The practical consequence of my position: Goku does not have to stand in punching range and wait for the gag to land. Saitama’s whole bit is “one punch,” but that is a narrative shortcut, not a demonstrated answer to instant transmission, ranged ki blasts, or fighting across dimensions. The other side essentially argues that the joke wins because it is a joke, which is like saying a cartoon anvil beats a fighter jet because it is funnier. Goku’s toolkit gives him real ways to avoid the punch and hit back. So yes, Goku can beat Saitama.

The practical consequence of my opponent’s view is that the match becomes a book-cover contest: Saitama wins because his cover says “one punch,” not because he has shown an answer to instant transmission, ranged ki, or fighting someone who refuses to stand still. A punch needs to connect. Goku’s toolkit is built around not being where the punch lands, then hitting back from elsewhere. If “his gimmick has no limits” is the whole argument, that is circular, not combat. Strip the premise and Saitama is a very strong guy with no demonstrated counter to Goku’s actual abilities.

The practical consequence of my opponent's view is a match decided by dust jacket: whoever's premise says "unlimited" wins before anyone moves. But a punch still has to arrive. Saitama's one-punch bit never had to solve instant transmission, ranged ki, or an opponent who leaves the room between swings. Goku doesn't need to out-punch the gag; he needs to make the punch miss, then hit back. That's not turning Saitama into a normal fighter, it's testing his premise against a moving target.