I must admit, the middle portion of your post here strikes me as rather uncharacteristic of you. Typically, your posts contain robust statistical datasets to show a bigger point you're trying to make, or offer a thorough analytical thought process to accomplish the same and stimulate discussion; whereas here, you avoid what you call a "semantic debate" over very basic smash terminology that can be quite easily reconciled even if it is a bit "dry" or "dull." I'm sure you're a busy guy (and so am I), but I think we can do better than that.
Perhaps it's the future lawyer in me, but I think it's very important to clarify definitions of terms we use in our discussion, even moreso for basic terms, to make sure we're all on the same page and performing our "due diligence" to post in a thoughtful way that reflects the stated purpose of this entire thread.
Enough with the diatribe; here are the general definitions I use on all of the above terms based on empirical observation and experience:
- Edgeguard: When your opponent is off-stage, and you intercept them so you KO them into
side blastzones, regardless of what resources your opponent may have had to recover back to ledge and return to stage to reset neutral.
-Gimp: This one might be a stretch (and it wasn't expressly brought up here); arguably, this is just a subcategory of an edgeguard, but I define this identical to the edgeguard definition above except that more often, the opponent has expended most, if not all, of their resources to get back to ledge, making them easier to intercept. I also find the usage of "gimp" to mean a KO not directly out to the side blastzone, but falling to their death to the bottom blastzone because they don't have the mobility or resources to attempt getting back to the stage's ledge.
-Ledgeguard: Aptly, intercepting your opponent from recovering to the ledge
specifically rather than (more) preemptively intercepting your opponent off-stage before they even have the chance to drift back toward the ledge. Two-framing is a good example of this.
-Ledgetrap: Again rather apt, but your opponent has already made it to the ledge and is trying to get off it, giving you the opportunity to react to their get up option, go for a hard read on their get up option, or employ more tactful conditioning that your character has available to make punishing a particular option more likely.
In other words, the only meaningful difference in these definitions is
the opponent's relative proximity to the ledge and/or center stage; an edgeguard in practice means the opponent is very likely going to be at a further distance from the ledge, ledgeguard indicates a much closer proximity to the ledge (either just about to use a DJ or up b to recover to ledge, or attempting to snap to the ledge after using those options), and ledgetrap, finally and obviously, meaning that the opponent is already on the ledge and attempting to get off it while you maintain stage control and opportunity to net the kill.
In light of the above, it's clear that much of what
does to her opponents to kill them would be edgeguarding and ledgeguarding (via 2-framing or just as they approach ledge otherwise), although she's certainly no slouch when it comes to ledge trapping either; her ability to do this from center stage is unique and exceptional, but her ability to maintain that positioning where others cannot is irrelevant to defining these basic terms.
Re: Mekos
/Kola
set
Just going to provide some quick thoughts on this: Many of us know that Lucas's disadvantage state is less than stellar, but I couldn't help but notice that Mekos tended to ledge jump a lot and if it wasn't that, it was a ledge drop DJ fair typically. Maybe it was just nerves, but he really should've mixed it up more, especially considering the caliber of player that Kola is (if Mekos mixed it up, Kola very well could've reacted to and/or read his option and kill him anyway, but mixing up options from ledge obviously and inherently makes your opponent's objective more difficult). Also, applying my proposed definitions of basic terms above, Roy got a lot off of
ledgetraps (typical Roy stuff, really) and Lucas got relatively more
edgeguards and
ledgeguards, which I think many of us can agree aligns well with what we expect from the character.
I just figured I'd take the time to give my thoughts on this boring ol' "semantic debate," because while it's rather dry and trivial in the grand scheme of things, if we're not cogent with our definitions and understanding of what constitutes an "edgeguard," "ledgeguard," and "ledgetrap," how can we expect of ourselves -- let alone, expect from others -- to be cogent in applying those definitions and understanding of the terms in an accurate way (let alone more advanced concepts of the game)?! Preferring to not get into the nittier and grittier semantics (even if just
occasionally; it obviously doesn't need to take up the lionshare of discussion) of these things is, I would reckon, a substantial factor in why the smash community is so shallow and misinformed about discussions of numerous aspects of the game, and I know for myself and many others that that is a phenomenon we are getting more than just a bit frustrated with contending against at this point.