Only 1:1 locking is of any interest here. All these exoplanets are certainly so locked. Whether life can arise on such a planet is of course unknown, and will remain so until we find any, but it seems unlikely to me.

> Only 1:1 locking is of any interest here.

Agreed, what matters is what percentage of these planets are 1:1 locked.

> All these exoplanets are certainly so locked.

How do you know? Just citing moons in our system isn't enough.

Easy, 100%. Do you imagine that fusion occurring in the parent body makes any difference? Tidal locking involves nothing but gravity and friction.

Sizes of both objects, speeds, distributions of the chunks coming together, these things have effects. It's not just about being moons but the way you're extrapolating from a single system. And telling everyone to ignore Mercury because you're too right is not helpful.

The point is that these planets orbit extremely close to their star: much closer than Mercury is to the sun, never mind Venus. That is what matters. It has literally nothing to do with any sort of magickal moonityness. Mercury is not special; it is just not locked 1:1. Yet.

Moons in our solar system orbit closer to planets than planets to the sun, so get locked much more quickly. Venus and even Mercury have not quite got there. Earth is in a more complicated arrangement, which helps us avoid it. That might even have been essential for life.

You may read up elsewhere on what determines the tidal forces, friction, and rotational momentum and energy that determine how long it takes to get into a locked state. That would be smarter than word games.