round 1:
Pav almost had it with his ending line, i’m a fan of queen…
And the style chosen was interesting and memorable. I visualized some 80’s comedian reading it slowly and articulately on the references (though i did not get all the references)
On the other hand Carleas not only successfully wrote a Shakespearean sonnet, and on top of that he put a message in bold, which adds to the overall complexity.
Lyrically Carleas is a close win over Pavlovianmodel146 at 30-29 respectively in round 1 (judged out of 30)
Pavlovialmodel146 argues that classic rock is timeless and has variety.
Carleas argues that rap is with the times, but does also discredit other genres and brings up the notion of expelling the old. He effectively argues that rap is good and is the current winner.
However i don’t think this effectively counters the argument of timelessness.
Quasi-logically Pavlovialmodel146 is a close win over Carleas at 30-29 respectively
Round 2
I enjoyed Carleas’s Haikus, though i’m not used to reading 7-9-7.
Carleas brought the argument up a notch and simultaneously belittled the gearth of Classic Rock, invoked pascal which i really liked, and posited that rap will overtake classic rock in terms of classics and volume many fold.
Pavlovianmodel146 attacks the freedom of rap. Pav also posits that Rap will die out in 30 years or so, and that we will look back laughingly. He argues that rap will not maintain listeners with the old classics.
Lyrically you were both on par, but I would have liked to see more depth in the Haiku’s
I liked
“Carleas now makes the claim,
That the total songs will be the same;
Sans regard for quality.”
and
“In the spirit of Pascal,
What risk is there in loving hip-hop?
There is much risk in trash talk.”
Lyrically, It’s a tie at 29-29
Both poets touched on the opponents lyrics from round 1. While Pav commented on the freedom in rap, and also that the quality is lacking even if the numbers exist, Carleas poked fun of Pavlovian’s many citations, which i suspect was just for good measure. aswell as adding a rebuke to the timeless argument by asserting raps own timelessness, and teh fact that there could be more timeless rap songs classic rock.
I feel that while Pavlovian does dress several aspects of rap such as the hoes and crime aspect, and just the general quality of rap, Carleas effectively rebukes this with his own aggrandizement of rap and puts it over the top with a direct rebuke involving not loving rap by trash talking which was cleverly related to the topic within a haiku.
Quasi-logically Carleas beats out Pavlovianmodel146 with a close 30-29 victory.
Round 3
Carleas, your technique, content and rhyming are all of high quality, the delivery could be a bit smoother, but then again i could be interpreting it wrong.
Your use of metaphors was excellent and helped to make points.
Pavlovianmodel146, well done, you had my attention at “the dude writes a rhyme and claims he’s gonna gut her” which i believe is in reference to Necro, whom i have promoted on this site.
And you did exactly what i enjoy at the same time, which is just straight slander. You made a lyrical impression.
But to Carleas, perhaps if i heard it instead of just reading it i would feel differently, but i’m just sort of desensitized when it comes to,… shall we say… non offensive raps.
Immortal technique is a rapper you might enjoy Carleas, he is sort of your style. For such a small sample it’s hard to see what you can do. But you have the lyrical talent and i think you probably have rigid opinions deep down just waiting to be violently asserted…
Lyrically Pavlovian takes it with a score of 30-29
Quasi-logically i cannot begin to score this in terms of arguments wagered. If i had to i would probably rule in favor of Carleas just because what pav wrote is mostly slander (not a bad thing), and i also liked the use of poetic devices and flow. (in meaningful ways)
In any case i’m rendering it:
Quasi-logically: a tie, at 30-30.
results: it’s a tie
=D>