Instigator / Pro
6
1557
rating
35
debates
52.86%
won
Topic
#1920

Pele is truly the GOAT (2)

Status
Finished

The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.

Winner & statistics
Better arguments
3
24
Better sources
2
16
Better legibility
1
8
Better conduct
0
8

After 8 votes and with 50 points ahead, the winner is...

RationalMadman
Parameters
Publication date
Last updated date
Type
Standard
Number of rounds
5
Time for argument
Two weeks
Max argument characters
30,000
Voting period
One month
Point system
Multiple criterions
Voting system
Open
Contender / Con
56
1697
rating
556
debates
68.17%
won
Description

Due to my previous debate on this subject becoming vandalised, which nearly brought tears to my eyes, given the time and effort i put in to it, i have put this debate back up for challenge to whoever would like to take it.

Pele is also a footballer. So this subject pertains mostly to football.
Other GOATS in other fields are nothing to do with the subject.

My opponent can argue for Baked Beanz. (though this is not the subject matter, so would be silly to do so)
All i ask is for an honest debate.
Errors that remain unacknowledged after being pointed out become construed as lies.

Also i will probably use wikipedia as a foundation to launch a debate.
I may use other sources later on, if required.

My opponents argument should be consistent with "the GOAT debate".

-->
@shadow_712

RM was just making a joke, or so implied by the winky face. ;) 😉

In short, such a vote would be eligible for review, but will not be automatically removed.

If I ignored that this was a full forfeit, I estimate I would have ended up giving pro 2 points for sources, and con 4 points for arguments and conduct. Heck I highly respect Intelligence_06's vote of just conduct (if not for early abuses, votes like that for full forfeitures would probably be the standard).

no need to crib about it RM

I just wanted to know if i bother to read all the arguments and I find PRO more convincing will mod remove my vote , that is all.

-->
@Barney

He is not allowed to read the arguments once FF has occured, did you not know this? ;)

-->
@shadow_712

While a voter may choose to read arguments, the instigator choosing to forfeit every round after their first (and the contender posting in three) leaves the outcome a foregone conclusion.

-->
@Barney

should voters consider this as Full forfeit? or read arguments?

-->
@User_2006

A good kritik should avoid the perception of emotional provocation that I associate with trolling but imabench uses that word in many contexts that I wouldn't. I remember an Edward Snowden debate where I used 10 sources and Bench complained bitterly about my using sources in what he called a troll debate.

See? I tried to take away Bench's authority by using many citations and Bench took it right back by creating a new context, "troll debate" where he was the expert and I didn't know what I was doing.

Bench is a master at K. Don't debate imabench unless you are prepared to take a loss.

-->
@oromagi

However the description "I will be arguing that Pele is truly the GOAT (serious contenders only/no time wasters)" implies that trolling, kritik and semantical exploits loses credit for conduct.

-->
@oromagi

Evident Sources would most likely work for people who haven't mastered the art of Kritik. People like Oromagi who definitely know how to appropriately manipulate the topic and change the meaning would make the sources on the opposite side unrelated to the present topic. Listing how accomplished Pele is does not make him an animal similar to a sheep. The sources will quickly develop from football games to biological classifications.

-->
@oromagi

I don't know about you but ImaBench calls this trolling. He had defined DNA as a kind of fictional antelope and Poop as a slogan that states "People order our patties".

Defining terms before my opponent definitely helps me win, especially when sources don't necessarily help me, i.e semantic debates or its likes.

Also, getting support from one of the best debaters on this site definitely makes me happy :)

-->
@User_2006

It makes me happy that somebody did this already. Kritiks are tricky. Ragnar has published some advice on the subject: http://tiny.cc/Kritik I think your position was winnable (in fact, the voting was close and there plenty of voters so you had support). In hindsight, I'd advise against starting off with an announcement of intent to manipulate. To pull off a K, you are saying "hey, normal debate conduct does not apply for this debate because of reasons x, y, x- we have to apply a new set of rules to fix the problem my opponent has created" If you're going to change the normal debate conduct you have to argue from a place of authority.

So, for example, I will say, "hey my opponent totally neglected to define terms" or "your thesis has no verb- how can we understand your intent without a verb?" I am projecting myself as an authority on proper debate conduct in the first or an authority on good grammar in the second. If I start out calling this manipulation, well then I have no authority by which to demand voters accept my assertion of terms or verb or whatever. Your concluding argument sets the right tone but by that time Nevets had dropped a whole lot of argument and asserted solid authority as well as expertise. This was always going to be a hard argument to win and you came very close to pulling it off. Nice work.

-->
@oromagi

I did it then I lost. Don't tell him.

Since GOAT is never defined for this debate I would really have liked to have seen a K on goat.

Not only is Pele not THE goat, he's not even A goat, he's not even half goat like a satyr or Pan. Pele is a human. If Pele has any goat DNA it is virtually undetectable by phenotype- no trace of horns, for example. If Pele had little goat hooves propped up in those cleats I'm fairly certain Pele would have been disqualified from the sport.

-->
@Barney

I'll wait until more Brits join the site.

-->
@Nevets

Perhaps try a third time?

-->
@Alec

American football and baseball in USA isn't it.. And i see most of the users on here are from US.

-->
@Nevets

I don't know enough about football. Sorry.

-->
@Alec

If you are a football fan, you could perhaps try requesting to have the debate passed over to you

-->
@Nevets

If I were you, I'd take the free win.

-->
@Alec

Thanks..But not a great way to win a debate. Will volunteer to simply have the debate removed, in the absence of an opponent

-->
@Nevets

Congrats on your future win.

-->
@RationalMadman

Just to say...Great choice btw.
I was thinking of asking for a draw after researching Maldini.
However i think i might have a way of defeating Maldini.
But not guaranteed.
Maldini is a great choice.
Was not expecting a defender.

-->
@RationalMadman

Ok, i began my debate as if i did not know you were backing Paolo, and began with only speaking up for Pele

-->
@Nevets

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paolo_Maldini

I will back Paolo Maldoni as the GOAT and in part will be explaining why a best defender is ultimately superior to a best striker.

Pelé, (born October 23, 1940, Três Corações, Brazil), Brazilian football (soccer) player, in his time probably the most famous and possibly the best-paid athlete in the world. He was part of the Brazilian national teams that won three World Cup championships (1958, 1962, and 1970).

-->
@User_2006

Yes, there is a genuine debate known as "the GOAT/goat debate" and there are all kinds of arguments as to why the footballing association is wrong about Pele being the GOAT.
Arguments are "but half of Pele's goals" came in friendly matches against rubbish teams. To which i showed how this likely effected his goal-scoring record negatively, and not positively, due to the insane amount of matches he was playing, and in different countries.

Other arguments are that Pele never played for a top club.. I counter this by showing how Santos were one of the most successful clubs in the world during the period Pele played for them.

Other arguments are that Pele was not tested at top level against top european teams... But i showed Pele, in 7 matches against Benfica (5), Ac Milan (2), Inter Milan (0), real madrid (1), scored a total of 8 goals in 7 matches, all against european cup winners. His record against european cup winners was actually better than his record against rubbish teams in friendlies, and this was while supposedly playing for an inferior Santos team.

Other criticisms of Pele are that he could only score 77 goals in 90 odd games whilst playing for the best footballing nation in the world...However, i showed how Pele was actually not an out and out striker. He was mostly a playmaker, and he has the world record for most goal assists in the world cup.

Also there is the wrongful argument that "but no top european club wanted him". And i showed, Pele actually signed for Inter Milan, but had to be escorted back to Brazil for national security purposes, as Santos fans threatened to tear the city up.

I will likely copy and paste this in to my summary for round 5 once it has passed back to me

-->
@Nevets

I accepted that debate because I misread the title. I really DID think you are arguing for that Pele is a mountain goat animal thing. After your first argument, I realized you are arguing for the GOAT as in Greatest of all times, and my arguments later is the only things that can let me even stand a chance because I know how great a footballer Pele is.

-->
@User_2006

I do not think you are a troll.
"Trolling" is not the same as being a "troll".
It is possible to act like a troll in one instance and not on another. And is hardly crime of the century.

-->
@Nevets

I am not accepting this debate. I probably know less in football knowledge compared to you and I agree with all your evidence in the other debate, The only thing I am kind of good at is that I can stretch the definitions of basically everything, with the drawbacks of maybe making someone frustrated because he may or may not think I am just a troll.

-->
@User_2006

Feel free to debate.
But if you do, i forsee "Edison is truly the GOAT (3)".

-->
@Nevets

Due to my previous debate on this subject becoming vandalized, which nearly brought tears to my eyes, given the time and effort, I put into it...

I had these experiences before on DDO. I made a perfect argument in the state in which I trusted an inference that wasn't proof-backed at all. Then I virtually lost the debate because no one would have voted anyways.

Fine, I will not accept this debate.