The Instigator
Pro (for)
1 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
15 Points

Batman defeats Spiderman

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 3 votes the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/23/2014 Category: Entertainment
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,041 times Debate No: 65693
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (3)




I have seen many debates about why would Spiderman win Batman, but this time i go with my knowledge of comics and geekyness to decide this once for all, Batman would surely beat Spidey with or without preparation time.


Batman and Spider-Man are both among the most intelligent scientists of their respective worlds. They excel in gadgetry, with Spider-Man having the edge of improvisation because Batman relies on his wealth, while Peter Parker has always worked with limited supplies.
Both are experienced crime fighters.
Spider-Man is a meta-human with heightened strength and reflexes.
Both are heroes.

The two meet due to some strange convergence of their universes. This has happened in the comics, btw.

And while OTHER heroes and superheroes tend to fight it out during their respective crossovers, those two are the best guys around and resolve their differences PEACEFULLY, gaining mutual respect and cooperating with each other. They shake hands in both issues, once to part and once to welcome each other back as friends.

So, since the meeting has already happened TWICE and did not lead to a fight, there is no EVIDENCE to conclude from that Batman would EVER even ATTEMPT to beat Spider-Man.

And since my opponent did NOT define any circumstances under which those two would not be partners, this imply never happens, and this debate is over.

Batman would not defeat Spider-Man. He had two occasions to do so and didn't even try. All my opponent has in order to go against this would be his "geek" "knowledge", in other words: pure speculation. Set against what has already happened in the comics.

Now, for another fact:
Spider-Man has officially beaten Superman's clone Superboy, who is clearly superior in power to Batman.
Spider-Man has defeated foes like the virtually unstoppable Juggernaut.
AND, specifically, Spider-Man has repeatedly bested the Green Goblin, who is basically an evil Batman with the addition of a lethal glider and no qualms about inadvertently killing people: a rich, genius billionaire with an arsenal of gadgets, including smoke grenades, throwing stars not unlike the famous batarangs, and who is additionally stronger than any human due to the Green Goblin formula, a variation of the super soldier serum that gave Captain America his powers.

All this is fact.

Batman, quite to the contrary, has only stopped villains who are superior to Spider-Man in only ONE aspect at a time. Either someone even more intelligent, but lacking Spider-Man's strength and particularly the Spider-sense that warns him of any danger. Or someone stronger, but then lacking the brilliant mind.

If my opponent wants to come up with his battles against Superman: Kryptonite always played a crucial part in those, and Spider-Man has no such weakness.

Spider-Man single-handedly defeated all of the Fantastic Four without preparation, when he was just a kid:
So, he effortlessly beat:
- the elaborate building security system
- the most brilliant scientist of that world
- the second strongest being of that world
- an invisible woman who can project force fields
- a metahuman who can project really hot flames and fly
without breaking a sweat, just to make an impression - so not even trying to harm anyone. And that was IN their lab, where Reed Richards has all his tech.
Even Batman cannot be better than a team of the finest heroes in their own headquarters.

So, even in a sparring match, Spider-Man wins.

Debate Round No. 1


This is a battle, this does not matter if they would or not fight, this debate does not discuss whether or not they would fight.

The Spider Man and Superboy match is non canon at all because if it was canon one of those universes would cease to exist.

Also the comparison between Batman and Green Goblin is ridiculous since the Green Goblin throws smoke grenades and Batman throws Batarangs that actually harm, and Batarangs that even explode.

Only a simple hit of Batman's explosive Batarang and Spiderman is done for. Lets remember how Batman killed numerous Doomsday clones (Doomsday killed Superman once) with the explosive Batarangs. Also, Spider Man got a grenade in the face once in a movie and got heavily confused; Lets combine that with a Batarang that could slice his neck AND explode to evade the tissue regenerating.

By the way, Spiderman's strength is really not that superior, see this video

If we are going to quote the opponents that each of our heroes defeated see this:
Most of them are stronger than Spiderman.


I thank my opponent for these insights. Here is my rebuttal:

A) "This is a battle, this does not matter if they would or not fight"
This has not been defined as a battle in round 1. I refuse to accept any post-hoc definitions.
Round 1 states: "Batman would surely beat Spidey with or without preparation time"
This is an absolute statement and is open to debate on ALL levels not ruled out by the initial resolution.
Batman would NOT "surely beat Spidey" if the two do not fight. Your resolution is disproved. Don't blame me for your sloppy resolution, if you please.

B) "The Spider Man and Superboy match is non canon at all"
Firstly, FALSE. Marvel lists the world of "DC vs. Marvel" as Earth-9602 (see: or ), meaning it is NOT "non canon at all".
Secondly: Irrelevant. You wish to stage a fight between Batman and Spider-Man that never happened nor would ever happen, so you accept non-canon material as a premise.
Besides, DC Universe CEASED to exist with the New 52.

C) "the comparison between Batman and Green Goblin is ridiculous"
"Spider-Man already has some experience in fighting strategic, gadget-oriented opponents, as his main enemy is the Green Goblin, who possesses a similar style of fighting compared to Batman."
I came up with that comparison by myself. Now that you questioned it, I found this. So, the more experienced geeks at "Death Battle", a well-researched webseries beloved by many fans, agree with me that this comparison is anything but ridiculous. I listed the similarities above.
The Batman never uses exploding Batarangs against anyone they would kill, as he doesn't kill.
The Goblin uses a large arsenal of different weapons, most of which resemble those of Batman:
Note the use of smoke pellets by Batman. You do not even know your material.

D) "Only a simple hit of Batman's explosive Batarang and Spiderman is done for"
Spider-Man's Spider-sense is well known. From the official Marvel site: "His spider-sense provides an early warning detection system linked with his superhuman kinesthetics, enabling him the ability to evade most any injury, provided he doesn't cognitively override the autonomic reflexes." from:
Batman can thus never hit Spider-Man.

E) "Doomsday clones"
This happened in Superman/Batman 10, in 2004.
"Darkseid attempted to replicate Doomsday, producing an army of Doomsday "clones". Darkseid was not able to duplicate perfectly the creature in all its raw power, and they were defeated by a combination of heat vision and Batman's explosive batarangs during an attack on Paradise Island, while Darkseid kidnapped the newly arrived Kara Zor-El/Supergirl." from:

So, it wasn't Batman, it was Superman with Batman's help who TOGETHER defeated a mindless, DEFECTIVE army of clones. Do your research properly, next time.

F) If we want to take the movies into this, the Goblin threw multiple sharp objects (much like Batarangs), and 1 bomb exploded into Spidey's face. The movie Spider-Man is easily the weakest Spider-Man of all, but even HE recovered from the blast and defeated his enemies. All of them. So, this only gets to show that he can overcome explosive Batarangs. But there was no Spider-Sense in that scene, because the Raimi-directed movies follow their own mythology, where Spidey doesn't even have his web-shooters.

G) Spider-Man's strength
Spider-Man lifted an ENTIRE SKYSCRAPER in 1999:
Far superior to anything Batman can ever dream of.

H) Defeated opponents
AGAIN: Those opponents who are physically stronger than Spidey lack his brilliant mind and Spider-Sense. That combination makes Spider-Man far superior.
And since you come up with "Tower of Babel": That doesn't say ANYTHING for this debate. In that story, all of the Justice are defeated (rather delayed for a few hours, as they recover and defeat the bad guys, showing just how "well" Batman's plans work) by the villains with STRATEGIES Batman has PREPARED well ahead.

Now, round 1 states: "Batman would surely beat Spidey with or without preparation time." But in "Tower of Babel" it was the VILLAINS, not Batman, and they had a LOT of preparation time. So, this story tells us nothing on how Batman would ever beat Spider-Man without preparation time.

Again, no evidence exists to the contrary of my assertions. Batman and Spider-Man would never fight, and if they did, Batman would have nothing to beat Spider-Man who has often defeated the even more powerful Green Goblin.

This debate is over.

Debate Round No. 2


As someone reasonable i must say i lost this argument from the beginning, i could not even state my strong points in this argument. My first debate surely wen't down to the worst, i did not even knew they first text i posted was the opening argument.
It was a pleasure to debate with you, i will learn my errors and maybe sometime defeat you, but i doubt it.


I have nothing but respect for an opponent who admits defeat.
Come more practice, I'll be fair game for you, too. No debater can NOT be beaten.

Looking forward to another time!

I want to encourage the voters to give conduct to my opponent for his great form here and a sign of encouragement and support!

Thanks all!
Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by 9spaceking 1 year ago
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: pro concedes.
Vote Placed by QTAY21 1 year ago
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: It just seems like pro was unprepared for this fight. Better luck next time.
Vote Placed by chewster911 1 year ago
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:13 
Reasons for voting decision: Good arguments presented by Con. Since they remained unanswered,points to Con. As Con suggested,i will give conduct to Pro for his honorary forfeit.