In a one-on-one fight Who would win the European Knight vs. the Japanese Samurai, both warriors would be from the 14th Century. Who would win the fight in hand-to-hand combat?

that's crazy talk, no one has ever posted something like that....



ummm


I mean, not since yesterday

Actually, it you guys will read the entire post, you'll see he's asking about hand-to-hand combat not general armed combat (which has been covered ad nauseum).

Knight would have bigger thumbs, more reach, would dominate a thumb war.

I'd be willing to bet that the better fighter would win, if we facor out dumb luck. Who the better fighter might be would be determined by a dizzying array of factors including level of training, reflexes, athletic ability, conditioning, fighting style, weather, time of day, phase of the moon, etc. We're not dealing with video game enemies where every example of a type possesses the same abilities and number of hit points. These are human beings who have the same range of talents and liabilities that modern humans do. It is impossible to draw such general conclusions about such a large and diverse group.

And if you noticed the small degree of frusteration around here, just know that this question is brought up a lot. ;)

If you guys insist on discussing this type of fantasy topic, I ask that you keep the tone and level of discussion up to the expectations of this site.

Thank you.

Hey

The Russian in the T-34 tank would win?

N

Nathan, maybe a new forum category could be created for the excessively fun, crazy/ridiculous, and nonsensical discussions brought up on occasion. A title like "Really Off-Topic Talk" or "Fantasy Forum" might describe that well. Or maybe not... :)

Assuming you don't mean hand to hand literally; You didnt say what armour theyre wearing, what weapon theyre using. Is the Samurai trying to cut through plate or heavy mail armour with a curved sword? If youre going to make this thread over and over on every history related forum I can think of at least be sepcific..

I don't carry any authority here or know the moderation policies but is there any chance of samurai VS "______" threads just being locked up? Theres 2 on the front page alone.. neither with any real answers. it really takes away from the clean, professional environment of this site.

I tend to agree. In most cases, the intellectual level of "Warrior X vs. Warrior Y" topics tends to fall in the vicinity of abysmal. They're fun to have sometimes, but little good ever comes of them. I've always enjoyed the more academic atmosphere found here. There is already a nice fantasy forum over at SFI, for those time you simply must discuss an aspect of Squall's gunblade or a Klingon bat'leth, so the inclusion of one here seems somewhat redundant.

I don't see a new forum being added for the purpose of these kind of threads.

Also, our policy is not to lock threads. This happens on other boards and often creates more problems than it solves. Generall, it's often preferable to trash a thread rather than lock it: if it has no value and has spiraled out of control, leaving it locked but visible serves no purpose. Will we begin to automatically trash threads of this nature? Not likely.

These threads can have some educational value to some people, but many jaded readers post unhelpful, snotty, and downright degrading messages in response since they are tired of these threads. Evidently, the poster of such threads is curious about these topics and obviously hasn't seen the myriad of other threads that are out there. There are things that can be learned from good responses to these threads, such as why it's nearly impossible to make valid, apples-to-apples comparisons of weapons, warriors, and fighting systems that developed in response to wildly different circumstances and materials.

If people would either a) take the time to respond helpfully and thoughtfully or would b) not post in them if they have nothing good to say, these threads would be less painful and more educational.

If you don't find these threads helpful or feel you can't post something of educational value in the tone we have tried very hard to maintain here, then stay out of them. Don't post a snide response or worthlessly facetious response simply because you are tired of these kinds of posts. Add something to a discussion, don't drag it down. If you can't do that, don't hit the reply button.

I'd stay the fight is close to dead even, though a very late 14th-century knight might have somewhat superior armor and polearm better at defeating armor. Even early 14th-century European armor covers the body more completely than Japanese armor, though. So, if they both used swords, I'd give a very slight edge to the European.

Hello Justin, I believe your question has crossed the minds of many sword enthusiasts. Since the question started out a little vague, it ended up being almost impossible to answer. Maybe you could clarify a bit. Were you wondering which warrior received the greater amount of training in their lifetime? Or maybe which warrior was in the better overall physical condition? Or maybe which culture outfitted their soldiers with the best overall equipment? These questions may be equally as hard/impossible to answer but you might get more postings with solid educated guesses.

Hopefully this helps. Don

Who would win is an impossible question to answer and any specific fight like this could end completely differently than any other subsequent fight. So, lets forget about " who would win ".

If a serious discussion is even possible it might be an abstract comparison of techniques: Say Samurai X uses a specific technique, what technique would the differently trained Knight use as a counter ? What techniques would be common and familiar to both and which would surprise the other ?

All this complicated by all the different combinations of styles both Western and Eastern that one could chose to pair up for comparison.

Equipment is also were comparisons can be made, but here too skill in use would be more critical than the details in a real life contest.

All the variable that would apply to a real fight that concern the individual quality of each fighter is just a distraction.

So I think a comparison of techniques might produce some interesting speculations or better simulations of how these would interact. I personally don't have the competence to come to any conclusions as I am not an expert in either Japanese or European swordsmanship.

So, I believe that a serious discussion about this sort of thing is possible it's just that most similar Topics degenerate into
unproductive my opinion is better than your opinion ......... and become obnoxious or boring !

Hi gents. i kinda like these decussions, allthough only hyperthetical, when taken seriously these threads have a great opitunity to compare armour and skill from different culture and pit them against another.

i think that a knight would win.

whether on horse back or foot.

Hey, why don't we try some generalizations? The European warrior will most likely have been larger and stronger than the Japanese warrior. That gives the Knight some advantage in the "brute" department. The European warrior's full plate armour would likely have presented the biggest problem in getting a strike through. I'm not trying to imply that the Japanese warrior's armour was any less worthy, just that a combination of coverage and fairly advanced metal working abilities most likely give the European armour an advantage in that department. Please remember that the full plate armour still had many fallable strike areas, especially those of movement. To successfuly render an incapacitating strike against a warrior in full plate, the opposing combatent would have to be extremely precise and quik. Herein lies the crux. Japanese martial training seems to have been very thorough, highly evolved, extremely precise, and a part of a much more encompassing life philosophy, much more so than the European martial training. That would probably give an advantage to the Samurai, under many fight situations. I believe, that it is at this point that the individual warrior's mental and physical capabilities would actually determine the effective outcome. You basically have razor-sharp skills vs. power& protection. That is tough to call... who would fall for what, first?


P.s. ; Didn't we all have to start learning from more knowledgable people at some point in time? I include myself in the learning group...