Could a Samurai Beat a Fencer

[NoSmilez]

It is hard to compare these two group of people. Their style of fighting and weaponry evolved with the way they waged war. Samurais didn't really use katana as their main weapon. It's a polearm and spear. If anything being a good shot on horseback was more important than using a sword.

 

[KnightTemplar]

It is hard to compare these two group of people. Their style of fighting and weaponry evolved with the way they waged war. Samurais didn't really use katana as their main weapon. It's a polearm and spear. If anything being a good shot on horseback was more important than using a sword.

And Duelists - not, "fencers" - were still fighting and killing each other with swords when firearms were the preferred battlefield weapon. Indeed, before duelling died out, the challenged party was often given the choice of Swords or Pistols.

 

[Adamant]

Which part?

 

[Shaun K]

Fencer would fuck a samuri up. Ya’ll seriously underestimate the skill of fencing

 

[BB in Crazy!!!!]

A katana would cut through a fencing sword like a lightsaber through tin foil. Fencer is fucked.

 

[BB in Crazy!!!!]

Which part?

A katana cutting through a rapier, sabre or small sword. Good luck.

A sport fencers foil yes, but a sabre and rapier probably could too. Foils aren’t swords, the are sparring rods with electric tips to read touches to score points.

 

[HelloBike]

Whichever one has a gun

 

[KnightTemplar]

Which part?

1)Tests have conducted by HEMA experts, in which a Duelist's Rapier was subjected to pressure testing by a variety of heavier swords. Up to and including a Great Sword. None of the blades were able to break a Rapier.

2)A Fencer practices a highly restricted, Olympic sport, using a very light sword designed for that specific rule set. A Duelist used a much stronger, heavier blade. And he fought to draw first blood at least, if not to kill his opponent. An experienced European Duelist probably had more single combat fights than a lot of Samurai. And it's a Duelist who's facing the Samurai, not a Fencer. The difference between the two is as stark as that between Point Karate and MMA.

 

[NoSmilez]

Who would get more pussy? A modern person cosplaying as a knight or a samurai?

 

[shunyata]

It is hard to compare these two group of people. Their style of fighting and weaponry evolved with the way they waged war. Samurais didn't really use katana as their main weapon. It's a polearm and spear. If anything being a good shot on horseback was more important than using a sword.

For the same reason skill with a horse and a lance was prized heavily in Europe over skill with a sword. Spears, polearms, and lances are the primary weapons of the pre cannon battlefield. A sword is like a handgun, the spear is your rifle.

 

[Strychnine]

 

[NoSmilez]

For the same reason skill with a horse and a lance was prized heavily in Europe over skill with a sword. Spears, polearms, and lances are the primary weapons of the pre cannon battlefield. A sword is like a handgun, the spear is your rifle.

I am under the impression that fencing/dueling is a one on one endeavor. It's not really for war. I believe it is the same thing as Samurais. Samurais didn't really become invested in swordsmanship until major conflict was over.

Timeline matters too because the way they waged war is different. 1100s knight might be similar to a Samurai around the same time. A knight in the 1400s is completely different. We need to establish a standard first.

 

[the ambush]

It is hard to compare these two group of people. Their style of fighting and weaponry evolved with the way they waged war. Samurais didn't really use katana as their main weapon. It's a polearm and spear. If anything being a good shot on horseback was more important than using a sword.

It doesn't matter. People will revert back to saying the Japanese samurai were unproven in military war because the samurai did not face an invading enemy force in a major war.

The samurai were tactically efficient at all of the same things the knights were. If anything I believe I would favor the samurai for not being weighted down in heavier armor, that might be the game changer

 

[BB in Crazy!!!!]

It doesn't matter. People will revert back to saying the Japanese samurai were unproven in military war because the samurai did not face an invading enemy force in a major war.

The samurai were tactically efficient at all of the same things the knights were. If anything I believe I would favor the samurai for not being weighted down in heavier armor, that might be the game changer

That knight armor was effective. There is a reason why they wore it. It's also not as heavy as you think compared to samurai armor, which was also effective. Basically, they both wore armor for a reason, and both moved well in it even if both were a bit heavy, the benefits were there.






They need a damn mace or warhammer lol.

 

[NoSmilez]

It doesn't matter. People will revert back to saying the Japanese samurai were unproven in military war because the samurai did not face an invading enemy force in a major war. The whole thing pisses me off. The samurai were efficient at the same things the knights were. If anything I believe I would favor the samurai for not being weighted down in heavier armor, that might have been the key disadvantage

I think terrain matters. If you want to invade Japanese territory then you need boats. As far as I know, the knights weren't sailors or seamen. The region is also heavily mountainous and hard to resupply. Heavy armor might not be suitable for that area. They way they engage is different. Knights never went up against Japanese but they have a common opponent. Knights had problems with Mongols because they shot from horse and refused to go head to head.

 

[KnightTemplar]

It doesn't matter. People will revert back to saying the Japanese samurai were unproven in military war because the samurai did not face an invading enemy force in a major war.

The samurai were tactically efficient at all of the same things the knights were. If anything I believe I would favor the samurai for not being weighted down in heavier armor, that might be the game changer

European Knights could run in full armour. The could climb a wall in full armour. Not the plate armour of the 1500's, but Knight between the 12th and 13th Centuries could move as quickly as Samurai, and were significantly stronger.

 

[Smokes]

European Knights could run in full armour. The could climb a wall in full armour. Not the plate armour of the 1500's, but Knight between the 12th and 13th Centuries could move as quickly as Samurai, and were significantly stronger.

Were knights as good has samurai on horseback? Samurai were master with a bow on horseback and knight mainly joists with shield and spear. Could the Samurais run around and pick of the knights?

 

[KnightTemplar]

Were knights as good has samurai on horseback? Samurai were master with a bow on horseback and knight mainly joists with shield and spear. Could the Samurais run around and pick of the knights?

English or Welsh Archers would push the Samurai's shit in an archery duel.

The Samurai were probably more manoverable on horseback than European Knights, But if the Knights closed the distance, the Samurai would go down hard. As others have said, the primary weapon of every Knight was his Lance. Swords were back up weapons. Some Knights didn't even bother to carry them, preferring a Mace.

 

[Smokes]

English or Welsh Archers would push the Samurai's shit in an archery duel.

The Samurai were probably more manoverable on horseback than European Knights, But if the Knights closed the distance, the Samurai would go down hard. As others have said, the primary weapon of every Knight was his Lance. Swords were back up weapons. Some Knights didn't even bother to carry them, preferring a Mace.

Samurais dueled on Horseback with spear/lances too now.

so they might be able to hold their own is josit

 

[BB in Crazy!!!!]

European Knights could run in full armour. The could climb a wall in full armour. Not the plate armour of the 1500's, but Knight between the 12th and 13th Centuries could move as quickly as Samurai, and were significantly stronger.

The plate of the 1500s was actually easier to move in. Not quite as good mobility with a solid steel cuirass as you would have with brigandine, but the full plate is very mobile and it doesn't feel as heavy as it is due to it being ridid and articulated on the joints. can let you know more once I get my full set of 15th century armor in for buhurt. I have my first fight on the 28th of January and I'll be borrowing someone from my chapters armor for it, his is a 14th century set.