I've been a comic book fan for as long as I can remember. I breathe and live superhero media — comics, movies, shows, video games, you name it, I consume it. In my many years of superhero fandom, I've seen a lot of debates. "Who's stronger, Spider-Man or Thor?" "Who's richer, Lex Luthor or Bruce Wayne?" "Who's faster, Superman or The Flash?" But, among those discussions, there's been one in particular that's always bothered me: Who'd win in a fight: Batman or Superman?
The question has been posed in multiple mainstream projects. It was the basis for NetherRealm's Injustice video games and the Injustice animated film, and even inspired a whole feature film in 2016's Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice. Listen, Batman and Superman are cool. They are. And having a man like Bruce Wayne go up against an almost-god-level individual like Clark Kent is a fascinating concept. That's not being questioned here. However, the debate surrounding such a mash-up holds, for the most part, no merit.
Batman vs. Superman Shouldn't Really Be A Question
Keep in mind, I'm not talking about the concept of Batman and Superman going up against one another. As mentioned, that's fascinating, and raises Bruce Wayne's bravery to even more legendary status. No, what's nonsense is the debate itself. Let's be real: In a one-on-one fight, Batman has absolutely no chance against Superman. Of course, whenever there's discussion of the Caped Crusader beating someone, the topic of prep time comes up. To get that out of the way, I am of the mindset that Batman being able to beat everyone and anyone who comes his way given enough time to plan is silly.
The Dark Knight is a smart fella, of course, but let's be real — there are some individuals he'd simply be unable to beat. Superman is on that list. Now, before I continue, I have to make something clear: Batman could technically hold his own against the Man of Steel if he were equipped with kryptonite (a whole lot of it), but that is a special-case scenario that falls into the category of giving Wayne time to plan things out, and that may also not end up being that effective, so let's leave it out for now.
It's important to remember this: For any fight between these two titans to be legitimate, Superman would not be holding back whatsoever, which would mean instant death for Batman. It may be tough to accept, but if Superman were to stop caring about Bruce remaining in the realm of the living, he would completely obliterate him in ways so numerous, it's pretty much impossible for me to list here.
A good example of how badly a fight against Superman would go for Batman was given in Justice League: War. The 2014 animated feature showed the first meeting between the two, and in that encounter, the Last Son of Krypton completely wiped the floor with the Caped Crusader (and Hal Jordan Green Lantern, for good measure). Another accurate example of how much pain Superman could inflict on Batman is given in 2017's "The Button." The comic had Bruce Wayne facing the Reverse Flash and... well, things didn't go well for our beloved Caped Crusader. The fight was brutal, and the only reason Batman survived was because Reverse Flash was teleported away.
Thus, a battle between Batman and Superman lasting more than 12 seconds depends solely on Superman holding back. The way I've always seen it, the Man of Steel fighting the Dark Knight is the equivalent of an adult racing a child: The adult naturally slows down to give the kid a fighting chance in the race. As such, realistically speaking, in nearly every fight they've had in both comics and media adaptations, Superman is most likely entertaining Batman, as opposed to considering him a serious opponent.
One could make the argument that Batman could ambush Superman; take him by surprise and gain the upper hand. Yet, there's another tool in Clark Kent's arsenal we need to take into account that would serve as a countermeasure for such a scenario: Super speed. It may be easy to forget how overpowering super speed can be, but thanks to it, Superman could see anything Batman were to throw his way the second he threw it, allowing him to neutralize it almost instantly.
Now, I imagine there's a temptation to say, "Well, these are comic book characters, whatever the writer says, happens." The thing is, that's not a good argument for looking at a question like this from a realistic perspective. The fact is that, given his immense powers, going up against a regular human — regardless of how well-trained said human may be — would not be a challenge for Superman. In fact, it would likely be a fairly forgettable experience for him.
So, overall, a powerless Batman — even with armor and a few (non-kryptonite) gadgets — does not pose a challenge for Superman. For a real fight between the two, Batman would need to be somehow powered up to such an extent that he'd be able to reach Superman's level... and kryptonite doesn't necessarily count. Going back to what I mentioned earlier, while an advantage for sure, kryptonite would probably not contribute significantly toward a win since, while it does weaken Superman, it doesn't entirely negate the bulk of his abilities. So, if he were serious about the fight, he could push through the effects of kryptonite on his body to give Batman the beating of his life.
Again, this is not to say that Superman and Batman should never come to blows. There are instances of it working, such as in the Injustice games, in which Batman took a pill to be able to match (or at least come close) to the Man of Steel's strength level. But at face value, Batman should not be able to go toe-to-toe against Superman, even if he were allowed prep time.
What are your thoughts on this debate? Let me know in the comments!