N'waswitshaka males

[Tr1x24]

(06-07-2020, 01:28 PM)Potato Wrote: 1. Matimba males cought Fourway males in fight 2vs2. In that case we speak about 2vs4. It is totally different story.
2. Birminghams are not Matimbas. That there were coalitions which manage to pull through when confronted by younger coalition doesn't mean Birminghams will be able to do that as well. I don't think odds are on their side.
3. "3 Fourways males where bigger then current N' ws back in 2014"  Oh really? Assumption based on what exactly?

(06-07-2020, 01:28 PM)Potato Wrote: 1. Matimba males cought Fourway males in fight 2vs2. In that case we speak about 2vs4. It is totally different story.
2. Birminghams are not Matimbas. That there were coalitions which manage to pull through when confronted by younger coalition doesn't mean Birminghams will be able to do that as well. I don't think odds are on their side.
3. "3 Fourways males where bigger then current N' ws back in 2014"  Oh really? Assumption based on what exactly?

I've taken Matimbas vs Fourways as and example that numbers dont always matter if coalition is inexperienced.

1. Yes they caught them 2 vs 2,but its very likely that all 3 Fourways was around, its often that young coalition splits in this situations, N'ws split too when they where chased by Bboys..
I dont think is 2 vs 4, because 1 of the N'ws has very bad injury, and its unknown if he can contribute in a fight scenario (as we seen he was not seen mating with SP female, he prob didnt dare to fight his brothers for mating right because of injury) 

2. "Birminghams are not Matimbas" based on what? Bboys since 2015 didnt lost inch of their territory without their will, thats more then S. Matimbas hold their.. 

3. Based on looks. 

But Fourways vs Matimbas doesnt matter, i've take that just as an example.. Reply