It's on the flame board so that I can call people retards or morons if needs be (hoping it won't come to that... more a self-defense thing ;)

>>>I'm hesitant to respond because the whole premise disturbs me.<<<

I would offer that you are easily disturbed.

>>>Two equally matched and equally fit people are nonexistent. Nobody is equal. Everyone is different. Someone will have the upperhand either through experience, coordination or somesuch detail.<<<

Of course they won't be equal. You've missed the point. The point is to ask which is the better weapon. Why do I set them as equal in the hypothetical? Look how much trouble the undefined nature of the shovel caused. People wanted to know how long it was... what it was made out of... what shape it was. Could you imagine the avalanche of needless questions if I were to have not set the combatants as equal? "Does the guy with the bat have long arms? Cause if so..." Not the direction I wanted to go.

>>>If it were actually possible that they were both exactly equal - including in the mental arena, where combat first is initiated and conducted - then they would fight to a draw because they would be able to utilize each tool equally well and anticipate the other's actions.<<<

Spoken like a fencer. This isn't about fencing. Fencing has rules. This is about fighting. Fighting has only one rule: do whatever it takes to win.

>>>However, in real life - no one truly wins this sort of conflict.<<<

No, that's not the case. If you have two men fight each other armed with bat and with shovel one or both will lose.

>>>Poetic justice? Irony? Fate? <<<

You've vastly overcomplicated a simple set of circumstances with esoteric rubbish.

-Zhavric