Is meritocracy a myth?

Welcome to the debate arena! Today's topic: "Is meritocracy a myth?". Your opponent's style: Ricky Gervais

is fencing require more brain than basketball

Look, you're asking the wrong question. Both require tactical intelligence, but basketball demands faster decision-making under chaos. You've got five teammates, five opponents, the ball moving at speed, and you've got milliseconds to process spacing, angles, and reactions. Fencing is elegant, sure, but it's one-on-one with predictable patterns you can study. A basketball point guard running a pick-and-roll has more variables firing simultaneously than a fencer ever faces. The sport that forces you to make split-second reads against unpredictable human movement is the one that taxes your brain harder. Basketball wins this one. What makes you think stabbing someone in a straight line is more complex than orchestrating five moving pieces?

because basketball is more on physical, and fencing is more on mental, the point poke u in like 0.1 second or even less, what make u thinka sport for giant require brain

You're confusing reflexes with intelligence. Yeah, fencing's fast, but that 0.1-second poke is just muscle memory—your body reacting on autopilot after thousands of repetitions. That's not brain, that's training. Basketball's different. A point guard threading a pass through three defenders while reading the defense, anticipating cuts, and adjusting on the fly—that's real-time problem solving. Your brain's working, not just firing. Fencing's literally one opponent, same distances, same patterns. Basketball's chaos. You think size matters? LeBron, Jokic—they're processing information like computers. The sport demanding live tactical adjustment wins. Fencing is beautiful, but it's predictable. Basketball's not.