The same caption also says that ''In an intense duel'' ... Take it as you will.

And this.

''Never wawering from his position of superiority, transformed into an agile whirlwind of destruction.''

''Maul attempts to avenge his brother's death, but he simply cannot defeat Sidious' power.''

Indicates that Maul can try to defeat Sidious, but he can't. Which is the same thing with holding his own in my book.

''still within a fair enough range of him that he can pose a threat.''

Holding his own doesn't mean possessing a threat, the best thing Maul can do is holding his own in a one-on-one duel, no one denies that fact. Dooku can hold his own against Yoda, that doesn't mean Dooku is a threat to him.

If Sidious was capable of one-shotting Maul, believe that he would do that in Son of Dathomir issue #04.

All right, since this is basically a disagreement over phraseological semantics, let's clarify what we mean here so that we avoid further misunderstanding. When I see or use the phrase "hold his own" in a battle setting, I usually pick up the idea that this means there is some amount of challenge involved, as in whoever "holds their own" before losing does still give their opponent at least a moderately tough fight. If you take a different meaning than that, then my mistake. I should let you clarify before responding to your point.

With that said, under the definition of the phrase "hold his own" that I work with, did Maul hold his own, or as you said fight Sidious for an extended period of time? Yes, he did. I never dismissed that. But why did he fight as long as he did? Because Maul can actually tax him in an all-out fight and provide an ample challenge? No, he held his own as long as he did because Sidious was holding back. It was never an all-out fight on Sidious' part, and that alone is why Maul held his ground for as long as he did. We know he was never a real challenge for him because Sidious dominated Maul with the Force like it was a training exercise and still outdueled him while holding back.

Not sure I follow. What makes taking out Savage while fighting Maul more enjoyable exactly? Why does he need to do that in order to prove he can beat both at once to begin with? The beginning of the duels sees Sidious TKing both of them and relaxing his telekinetic grip just to permit them to draw their weapons. In one sense, he already did handle both of them at once; he just elected not to finish the duel then and there because he liked the prospect of a lightsaber duel. I don't really see the connection here between killing Savage while Maul was still on his feet and Sidious' enjoyment of the fight in any case.

This idea that Sidious had to separate them in order to win has no merit, both because he was holding back, but also because it runs contrary to his other combat showings. In Revenge of the Sith, Sidious was confronted by the Council members, and he killed three of them without anyone, including and especially Mace Windu, being able to protect them. If he can kill Saesee and Agen in a quick blitz, and then strike down Fisto while dueling Mace in simultaneity, I hardly find it a stretch to say that he could beat both Maul and Savage concurrently without too much of a struggle.

If you know that Sidious was toying with them, then you just answered your previous question as to why Sidious separated them: he was holding back and treating the duel like a game. Obviously it took time for him to win because he chose not to end the battle from the outset via Force attacks. Your entire argument here is predicated on the idea that if Sidious did notdo something during the duel that that means he could not have, even though you acknowledge his mindset towards the fight and his refraining from abusing his Force attacks. This makes no sense.

To give you a hypothetical analogy to explain the logical gap here, I have never seen Maul telekinetically pull a glass of water to himself so that he could quench his thirst, but does that mean he can't? No, it means we never saw it happen. Maul has extended the reach of his TK onto objects far in excess of the weight and size of a glass of watter; obviously he can do that even though he has never shown to do that to the letter. This is just reasonable extrapolation.

If that analogy is too far afield, then let me give you a more concrete one. In Return of the Jedi, the Emperor blasts Lightning at Luke and said out loud that he intended to kill him. Luke suffered under the barrage of bolts for a minute or two before Anakin/Vader killed the Emperor and saved Luke. So Palpatine failed to kill him. Should I assume then that he couldn't? Of course not. Had it not been for his father, Luke would be dead. The reason he survived is because Palpatine was indignant over Luke's rejection of the dark side and spent his time reprimanding him and punishing him slowly with Lightning for his audacity, which forced Vader to finally choose between his son and the Emperor and afforded Vader the opportunity to kill him. Palpatine failed to kill Luke because he took his sweet time executing him, and yes, that did cost him. But it would be completely unreasonable to infer from that that the Emperor was just too weak to kill Luke or that he absolutely had to kill him slowly.

Running along the same vein, did Sidious have to spend as long as he did fighting the brothers to defeat them? No, not at all. Once again, he had them at his mercy before any of them drew their blades and then gestured with his hands to drop them back to the floor while cackling at them. Later, he KO'd Maul with a telekinetic attack and then, blades initially withdrawn, took his time downing Savage. Then, he allowed Maul to go to Savage's side as he died. Afterwards, according to starwars.com, he fought Maul one on one and was still toying with him even then. After disarming Maul, he decided "I'm done with this," in Filoni's words, and just ragdolled him with the Force.

There is really no reasonable way to interpret this fight as Maul and Savage actually posing a challenge to Sidious or Sidious needing as much time as he spent to defeat them. Everything points to the precise opposite. The episode The Lawless, Darth Maul: Shadow Conspiracy, Dave Filoni (multiple times), and starwars.com all echo one another: Sidious held back the whole time, played around, dominated the fight, and showed himself far and away more powerful than both of them to the extent that he was in a position to beat them without ever drawing his lightsaber. All of this leads me to the conclusion I expressed in the OP: Sidious could end the duel at his leisure, and it would end when he decided to end it, as Filoni commented on the end of the duel.

If you want to discuss exactly how much he was holding back or what degree of pressure the brothers could put on Sidious had he not been restraining himself, the former is impossible to determine accurately, and the latter would probably look like the Jedi Council duel, Kit Fisto in particular. Fisto dueled Sidious for a brief exchange before being cut down. Maul and Savage could probably replicate that, and it fits because Fisto also had one ally left alive to fight with him, Mace Windu. In the case of the Council duel, Sidious was demonstrably not holding back against Saesee, Agen, and Kit; his demeanor was more combative, his facial expressions were fiercer, he snarled angrily instead of laughing, and he wrecked his competition in short order instead of entertaining a protracted duel with them like he did with Maul and Savage. In the duel with the Council members in RotS, starwars.com, the RotS novelization, and Revenge of the Sith: The Visual Dictionary all state that Sidious killed the three Jedi Masters before any of them could react. That would be an example of Sidious when he wanted to cut a duel short rather than amuse himself with his enemies, and he managed to essentially speedblitz three of the most masterful and decorated swordsmen the Jedi Order had ever seen (Revenge of the Sith novelization, Revenge of the Sith: The Visual Dictionary). If we're taking Legends into account, then I would draw attention to Shadow Conspiracy's description of Sidious in his one-on-one with Maul; in the novelization, he gradually amplifies the speed of his blows until Maul can no longer visually track them or react to all of them and is disarmed. That would be our sample of what would've happened if Sidious decided not to "toy with Maul" like starwars.com said, but even if we agree not to assent to Shadow Conspiracy because of its exclusion in current Canon, then we still have Sidious' repeated ragdolling of the brothers. He pins them to a wall, he KOs Maul with a push, and he flings Maul around at the end before afflicting him with Lightning. If Sidious never held back in this duel, then in all probability, he would have cut them down roughly as quickly as the three Council members, and/or he would have incapacitated/killed them with the Force without even the necessity of a lightsaber.

We can continue this discussion, but all I'm doing here really is repeating myself, not offering anything new. So if you still disagree after all of the evidence presented, then fair enough, I guess; we can agree to disagree.

@silver2467: Reply later.

@silver2467:

Actually that was rather enlightening on the subject. Ok, he was much better with the force and (if I could calculate it) maybe twice to three times better at normal fighting than Maul.

Note: Kit fisto's form is for fighting multiple opponents, which is why he did so well against grevious.

Another note: Despite that, Maul is still considere ONE of the most skilled sith in history. Including enough to survive being chopped in half.

Agreed. I do consider Maul more skilled than Saesee, Agen, or Fisto to some degree as well as more powerful with the Force and more highly trained, and Savage is at least as formidable as anyone of them are, even if not as technically skilled a combatant.

@silver2467: That was a much better argument than I usually get. Thanks!

@admirallogic: Sure thing.

This was great.

Awesome analysis, Silver

@darth_nimrod: @deathstroke52: Thank you, gents.

Nice thread. Can't believe this was actually a misconception though lol.

To retread the subject of why Sidious himself approached Maul and Savage on Mandalore and elected not to charge Dooku with proving himself against them, I thought of something a couple days ago after answering @rabumalal's question that I'm a little surprised at myself for not realizing sooner, because it should be obvious.

The primary reason Sidious would choose not to risk losing Dooku to Maul is because the war effort was well under way. The Clone Wars had been raging for a few years by that point, and Dooku was the charismatic, "principled," political leader of the Separatist forces. Supposing Dooku died on Mandalore to Maul, that would cripple the CIS sooner than needed for the Grand Plan to succeed. Sidious needed Dooku in place to galvanize the Separatist members, champion the CIS ideals, manipulate the various seceding organizations, and help finance CIS operations. It would be counterproductive for Sidious to decide all of a sudden to replace Dooku when much of the integrity of the entire CIS operation depends on his status as its figurehead. Revenge of the Sith documented clearly that with Dooku's death, the Jedi expected the Clone Wars to end, and the CIS' other principal members were forced into hiding without him (albeit, this was also a plan to corral them for their deaths at Vader's hands). The CIS served as a common enemy the Republic could unite together against, and during the Republic's conflict with the Separatists, they would transfer confidence and political authority to Palpatine in an endeavor to defeat them as soon as possible. Palpatine's continued amassment of political power was one of the main reasons the Jedi Council grew more and more distrustful of him, and Palpatine needed the Jedi to become wary of him in order to turn Anakin to the Sith and to convince the general populace that the Jedi were public enemies. If the CIS were defeated too soon, such as might happen if Dooku were out of the picture, then Palpatine would fail to accumulate the political power, near-universal trust, and anti-Jedi propaganda he needed to finally declare himself Emperor.

Basically, Sidious had to deal with Maul himself because Dooku is too important to lose to Sith infighting until the right time with the right apprentice (Anakin).

@silver2467: I also thought of this but was too lazy to return to the thread. Btw your posts are awesome but they are TOO LONG. You would reach maximum capacity if you could be more concise.

lol, i love how this websites obsession with Sidious is so simply looked over. He's powerful yes. But the fact that Sidious was panting for breath on several occasions in the fight shows he could not physically stay in a fight as long as the brothers could. And if you really looked into the fight this much, silver, you would recognize the agonizingly SLOW attempts at hitting sidious that Savage was executing, A REAL TRAINED HUMAN SWORDS MAN COULD DO BETTER! Especially the fact that lightsabers are pretty much weightless. The SW community shows a clear unfiltered bias towards sidious, its criminal. Disney could easily rectify the biggest mistake the original EU did. Keep him dead. Unlike Maul, sidious got his time to shine. Maul didn't.

They got owned badly thats what really happen. lmao. Nah but in all seriousness i really enjoyed the thoughtful and careful analysis in the OP, you made some really great points.

@deathstrokesrevenge: So you bump the thread after two months to spout some more of your biased Sidious lowballing, but this time don't even provide a shred of reason other than "CV wanks Sidious he's not that strong hur dur" and "Savage was attacking slow because hur dur".

Seriously?

I am actually thinking of doing an in depth break down on Obi-Wan and Adi Gala vs Maul and Savage, but I haven't found the time and it will take a very long time for me to write a blog on it, covering every single aspect of it.

I wonder if in canon we'll see Sidious ever actually expend all of his effort, aside from the battle with Yoda. I suppose that might take away from the singular event that was the Jedi Grandmaster vs the culmination of the rule of two, but still.

Awesome analysis.

you're one to talk about bias

@erkan12 said:

The same caption also says that ''In an intense duel'' ... Take it as you will.

And this.

''Never wawering from his position of superiority, transformed into an agile whirlwind of destruction.''

''Maul attempts to avenge his brother's death, but he simply cannot defeat Sidious' power.''

Indicates that Maul can try to defeat Sidious, but he can't. Which is the same thing with holding his own in my book.

''still within a fair enough range of him that he can pose a threat.''

Holding his own doesn't mean possessing a threat, the best thing Maul can do is holding his own in a one-on-one duel, no one denies that fact. Dooku can hold his own against Yoda, that doesn't mean Dooku is a threat to him.

If Sidious was capable of one-shotting Maul, believe that he would do that in Son of Dathomir issue #04.

he was holding his own? i suppose kit fisto also held his own v sidious or kanto marek held his own v vader.

SIDIOUS COULDN'T ONE SHOT MAUL?

sidious can move faster than anakin can percieve, how would maul percieve sidious if anakin couldn't?

dooku fared much better v yoda who was not toying with him while maul was being toyed with by yoda's equal

@silver2467: What would you say the correct term is to describe this scenario: character A is capable of giving a good fight to character B, but character A would never actually defeat B in a fight. However, B could not effortless defeat A.

I don't agree that Dave Filoni's (DF) argument is non-sequitor.

DF is making a point that Savage was a force to contend with once you put his statement *into context*, which is what is most important. He told us that Lucas wanted characters who weren't in the movies to die. The fact that the Jedi Council members died so quickly had little to do with them not being able to put up a good fight. That was a statement showing us how good Sidious is. It is not about their inabilities to perform well in dueling/ battle because we know that they are exceptional fighters and force wielders.

So what we are given when DF says that Savage lasted longer is indeed a statement of how good he was once you put it into appropriate context. Outside that context is when you end up with the false logic of non-sequitur.

What a ridiculous load of wankery. You don't seem to have a basic level of comprehension. Obviously Sidious was toying with them the whole time because he could have killed them both with TK whenever he wanted, but Maul pushed Sidious purely as a lightsaber duelist to the point that Sidious didn't seem to want to bother with that anymore and reverted to spamming TK to regain his decisive advantage. All you have to do is watch the fight to see that Maul is making Sidious work near the end more than he wants or was expecting to. Maul in a canon showings was good enough to engage Mace Windu and Aayla Secura, simultaneously, he fought general Grievous, he bested Qui Gon Jinn, he bested Obi Wan Kenobi, he casually dominated Savage Oppress. He's no joke. Sidious didn't want to fuck around with that dude with lightsabers anymore, with sabers Maul can hold his own with the best, though he would still lose to a lot of upper tier combatants.

Agreed.

I might suggest you do one for Maul Vs. Pre Vizsla. If I never have to see someone either lowball Maul or wank Vizsla based on that fight ever again, it will be too soon.

Great thread, but this was a bit obvious.

I just love this post and the user. I've also this my friend;

https://comicvine.gamespot.com/profile/erkan12/blog/why-the-list-says-mauldooku/134755/

I used to have a hard time comprehending why some people held Maul in low regard. Now I perfectly understand why.

@dark-sith123: Yeah You can wank maul far, but when you Erkan him people stop listening

@in-sidiousvader:

Yup. We can wank Maul but let's not be delusional fanboys.

@dark-sith123:

Agreed

Lmao, now Dooku fanboy dark-sith is blaming me for being ''delusional'', I guess SW Everything You Need to Know is a ''delusional source'' since that source states Maul>Dooku, only Dooku fanboys has problems with it.

People held Maul in low regard because of Dooku wankers such as you dark-sith not from anything else.

@in-sidiousvader No one wanking Maul, it's the list states Maul > Dooku.

Also no, Sidious get kicked by Maul during the duel, you don't get a kick from someone who you can toy with.

I highly doubt @maxhwelll is a Maul wanker. Read it again please.

''What a ridiculous load of wankery. You don't seem to have a basic level of comprehension. Obviously Sidious was toying with them the whole time because he could have killed them both with TK whenever he wanted, but Maul pushed Sidious purely as a lightsaber duelist to the point that Sidious didn't seem to want to bother with that anymore and reverted to spamming TK to regain his decisive advantage. All you have to do is watch the fight to see that Maul is making Sidious work near the end more than he wants or was expecting to. Maul in a canon showings was good enough to engage Mace Windu and Aayla Secura, simultaneously, he fought general Grievous, he bested Qui Gon Jinn, he bested Obi Wan Kenobi, he casually dominated Savage Oppress. He's no joke. Sidious didn't want to fuck around with that dude with lightsabers anymore, with sabers Maul can hold his own with the best, though he would still lose to a lot of upper tier combatants.''

@erkan12:

The idea Maul can challenge Sheev in sabers is absurd. Even saying Maul can defeat Dooku in saber is questionable to say the least

What a weird Dooku fanboy I am. One that argues extensively against him and hates the Dooku contending with Yoda myth. Weird Dooku fanboy indeed.

Yeah, because I don't take debunked "rankings" as fact I'm a fanboy. Yeah. The fact that I am a staunch believer of Yoda >>>>>>> Dooku and hate the myth won't change that.

Lmao. It's not. Even an average Jedi Knight Vos did it, Maul's apprentice Savage did it.

Even in the legends, Maul gave Sidious a ''good fight'' when Maul was wounded and starving to death. Shadow Conspiracy novel states that Sidious wasn't holding back and dueling only for killing both Maul and Savage.

It's not absurd at all. Sidious wouldn't raise an apprentice who has half of his own skills. According to Sidious, Maul's skills as a swordsman was peerless.

@neutronstar666: Vader is more skilled (even though only slightly) than both Sidious and Maul. It's not weird. Sidious's main power his Dark Side mastery which no one (except Plagueis) can rival with. Which is why he doesn't even need a lightsaber after the RotS. Vader would kill Sidious in sabers and he would be the Master otherwise. But the difference in the Force is so wide that even Vader's saber advantage isn't making difference against Sidious's dark side mastery. The guy was so powerful he was overpowering Ahsoka + Ezra from another dimension, he was choking Dooku from another planet.

Yoda also defeated Sidious in sabers, but failed to defeat him in the Force, btw, Yoda can hold back a mountain and more powerful than Vader as well.

@erkan12

@neutronstar666:

Yeah. That list, and any idea of Vader > Sidious was thoroughly debunked.

https://comicvine.gamespot.com/forums/battles-7/darth-vader-vs-darth-sidious-sabers-only-1951456/

By the way, Erkan's a bad apple. Most of us Maul fans are actually reasonable individuals. I hope Erkan doesn't give you a bad picture of Maul or his fans.

@dark-sith123: Stop pretending to be a Maul fan lmao, you even said Dooku beats Maul you're not fooling anyone here.

@erkan12:

he is though. Like he loves Maul to pieces and he and I constantly argue on Maul's placement. You are a good debater Erkan with potential to be great but you have to tone down the wank if you want to be taken seriously.

The list was not debunked. Detractors only gave their opinion, as did we supporters. There is no definitive evidence to claim the list is not reliable, only subjective interpretation of events and context.

@rgr:

I praise you for your work on HP. BUT, VADER IS NOT A BETTER DUELIST THAN SIDIOUS PERIOD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

@in-sidiousvader: That seems to be the opinion of most people here, so can't blame you for that :)

@erkan12:

So I have to say Maul > Dooku to be a Maul fan? I'm, like, forced to believe that?

Oh please. I'm growing tired of this. Go irritate someone else.

It's your imagination that you think I am wanking Maul.

All I said was ; the list is true.

I already accepted that Vader is more skilled and Sidious is more skilled than Maul, because the list said so.

@erkan12:

In what universe is CANON Vader even remotely comparable to Maul, you of all should know how impressive his causal dismantling of Savage and Maul was, Vader has never done anything remotely as impressive and I am a HUGE Vader fan so it hurts me to say that Sidious > Vader in dueling but its reality.

@in-sidiousvader: Overpowered Adult Ahsoka quicker than Maul would. Portrayed as superior to Ben Kenobi who is at least as skilled as Maul if not more skilled. He improved the form IV technique and made special adjustments and the Jedi Council decided to use that as a lesson in the Jedi Holocron, even during the Clone Wars his skills were on par with RotS Kenobi. Completely stomped Dooku during the duel, and becomes a tier 9 (though only physically) and then he overcame his mental weaknesses and became even more powerful as Darth Vader.

@dark-sith123: So I have to say Maul > Dooku to be a Maul fan? I'm, like, forced to believe that?

Obviously. Maul's biggest rival, and one who has held superiority over Maul for ages, on ComicVine is Dooku. If you side with Dooku, no matter how close a fight, you are automatically a Dooku wanker. If you back Maul, though, you are a reasonable individual.