Bg 1.10

aparyāpta tad asmāka
bala
 bhīṣmābhirakitam
pary
āpta tv idam eteṣāṁ
bala
 bhīmābhirakitam

Word for word: 

aparyāptam — immeasurable; tat — that; asmākam — of ours; balam — strength; bhīṣma — by Grandfather Bhīṣma; abhirakitam — perfectly protected; paryāptam — limited; tu — but; idam — all this; eteṣām — of the Pāṇḍavas; balam — strength; bhīma — by Bhīma; abhirakitam — carefully protected.

Translation: 

Our strength is immeasurable, and we are perfectly protected by Grandfather Bhīṣma, whereas the strength of the Pāṇḍavas, carefully protected by Bhīma, is limited.

Sometimes “in” is prefixed before an adjective to negate it or to intensify it e.g. valuable => invaluable (value is so great we cannot measure – intensify), substantial, insubstantial (negative)

paryāpta = Sufficient or adequate

aparyāpta= here the prefix ‘a’ can intensify or can negate ‘paryaptam’

Army under Bhima is limited measurable (Baldev Vidyabhusana commentary)

Army under Bhisma is un-measurable means so much (Baldev Vidyabhusana commentary)

Srila Vishwanath Chakravarti Thakura commentary:

paryāpta = Sufficient or adequate

aparyāpta= here the prefix ‘a’ can intensify or can negate ‘paryaptam’

Why Duryodhana spoke in such a way since these words are spoken by Goddess Saraswati Devi through Duryodhana.

{also we can see that two consecutive verses are influenced by Goddess Saraswati.}

So it is not that comments from different Acharyas are contradictory but it depends where they are focusing, Srila Baldev-Vidyabhushan is concentrating on tatva and Srila Vishwanath Chakravarti focused on rasa.

Heart is very much important in the war, Bhishma's heart was not there in war but Bhima full heat was there in war…because of incidents happened with him before the war.

So Duryodhana says that just by presence of Bhishma it is not adequate but presence and support of all others whose name he took in important. This is clear in next verse.