*POLL* European swordsman vs Japanese Samurai

[Shockwave]

Assume both warriors have equipment of their choice from the pinnacle of their respective ages. Also assume both are highly trained.
In a duel, who do you think would be victorious?

 

[Arkitech]

I think this is poll going to be easy to call

 

[dighn]

samurai are like ninjas and ninjas pwn

 

[slackin]

This poll has already been done.

 

[chrisms]

Samurai... they put so much work into everything

 

[wkabel23]

Samurai

 

[Shockwave]

Originally posted by: slackin
This poll has already been done.

But maybe people have had a change of opinion, so its good to have a refresher so to speak

 

[Looney]

Without any armor, it would be whoever makes the first contact. So chances are would be the Japanese sword.

 

[Electric Amish]

Most likely a draw.

If neither opponent is familiar with the fighting style though, it would be the first to make contact. That could be either warrior.

 

[Shockwave]

Originally posted by: Hardcore
Without any armor, it would be whoever makes the first contact. So chances are would be the Japanese sword.

But each can choose to wear armor. As said, they can use any weapon or armor they choose.

 

[Trygve]

I've done some mixed-style swordfights, including European longsword versus single or twin katanas, and personally I'd say that, if we're talking about European longsword versus Samurai-style katana (obviously there are lots of other styles in either culture), the European-style swordsman would have the advantage. Much of that is simply due to the greater reach of the European style. Additionally, Samurai-style katana fighting is much, much, much better for taking out large numbers of unarmed and unarmored peasants quickly, whereas European-style swordfighting is directed more towards a one-on-one match between two comparably armed and armored opponents.

 

[Looney]

Originally posted by: Electric Amish
Most likely a draw.

If neither opponent is familiar with the fighting style though, it would be the first to make contact. That could be either warrior.

If you're doing weapon by weapon, Japanese swords are always lighter and faster than European sword. Although the Japanese swords aren't meant to be parried with, they could take one or two parries, but the Japanese user would be able to counterattack/riposte much quicker than the european sword. Lets not forget that European swords are bigger as well, so they'll be easier to see it incoming (as well as slower during the incoming). A japanese sword is thin and lightning quick, and very difficult to see in motion.

 

[Papagayo]

I think this is a dumb question..

You also didn't specify the weapon.

Winner would be the person that had pistols at their time period..

 

[Czar]

I voted the samurai but I'm having doubts, to get through armor you need pearching weapons and the samurai sword is a slashing weapon

 

[Looney]

Originally posted by: Shockwave

Originally posted by: Hardcore
Without any armor, it would be whoever makes the first contact. So chances are would be the Japanese sword.

But each can choose to wear armor. As said, they can use any weapon or armor they choose.

Then it would depend on fighting style i would think. If the European fighter really were dressed in full plate with chain and padded armor underneath, he's carrying over a hundred pounds. I would run around until they were tired... but i don't know how long that really takes and if it would be viable.

 

[Amorphus]

Samurai armor is bulky and cumbersome. It was designed for riding around armored on a horse while you slash whatever you can with one free arm while the horse is running like made.

European armor is to protect anything and everything against any sort of blow.

Neither of them would be moving too much, and since Medieval warriors had more weapons that just longswords at their disposal, they have a distinct advantage (i.e. blunt weapons like maces and flails and morning stars).

I voted for European. Japan isn't all that great, you know.

Even on horses, knights have lances (*schloop*), samurai have arrows (*ping*) or swords (*bong*)
(the *xxx* is the noise the weapon would make against the other person. )

 

[Looney]

Originally posted by: Papagayo
I think this is a dumb question..

You also didn't specify the weapon.

Winner would be the person that had pistols at their time period..

You obviously can't read. He said European SWORDSMAN and Japanese SAMURAI.

 

[TheWart]

also, i know this is not in your poll, but the choice of fighters is not exactly equal. in my limited understanding of military history, the samurai was the elite of the elite of japanese warriors, whereas the European knight on horseback would be the equivalent. that is if you are taking the cream of the crop versus the cream of the crop. no European army had footmen in hundreds of pounds of armor trying to wield a sword - that only happened when the knight in question was unhorsed.

like i said, not trying to crap your poll, just providing some info.

 

[Looney]

Originally posted by: Amorphus
Samurai armor is bulky and cumbersome.

er really? Not from everything i've read and seen. It was made from bamboo, cloth, with some metal plates and rings, certainly sounding much lighter than the European armor (there was a Discovery special on Japanese armor after Last Samurai was released), if not offering as much protection.

Neither of them would be moving too much, and since Medieval warriors had more weapons that just longswords at their disposal, they have a distinct advantage (i.e. blunt weapons like maces and flails and morning stars).

A samurai carried 3 swords... daito, wakizashi, and tanto. I've never heard of any knights carrying a longsword, mace, flail and morning stars with them at the same time... where the hell would they put all those weapons?

 

[Demon-Xanth]

There was actually a show on this a while back. I think they had ruled in a minor favor to the european. A samurai sword would have to pierce the european armor, it couldn't just slash and break through. A european's sword would have more push to it. The samurai might not be able to block a shot, but would have to dodge and then stab. Remember, the european guys were highly trained as well, and a samurai sword can't magically cut through anything like in the movies.

 

[Trygve]

Originally posted by: Shockwave

Originally posted by: Hardcore
Without any armor, it would be whoever makes the first contact. So chances are would be the Japanese sword.

But each can choose to wear armor. As said, they can use any weapon or armor they choose.

If both are wearing armor, then the European longsword style has an even greater advantage.

There's also the question of what they have in their other hands. Twinsword fighting with katanas takes skill, but there's a lot to be said for the technique. I'd hesitate to fight with two matched longswords, though. Now, on the European style weapons, fighting with either shield or axe in the other hand has some big tactical advantages (remember that an axe isn't merely a striking weapon; it's very effective for entrapping or even breaking an opponent's sword). Swords aren't the only weapons around, either; a skilled fighter with a relatively light halberd might give a Samurai a run for his money, too.

BTW, for the guy who said Samurai are like Ninja, Samurai and Ninja styles, while they have some common elements, are not the same, nor are the weapons. The katana and shinobigatana may look superficially similar from a distance, neither the construction nor the techniques are the same.

 

[Kelvrick]

Japanese armor probably won't provide too much protection against the european swordsman. THe euro (i'm lazy, so abbrevs now) has more protection and a lot longer reach. Not only with his sword, but probably his arm length as well. The sam would have greater mobility. There have been arguments and the end result isthat each fight would differ.

EDIT: Also, there are different types of swords. A french swordsman might use a longsword and a parrying knife (forgot whats called) in the other. He might use the greatsword.

 

[Kipper]

Depends...is he using the eight-foot William Wallace sword?

 

[DainBramaged]

Originally posted by: dighn
samurai are like ninjas and ninjas pwn

Teh winnar!

 

[Looney]

Originally posted by: Trygve

Originally posted by: Shockwave

Originally posted by: Hardcore
Without any armor, it would be whoever makes the first contact. So chances are would be the Japanese sword.

But each can choose to wear armor. As said, they can use any weapon or armor they choose.

If both are wearing armor, then the European longsword style has an even greater advantage.

There's also the question of what they have in their other hands. Twinsword fighting with katanas takes skill, but there's a lot to be said for the technique. I'd hesitate to fight with two matched longswords, though. Now, on the European style weapons, fighting with either shield or axe in the other hand has some big tactical advantages (remember that an axe isn't merely a striking weapon; it's very effective for entrapping or even breaking an opponent's sword). Swords aren't the only weapons around, either; a skilled fighter with a relatively light halberd might give a Samurai a run for his money, too.

BTW, for the guy who said Samurai are like Ninja, Samurai and Ninja styles, while they have some common elements, are not the same, nor are the weapons. The katana and shinobigatana may look superficially similar from a distance, neither the construction nor the techniques are the same.

Dual/twin katanas is a Hollywood invention. Katanas were never meant to be parried with (you'll nick them if you do), so anybody who's dualwielding katanas are completely ignorant and just doing it for show. I'm not surprised you weren't impressed with them.