Deadliest Warrior

[the beast]

Just watched this new show called Deadliest Warrior very interesting was just wondering if anyone else has seen it.

[bushido_man96]

I've seen the ads, and I want to see it. I just have to try to catch it. What did it cover?

[BDPulver]

Thats different from what I watch on history channel I think. I watch Warrior by terry shepard. Last night he did samurai and ninja.

[the beast]

This past week they put an Apache warrior against a Gladiator, they went over a lot of both warriors weapons and ran a simulation through a computer that covered 1000 battles and which ever one won the majority of battles won. Next week is Samurai vs. Viking.

[Grego]

I actually missed the premier, but I already set my DVR to record it when it comes on tomorrow.

Looking forward to it.

[bushido_man96]

This past week they put an Apache warrior against a Gladiator, they went over a lot of both warriors weapons and ran a simulation through a computer that covered 1000 battles and which ever one won the majority of battles won. Next week is Samurai vs. Viking.

I'm not sure if I like the versus setup. You end up looking at different spots in time, different technology, etc. In some cases, it would be like sending in 300 of today's Marines, with modern weaponry, to fight in the battle of Thermopolae. I think there would be different endings there.

[BDPulver]

Yeah, i'd have to agree on that also bushido. You deal with different cultures, different time spans. Reasonings for the types of weapons used and so on.

As much as it would be interesting to see too many variables in place.

[bushido_man96]

Yeah, I think that they could do something more informative as opposed to comparative.

Now, if they wanted to get into comparing actual battles in history of different cultures, then I am cool with that; it actually happened. But an Apache vs. a Samurai wouldn't be very adaptable, I don't believe.

[bushido_man96]

I saw most of the episode of Samurai vs. Viking. I didn't care for the setup that much. The weapon analysis and demonstrations were cool, but I don't think they did the applications worth a hoot.

This was the line-up:

Viking........vs...........Samurai

Long Sword.........Naginata............mid range weapons

Great Ax.............Katana..............close range weapons

Shield.................Kanabo..............special weapons

Yumi...................Spear................long range weapons

This just totally fuddles me, for several reasons. The main reason is because they both carried a friggin' sword! Why not compare them in sword combat? And why not compare spear to naginata? They only issued the spear with the Viking in its throwing aspect. And although leathal there, it has usage as a polearm. The Samurai also carried a spear. I also think that Vikings used some bow and arrow, so there again, the comparisons aren't consistent.

In the end, it looked like they tried to do something like that show that NatGeo did on various MA technique studies (can't remember the name).

In the end, they gave the overall victory to the Samurai (which most around here know how I feel about the presumption of the view of Samurai supremacy bias), but I think that in the end, the counts weren't done as accurately as they could have been.

[the beast]

I saw most of the episode of Samurai vs. Viking. I didn't care for the setup that much. The weapon analysis and demonstrations were cool, but I don't think they did the applications worth a hoot.

This was the line-up:

Viking........vs...........Samurai

Long Sword.........Naginata............mid range weapons

Great Ax.............Katana..............close range weapons

Shield.................Kanabo..............special weapons

Yumi...................Spear................long range weapons

I also think that Vikings used some bow and arrow, so there again, the comparisons aren't consistent.

Many samurai were also archers. I haven't seen this episode yet but from what your saying they seem to leave out alot of other weapons that were used.