couldn't loose horribly either .

 

[Navin]

If the mods removed the vote then no issues though if they didn't then either both that vote and the Zoruagible vote count or they both don't (because they both fail the R condition). Once again; if you don't like how I reason then complain about it with your local PHIL department.

Lol, you're aware they don't care, right (probably haven't even looked at the poll)? My local PHIL department would first wonder why someone is trying to shoehorn R conditions into a Pokemon VS. battle, before pointing out that one very obviously does meet the R condition.

Pretty sure you're the one with the confirmation bias. Just ask him yourself if you want it cleared up. His current opinion doesn't have to reflect the opinion he stated then.

Holy desperation Batman. Those are literally quotes from Page 1 lol.

 

[Genaller]

Lol, you're aware they don't care, right (probably haven't even looked at the poll)? My local PHIL department would first wonder why someone is trying to shoehorn R conditions into a Pokemon VS. battle, before pointing out that one very obviously does meet the R condition.



Holy desperation Batman. Those are literally quotes from Page 1 lol.

Cool then the voter you're complaining about has made no violations . If you want to bring up poll integrity in a poll where we both know the results are meaningless from a technical standpoint then don't B**** when I bring up formal criteria for argument evaluation. Nah they'd first be baffled as to why someone would seriously waste their time about something as trivial as this and then tell you how wrong you are and you know it .

CMB only says Sawyer would loose horribly to Ash and doesn't give any indication of Tyson's win margin. If Ash with Peak Hoenn team starts with Sceptile and Peakachu then Tyson would loose pretty horribly as well (6-1 decisively) .

EDIT: If you want me to explain the R condition to you as well as why both sets of reasons fail it then PM me about it

 

[Navin]

Cool then the voter you're complaining about has made no violations . If you want to bring up poll integrity in a poll where we both know the results are meaningless from a technical standpoint then don't B**** when I bring up formal criteria for argument evaluation. Nah they'd first be baffled as to why someone would seriously waste their time about something as trivial as this and then tell you how wrong you are and you know it .

This is just sad bait.

CMB only says Sawyer would loose horribly to Ash and doesn't give any indication of Tyson's win margin

Funny, why were you then trying to justify that this vote was a reflection of the win/lose margin of non-prep/prep? Lol, you're too stubborn, and now are just making up random reasons ("Zorua's vote fails the R condition!", "the mods would have removed that vote!") to keep your guy clinging onto a lead that's not really there. Whatever bud, I'm done going in circles over this.

 

[Genaller]

This is just sad bait.



Funny, why were you then trying to justify that this vote was a reflection of the win/lose margin of non-prep/prep? Lol, you're too stubborn, and now are just making up random reasons ("Zorua's vote fails the R condition!", "the mods would have removed that vote!") to keep your guy clinging onto a lead.

No your whole poll conspiracy is the "bait" here.

Stubborn? Have you looked in a mirror recently . Besides after his comment I already explained why Sawyer's strategies can be more generally applicable and we don't know his full thought process or even his precise meaning of the word "prep" (since technically speaking prep isn't a constant variable). "True trainers don't need Megas"- yeah this wouldn't even pass the A condition never mind the R condition. "Sawyer wins because of Plot Armour"- definitely fails the R condition (is irrelevant because everything in the anime is the result of "plot"). Unless the deleted comment explicitly mentioned that they don't even care about the battle then the default position is that they meant the following:

1. I like Sawyer
2. I don't remember Tyson
3. Therefore, Sawyer wins in a battle (implicit conclusion which can be inferred from their vote)

Obviously 1. and 2. fail the R condition (are completely irrelevant) for the conclusion 3. though that doesn't separate them from the reasoning that Zoruagible gave (which also fails the R condition).

Yeah I acknowledged it as a draw ever since it was 17-18-5 (and now it's 18-19-5) since a 1 vote difference is too miniscule to declare a clear winner (would've said the same even if it was 19-18-5 right now).

EDIT: watching this poll progression has been genuinely fascinating since I don't think there's been another poll where PAD has been so indecisive .

 

[Navin]

Just so you finally get it:

Besides after his comment I already explained why Sawyer's strategies can be more generally applicable and we don't know his full thought process or even his precise meaning of the word "prep" (since technically speaking prep isn't a constant variable).

That's YOUR reasoning, not HIS. He wrote: "So,I'd give to Sawyer if we imply (since Gen didn't give clear instructions) that Sawyer constructed his team to counter Tyson's( so he watched him, wrote a notes etc)." Ergo, if Sawyer is given time to prep by constructing a counter-team from watching Tyson, writing notes, etc, THEN he'd win. Otherwise, " Tyson wins if we go by current stuff." YOU might believe Sawyer's strategies can be generally applicable, but others may not.

"True trainers don't need Megas"- yeah this wouldn't even pass the A condition never mind the R condition. "Sawyer wins because of Plot Armour"- definitely fails the R condition (is irrelevant because everything in the anime is the result of "plot"). Unless the deleted comment explicitly mentioned that they don't even care about the battle then the default position is that they meant the following:

I'm beginning to wonder if you actually know formal reasoning. Those aren't invalid opinions. He think Tyson wins in a battle. Full stop. Everything afterwards doesn't matter; it's not subject to further analysis. If it bothers you so much, then less than a year back, he wrote that Tyson curbstomps due to experience. Fact is, if Triox didn't post that his vote (BTW post wasn't deleted; I just didn't see it) was based on character preference and not remembering Tyson, this wouldn't be an issue. For all you know, half those poll votes could be based on character liking, and not actually who wins in a battle. You assume they are, and whatever the underlying reasons are irrelevant.

FYI, he's right too. Sawyer wouldn't have beaten Ash if Ash didn't have frog issues. And while he might have beaten Tierno regardless, it was laughably convenient how advantageous of a match-up (Mega) Sceptile was given.

 

[Genaller]

Just so you finally get it:



That's YOUR reasoning, not HIS. He wrote: "So,I'd give to Sawyer if we imply (since Gen didn't give clear instructions) that Sawyer constructed his team to counter Tyson's( so he watched him, wrote a notes etc)." Ergo, if Sawyer is given time to prep by constructing a counter-team from watching Tyson, writing notes, etc, THEN he'd win. Otherwise, " Tyson wins if we go by current stuff." YOU might believe Sawyer's strategies can be generally applicable, but others may not.



I'm beginning to wonder if you actually know formal reasoning. Those aren't invalid opinions. He think Tyson wins in a battle. Full stop. Everything afterwards doesn't matter; it's not subject to further analysis. If it bothers you so much, then less than a year back, he wrote that Tyson curbstomps due to experience. Fact is, if Triox didn't post that his vote (BTW post wasn't deleted; I just didn't see it) was based on character preference and not remembering Tyson, this wouldn't be an issue. For all you know, half those poll votes could be based on character liking, and not actually who wins in a battle. You assume they are, and whatever the underlying reasons are irrelevant.

FYI, he's right too. Sawyer wouldn't have beaten Ash if Ash didn't have frog issues. And while he might have beaten Tierno regardless, it was laughably convenient how advantageous of a match-up (Mega) Sceptile was given.

I admit I was vague in my initial conditions but what I had in mind was a 10 match simulation where both trainers kept knowledge from previous battles (I know I mentioned this somewhere in a previous post) and a scenario like that favors prep over no-prep since it shouldn't take over 2-3 matches to know everything they would need hence why I didn't initially take issue with CMB's page 1 post since it would still give Sawyer the win based on how I was actually thinking about the match.

Nah I'm solid (lucky for me formal reasoning isn't dependant on your opinion). Did this indivdual say that they didn't think Sawyer would win a battle? No... then the default position is that they believe Sawyer would win a battle based on their vote and like you said (b]full stop[/b] end of story. If you're going to further analyze then don't complain when I do the same. Yeah Zoruagible's negative bias towards Sawyer is extremely apparent.

Eh could've gone either way with Ash. As for Tierno; winning is 1 thing but (M-)Sceptile not taking any damage is a whole other ball game.

EDIT: Oh I know who you're talking about. First of all Triox is a "she". 2nd she only says that she doesn't remember Tyson too well which doesn't mean she doesn't know him at all (way to twist the facts lol). Third sure her primary reason was because she likes Sawyer but she does make a relevant point about his hard work and never outright says that she wasn't voting based on who she thought would win and hence the default position is that she believes Sawyer would win and there's no need to further analyze it. Also Zoruagible definitely has a negative disposition to Sawyer so Triox wasn't the only 1 voting on the basis of who she liked more. I can't believe you wasted so much of my time on this conspiracy nonsense XD.

 

[Navin]

I admit I was vague in my initial conditions but what I had in mind was a 10 match simulation where both trainers kept knowledge from previous battles (I know I mentioned this somewhere in a previous post) and a scenario like that favors prep over no-prep since it shouldn't take over 2-3 matches to know everything they would need hence why I didn't initially take issue with CMB's page 1 post since it would still give Sawyer the win based on how I was actually thinking about the match.

Makes no difference anyway.

Sawyer literally countered all of Ash's team, right down to the moveset. He called out Slaking in response to Hawlucha (which worked), Clawitzer in response to Talonflame (which worked), Aegislash in response to Pikachu (which very nearly worked->set up easy revenge kill), Salamence in response to Noivern (which led to a draw), and of course Sceptile saved for Greninja.

Unless Sawyer is allowed indefinite time between matches to change his Pokemon's movesets or switch Pokemon entirely, those strategies are what he retains. And they won't be as effective against Tyson.

Nah I'm solid (lucky for me formal reasoning isn't dependant on your opinion). Did this indivdual say that they didn't think Sawyer would win a battle? No... then the default position is that they believe Sawyer would win a battle based on their vote and like you said (b]full stop[/b] end of story. If you're going to further analyze then don't complain when I do the same. Yeah Zoruagible's negative bias towards Sawyer is extremely apparent. Eh could've gone either way with Ash. As for Tierno; winning is 1 thing but (M-)Sceptile not taking any damage is a whole other ball game. EDIT: Oh I know who you're talking about. First of all Triox is a "she". 2nd she only says that she doesn't remember Tyson too well which doesn't mean she doesn't know him at all (way to twist the facts lol). Third sure her primary reason was because she likes Sawyer but she does make a relevant point about his hard work and never outright says that she wasn't voting based on who she thought would win and hence the default position is that she believes Sawyer would win and there's no need to further analyze it. Also Zoruagible definitely has a negative disposition to Sawyer so Triox wasn't the only 1 voting on the basis of who she liked more. I can't believe you wasted so much of my time on this conspiracy nonsense XD.

You continue to stubbornly concoct more assumptions, interpretations, and denials to spin things to make sure Sawyer still draws/leads. I'm not going to argue further against a hopeless case.

 

[Genaller]

Makes no difference anyway.

Sawyer literally countered all of Ash's team, right down to the moveset. He called out Slaking in response to Hawlucha (which worked), Clawitzer in response to Talonflame (which worked), Aegislash in response to Pikachu (which very nearly worked->set up easy revenge kill), Salamence in response to Noivern (which led to a draw), and of course Sceptile saved for Greninja.

Unless Sawyer is allowed indefinite time between matches to change his Pokemon's movesets or switch Pokemon entirely, those strategies are what he retains. And they won't be as effective against Tyson.

So correct me but when Slaking is sent out wouldn't the logical decision be to send out a fighting type if you have 1? Slaking can be used to lure out a fighting type, scout their moves with its high bulk + recovery and then use Counter when said fighting uses its strongest move again (x4 Hariyama's Focus Punch = dead Hariyama). The primary reason that Clawitzer won so smoothly was because it could effectively halt Talonflame's momentum with Ice Beam and really that can be used on literally any speedy Pokémon that relies on high momentum for greater impact with their attacks. Also Clawitzer previously beat Novern + Luciha and has reliable recovery (and can even hit Grass types Tyson would likely send out against it with SE Ice Beams). Literally any Pokémon would have trouble with King's Shield (and no Steel resists Psychic so Metagross isn't manually removing the Shield with Psychic) and besides Kalos Pikachu was the most consistent version of Pikachu (16-4-0 record going into the Sawyer battle) so even if he wasn't in Peak mode he was still very powerful in his own right. Yeah "Protect"... wow what a major counter (definitely can't be used to at least scout an enemy attack mirite mate). Slurpuff can use his nose to land pinpoint surprise attacks when there's smoke from move collisions so that's a pretty neat general skill. Conserving one's Ace for last is a basic tactic (Tyson does it too and unfortuneately for him MS does have the net move advantage against Meowth).

There was nothing that Sawyer did which was overtly specific to Ash's team (barring maybe cutting trees down since Pikachu liked forests but that was improvisation and not a planned strategy) and not applicable in a more general sense. In addition Sawyer has been compared to Ash in that he's also very good at improvising (obviously not to the same degree but this should be noted). Also Tyson isn't exactly the kind of guy that would try very hard to give himself the optimal matchups (on a side note what even would be Tyson's ideal match play out). Sawyer's team in fact does seem to stack up nicely against Tyson's team and the only information Sawyer would need to know this would be what Pokémon Tyson is using which he could easily get if this were the next round of a league conference. As far as I can tell the most reasonable correspondence would be:

Slurpuff <-> Shiftry
Salamence <-> Donphan
Slaking <-> Hariyama
Clawitzer <-> Sceptile
Aegeslash <-> Metagross
M-Sceptile <-> Meowth

Which gives the following play out:

Slurpuff vs Shiftry -> Slurpuff
Slurpuff vs Donphan -> Donphan
Salamence vs Donphan -> Draw
Slaking vs Hariyama -> Slaking
Slaking vs Sceptile -> Sceptile
Clawitzer vs Sceptile -> Draw/Sceptile (heavily wounded and fatigued)
(If Sceptile wins: Aegeslash vs Sceptile -> Aegeslash with minimal damage)
Aegeslash vs Metagross -> Metagross
M-Sceptile vs Metagross -> M-Sceptile
M-Sceptile vs Meowth -> M-Sceptie

At best (for Tyson) there should be a lower moderate health Metagross (30%) + Meowth by the time Sceptile comes out and it should be M-Sceptile's game from there (though I will admit that this should be enough to edge out Base Sceptile). The playout I gave certainly doesn't represent Sawyer's idealized playout (e.g. Aegeslash vs Hariyama lol) and again I have to ask what is Tyson's idealized playout that would sc*** Sawyer so badly if he didn't have prep time?

You continue to stubbornly concoct more assumptions, interpretations, and denials to spin things to make sure Sawyer still draws/leads. I'm not going to argue further against a hopeless case.

Dude you officially lost all credibility here the moment you equated "don't remember Tyson too well" = don't remember Tyson. Please don't waste anyone's time any further with your conspiracy nonesense.