Why Batman Shouldn't Win Very Many What-Ifs.

[Teague]

Leon got me thinking about this thread with his answer in the Iron Man vs. Batman thread (so thanks, Leon!). And considering that we not only include Bats in so many of these things, but we at one point considered a moratorium on Batman related questions, just because they were so contentious, I figured I'd explain why I tend to vote against Bats more often than some.

First, let me say that there are many times I've voted for the Bat. Mainly, these are fights pitting Bruce against another street-level fighter-type. Iron Fist. Nightwing. Daredevil. Taskmaster. Even with Captain America, the quintessential Marvel match-up to DC's Batman, I give Bats credit for making it a near-draw. (I still give Cap the edge here, but I have to admit, I can cop to a Marvel bias in this perhaps making that difference...) But my point here is that I can concur with Batman being one of the best H2H fighters in the DC (or even any) universe. I have given him my vote in some matchups.

But the thing with Bats is that DC has built up this mythos around him (very effectively, based on a lot of opinions I see here) that Batman is the most dangerous man in the DCU. Superman's said almost that exact thing before (in JLA, I believe), and so have others. And it's very cool to think that this brilliant and well-trained guy can stand up with the likes of veritable gods. It's a great storyline. And it's a neat character thing, except in contests like these. Planning is everything to Batman. He relies heavily on it. This is why he's a detective, why he has the Bat-computer (I hope he still calls it the bat-computer...), all that stuff.

But most of the Batman comics I remember reading as a kid (Neal Adams era) went this way: Batman investigates. Batman gets his ass handed to him by some bad guy. Batman studies up. Batman figures out what's up. Batman takes the fight back to the bad guys and wins. The End.

Again, great stories. Powerful guy. Just not so great in an immediate one-on-one matchup like the ones these vs. threads set up. My feeling is this: if you have to add "with some planning" to your response, that means the answer is really no. Can Batman beat Superman? Yes, with some planning. Meaning no, not usually. Can Batman beat Thor? Sure, with some planning. Or, no, not straight up.

In other words, the vs. fights (to me) have always been these "two heroes meet in the street...who wins?" things. Not "in a long and developed comic arc, which of these two characters would win?" Because the answer to the second question is always "anyone". Dazzler beat Galactus. Doctor Octopus beat Dr. Doom. Comic books are always about beating the odds.

Anyway, that's my two cents. I tried to write this so as to avoid pissing anyone off, and I hope I managed to do that. I like these vs. threads for the most part, and I don't want to see them die off. I just almost type this whole thing out every time there's a Bat-thread, and I figured I'd just say it once so I wouldn't have to be tempted every time.

[LoD]

Well said, Teague.

[Sledge Hammer!]

Gotta disagree personally. I think the whole "planning is everything' / 'Batman always needs time to plan' thing is pretty much a fallacy. Batman doesn't need to sit down and map things out in terms of fighting his opponents, he does the vast majority of his battle thinking on the run and in the heat of the moment. That, to me, is one of his greatest strengths.

Sure, if he's playing detective or investigating something or whatever he'll do a certain degree of that, and in the occasions where he fights to a stalemate, or the enemy gets away by some unexpected new means then he might look into the technology used or whatever, but in all honestly I can't think of that many cases where Batman has had to plan out attack strategies prior to fighting whoever, particularly post crisis. I mean it's a standard schtick that they use in the cartoons a lot (particularly on The Batman), granted, but that's often more a case of paint by numbers plotting more than anything else if you ask me.

In the comics though, in this modern era especially, I just don't see that happening all that often. Occasionally, sure, but not like it's a crutch, or something that Batman needs before defeating somebody.

In fact one of his biggest strengths is the fact that he's an adaptive thinker and does the majority of his strategy in the heat of the moment where it matters most. He doesn't need quiet time to plan, he doesn't assume anything about an enemy that he doesn't know, he's cautious, measured in his choices, and he uses his surroundings, his skills, and his perceptive intelligence to nut out any strategy he needs mid battle. That's Batman to me. And that's why, one on one, he's always a force to be reconned with, and not under-estimated.

That's my take anyway. Everyone has their own vision of what any given character means to them, and what era or incarnation defines that character to them, so not saying you're wrong as much as I'm saying your vision of Batman and my vision of Batman don't quite line up, that's all.

[JDH]

The few times I've seen Clark and others say that knd of thing about Bruce, I just think they're all humouring him. The poor guy might just give it all up if they spelled it out to him that he's Columbo in a cowl.

[Teague]

Originally Posted by Sledge Hammer!

Gotta disagree personally. I think the whole "planning is everything' / 'Batman always needs time to plan' thing is pretty much a fallacy. Batman doesn't need to sit down and map things out in terms of fighting his opponents, he does the vast majority of his battle thinking on the run and in the heat of the moment. That, to me, is one of his greatest strengths.

Sure, if he's playing detective or investigating something or whatever he'll do a certain degree of that, and in the occasions where he fights to a stalemate, or the enemy gets away by some unexpected new means then he might look into the technology used or whatever, but in all honestly I can't think of that many cases where Batman has had to plan out attack strategies prior to fighting whoever, particularly post crisis. I mean it's a standard schtick that they use in the cartoons a lot (particularly on The Batman), granted, but that's often more a case of paint by numbers plotting more than anything else if you ask me.

In the comics though, in this modern era especially, I just don't see that happening all that often. Occasionally, sure, but not like it's a crutch, or something that Batman needs before defeating somebody.

In fact one of his biggest strengths is the fact that he's an adaptive thinker and does the majority of his strategy in the heat of the moment where it matters most. He doesn't need quiet time to plan, he doesn't assume anything about an enemy that he doesn't know, he's cautious, measured in his choices, and he uses his surroundings, his skills, and his perceptive intelligence to nut out any strategy he needs mid battle. That's Batman to me. And that's why, one on one, he's always a force to be reconned with, and not under-estimated.

That's my take anyway. Everyone has their own vision of what any given character means to them, and what era or incarnation defines that character to them, so not saying you're wrong as much as I'm saying your vision of Batman and my vision of Batman don't quite line up, that's all.

Which is totally cool. I wasn't posting this to win converts or anything. More to explain where I'm coming from on this, because I worry that sometimes I just come across as anti-Bat, which I'm completely not.

And I get what you're saying here, and I agree for the most part. I just don't think the "adaptive thinker" thing would help him in some battles. His own rogues gallery is suited to his strengths (as all rogues galleries are, to be sure). But to take out characters on a completely different power level (Superman, Thor, etc.), those skills just aren't going to help him all that much, I don't think.

Again, the Bat is definitely a force to be reckoned with; I just think he's sometimes completely overpowered, and yet still cases are made that he could win based on the planning-thing.

[Teague]

Originally Posted by JDH

The few times I've seen Clark and others say that knd of thing about Bruce, I just think they're all humouring him. The poor guy might just give it all up if they spelled it out to him that he's Columbo in a cowl.

[Sledge Hammer!]

Fair enough too Teague, like I say, everyone has their own view of these things and these characters, and that's cool and is just as it should be.

Oh, and Batman could still take you, and you know it...

[bat_collector]

BOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!

[The Dark Knight]

Yes, I know Batman throwed Captain America in sewer. I just want to say get ower it Teague.

[bat_collector]

Originally Posted by The Dark Knight

Yes, I know Batman throwed Captain America in sewer. I just want to say get ower it Teague.

lol

my thoughts exactly

Teague, I apprciate all the time you took to write such a lengthy response, but you know in our gut batman wins every single time!