On the Katana and it's wielder.

[Dygen Entreri]

actually that is a lie. the long sword can be a very graceful yet powerful weapon. two edges plus teh abiltiy to thrust, held be a guy wearing a custom built armour, and knights could do quite a bit in full plate. the long sword granted wasnt made purely for slashing it was very utilitarian and in the proper hands could work just as well as any katana

plus you can block with a long sword and not have to worry about anything. but why would you want to... you also have shield which in itself can be used as a weapon...

You do thrusts with a katana as well. I don't know where you've gotten the idea that katanas aren't used for thrusting.

You can block with a katana as well, and YES you can block with it WITHOUT breaking the sword. It's just that you don't parry with the edge but rather the sides of the blade.

Also a longsword would have it's edge ruined if you used it to block with.

As for your other points, yes shields are useful defensive weapons. But if you hold a shield then you have to use the sword with one hand. This will reduce control of the weapon, as opposed to the katana wielder who is trained to use both hands, giving superior control.

Do note that if you will try to rebuke by lecturing me, do take note that I have a few years of actual training with these weapons. (I never was much into martial arts focussed on hand to hand combat so swords, polearms and chain weapons seemed a lot more interesting)

Who told you that people block with a longsword's edge? Yes that would ruin the blade, that's why you are only supposed to block with the flat.

And with a shield, you wouldn't be using a sword that is designed for two hands like the katana, they would be using a slightly shorter sword, unless they were just really strong. But a knight wearing armor and using a shield wouldn't be as worried about having superior control, as they would only use the sword for attack, and wouldn't need to control it as well, as blocking is where control plays the greatest part when fighting with a slashing weapon.

 

[TheMetalGuy]

Show me a nerd who can wield a claymore!

The hugest of claymores only weights like 25-35lbs and that's not if you have recived prober training.
I don't practice the way of the sword, but I didn't find it hard swing it around.
(I tried it during a trip to Belgium)

 

[Dygen Entreri]

Yes it is overused, but if you know a popular martial art that doesn't use the katana for swordsmanship training (if it has such training) please tell me.

It's called fencing, and yes it is a martial art. And don't even try and say that it doesn't count as popular, as it is an Olympic sport. We use the foil, epee, and saber style blades, each with differences in fighting style and target areas, although experts can still pit different weapons against each other. In no way has a katana or a training equivilant ever been used, unless the class was showing off other styles of swordfighting.

 

[Glademaster_v1legacy]

If a knight were to fight a samurai, both unarmoured the samurai would likly win, if the knight was wearing armour and/or had a shield the samurai would more than likley be fucked.

See, this is the Deadliest Warrior problem. The samurai was SMART, he would use any possible advantage he could get. Bushido is bullshit. This is what made the samurai formidable, NOT his weapon.

Yeah Deadliest Warrior is fun but some of the weapons tests and comparisions are total BS.

There was one with a pig cutting, (cant remember which) but the first team hit the inside of the leg and carried through to the bottom of the spine at its thinest point the weight of the haunch hanging on the tear & the second team hit high going through ribs & spine. They decided that first team won even though they cut through less hard bone & muscle.

Oh & the roman one where the guy dented the Gladius on the metal pole holding the body up (Cant remember if it was the APache or the Rajputt one?) He lost made no sense whatsoever.

I think the one on the Celts annoyed me more. Especially since the Persian Crenellated Scythe as far as I remember showed little to no killing potential while the Celtic club showed actual killing potential regardless of wearing a helmet and got less kills. Also the one with the Romans was against the Rajput.

 

[Lunar Templar]

And OT nerd > anime > japan > katana - that's pretty much the only links you have to make

this pretty much
i'd take a long sword and kite shield my self

 

[hannan4mitch]

Show me a nerd who can wield a claymore!

I'd say it's probably because the katana is far easier to handle than a huge european sword due to lesser weight and smaller form. I agree that in direct combat against a european broadsword the katana would most likely be fucked.

ME!
No really, I can use a medieval longsword, which primarily used as a two-handed weapon, contrary to many games (I'm looking at you, Oblivion!). In fact, longswords aren't heavy compared to other medieval melee weapons, and they require more skill then strength to use, and aren't swung in massive arcs, but are used in a type of style that is more defensive than offensive, more focused on blocking attacks and "winding" (moving the blade in a specific way that keeps your opponent's blade away from you and attacking unprotected areas with precision jabs and slices) and tactics involving using your opponents strength against him (such as "sliding off" where you yield your blade when your opponent is putting alot of pressure on it, having his blade slide of yours, giving you a chance to attack him.) The only really aggressive fighting style is armored combat, which is focused more on dealing alot of pain than tissue damage, such as grinding your opponents chainmail into his armpit, or tripping him attacking him in a weak point in the armor.

 

[Treblaine]

Who gives a shit?

Are you trolling the OP... or is the OP trolling us?

 

[RatRace123]

Katana ain't got nothin' on a kilij.

Spoiler

That thing can cut through bone... awesome!

 

[Treblaine]

If a knight were to fight a samurai, both unarmoured the samurai would likly win, if the knight was wearing armour and/or had a shield the samurai would more than likley be fucked.

See, this is the Deadliest Warrior problem. The samurai was SMART, he would use any possible advantage he could get. Bushido is bullshit. This is what made the samurai formidable, NOT his weapon.

Yeah Deadliest Warrior is fun but some of the weapons tests and comparisions are total BS.

There was one with a pig cutting, (cant remember which) but the first team hit the inside of the leg and carried through to the bottom of the spine at its thinest point the weight of the haunch hanging on the tear & the second team hit high going through ribs & spine. They decided that first team won even though they cut through less hard bone & muscle.

Oh & the roman one where the guy dented the Gladius on the metal pole holding the body up (Cant remember if it was the APache or the Rajputt one?) He lost made no sense whatsoever.

I think the one on the Celts annoyed me more. Especially since the Persian Crenellated Scythe as far as I remember showed little to no killing potential while the Celtic club showed actual killing potential regardless of wearing a helmet and got less kills. Also the one with the Romans was against the Rajput.

How seriously could you possibly take a show with such a premise?

My only problem is they even hint that in any way it is scientifically relevant or conclusive. It is purely a bunch of unqualified people fucking around with weapons and ballistics gel and shit while they try to get retired military type and weird re-en-actors to read from a tough guy confrontation script. I stopped watching when the novelty wore off and it became predictable. There certainly was nothign to learn from the show.

I don't have a problem with some dumbass in a pub giving me medical advice (if I asked for it) I do however have a problem if he claims to be a doctor, when he is not.

 

[Ulixes Dimon]

The reason the katana is held in such high regard is (I think) because Samurai were a sort of officer class. Knights in europe (correct me if I'm wrong) were very common. Armies consisted almost entirely of armored soldiers. The Samurai were elite warriors with years of training, who carried weapons specifically crafted for that Samurai.

 

[Shock and Awe]

The reason the katana is held in such high regard is (I think) because Samurai were a sort of officer class. Knights in europe (correct me if I'm wrong) were very common. Armies consisted almost entirely of armored soldiers. The Samurai were elite warriors with years of training, who carried weapons specifically crafted for that Samurai.

Actually the Knights of Europe were the officer class of European armies. They were some of the only professional soldiers of the time. Most soldiers were called up from a levy in times of war. While many soldiers were light armor very few wore the heavy armor of knights.

 

[Glademaster_v1legacy]

If a knight were to fight a samurai, both unarmoured the samurai would likly win, if the knight was wearing armour and/or had a shield the samurai would more than likley be fucked.

See, this is the Deadliest Warrior problem. The samurai was SMART, he would use any possible advantage he could get. Bushido is bullshit. This is what made the samurai formidable, NOT his weapon.

Yeah Deadliest Warrior is fun but some of the weapons tests and comparisions are total BS.

There was one with a pig cutting, (cant remember which) but the first team hit the inside of the leg and carried through to the bottom of the spine at its thinest point the weight of the haunch hanging on the tear & the second team hit high going through ribs & spine. They decided that first team won even though they cut through less hard bone & muscle.

Oh & the roman one where the guy dented the Gladius on the metal pole holding the body up (Cant remember if it was the APache or the Rajputt one?) He lost made no sense whatsoever.

I think the one on the Celts annoyed me more. Especially since the Persian Crenellated Scythe as far as I remember showed little to no killing potential while the Celtic club showed actual killing potential regardless of wearing a helmet and got less kills. Also the one with the Romans was against the Rajput.

How seriously could you possibly take a show with such a premise?

My only problem is they even hint that in any way it is scientifically relevant or conclusive. It is purely a bunch of unqualified people fucking around with weapons and ballistics gel and shit while they try to get retired military type and weird re-en-actors to read from a tough guy confrontation script. I stopped watching when the novelty wore off and it became predictable. There certainly was nothign to learn from the show.

I don't have a problem with some dumbass in a pub giving me medical advice (if I asked for it) I do however have a problem if he claims to be a doctor, when he is not.

I don't take it seriously but it was something that irritated though. The Mainish guy always changes his mind though.

 

[Ymbirtt]

Simple answer is that we're nerds and we like things that aren't particularly mainstream. If it looks like it's from an obscure part of the world - which the far east is over here - then it sells better. Also, it doesn't feel like a fairy tale. A story about brave and noble knights, but a story about a brave and noble samurai doesn't. I don't quite get why there's a massive debate over the whole "samurai vs knight" thing, it just smacks of "pirates vs ninjas", in that it's an amusing little argument you can have with absolutely no correct answer.

A far more interesting thing to discuss would be the swordfighting techniques used in Star Wars. Surely with such light blades, pinwheel moves would be impractical since the bade won't have any weight behind it - why not fencing-style moves?

 

[Canid117]

I remember a thread a little while ago that tried to claim that the Katana was the greatest weapon ever invented by man. Needless to say his opinion was torn apart by about a hundred different people.

 

[jamesworkshop]

Simple answer is that we're nerds and we like things that aren't particularly mainstream. If it looks like it's from an obscure part of the world - which the far east is over here - then it sells better. Also, it doesn't feel like a fairy tale. A story about brave and noble knights, but a story about a brave and noble samurai doesn't. I don't quite get why there's a massive debate over the whole "samurai vs knight" thing, it just smacks of "pirates vs ninjas", in that it's an amusing little argument you can have with absolutely no correct answer.

A far more interesting thing to discuss would be the swordfighting techniques used in Star Wars. Surely with such light blades, pinwheel moves would be impractical since the bade won't have any weight behind it - why not fencing-style moves?

lightsabres require force training to use because of that

thats why

 

[thylasos]

Yes it is overused, but if you know a popular martial art that doesn't use the katana for swordsmanship training (if it has such training) please tell me.

It's called fencing, and yes it is a martial art. And don't even try and say that it doesn't count as popular, as it is an Olympic sport. We use the foil, epee, and saber style blades, each with differences in fighting style and target areas, although experts can still pit different weapons against each other. In no way has a katana or a training equivilant ever been used, unless the class was showing off other styles of swordfighting.

Also, sword training in kung fu.

 

[Simriel]

You cite cutting power as a factor & then say the curves distract you. The curves dictate the blades ability to cut effectively.

It's not the existence nor absence of a curve itself, it's the aesthetics of the curve, the type of curves. I just find it looks too wavy and naturalistic. Katana just looks like it's from the future, even though the design is hundreds of years old. It looks like a refined killing machine for a person who has trained their mind body and their very soul to kill effortlessly.

I have no idea which intrinsically cuts better but have you ever the phrase "it's not the arrow, it's the Indian"? At the time the western world really became familiar with Japanese weapons the samurai were the most pre-eminent sword fighters in the world, that (artistically speaking) infuses the weapon with a reputation. It's as much the swordsman that comes with the Katana that makes it so sought after.

A western style cavalry sabre - to me - leaves the impression of a guy with a huge moustache yelling CHHHAAAAAARGGE while impotently waving the sabre over their head.

When someone twirls a Colt Single Action Army revolver you get the impression of speed, and effortless accuracy... might not be the case but those that have wielded it before in fiction and non-fiction have left that reputation.

Consider the Japanese samurai films like Yojimbo and the Seven Samurai that have imbued the sword with a great potency. And when we are talking about art, there is that wider cultural impression that counts with not only the audience but the characters within the work. In Pulp Fiction when Butch is selecting weapons to face down some armed rapists nothing seems to instil more confidence in him than a samurai sword, more so than even a chainsaw.

Oh so it had nothing to do with Quentin Tarintinos adoration of Katana?

 

[Ulixes Dimon]

The reason the katana is held in such high regard is (I think) because Samurai were a sort of officer class. Knights in europe (correct me if I'm wrong) were very common. Armies consisted almost entirely of armored soldiers. The Samurai were elite warriors with years of training, who carried weapons specifically crafted for that Samurai.

Actually the Knights of Europe were the officer class of European armies. They were some of the only professional soldiers of the time. Most soldiers were called up from a levy in times of war. While many soldiers were light armor very few wore the heavy armor of knights.

Thanks for correcting me

 

[Ulixes Dimon]

Seeing as everyone is discussing Knights vs. Samurai I would like to point out that utilizing the drawing/cutting technique a Samurai COULD potentially cut down a Knight say through the gap between the helmet and chest at the beginning of the fight. Not in any way saying the Knight is inferior and in fact if that failed the Samurai's chances of victory would likely exponentially decline... Though the fatigue a Knight experiences wearing such heavy armor could reduce his effectiveness in a long one on one... So interesting stuff.

 

[Spoonius]

In an episode of Deadliest Warrior (I'm referring only to a practical demonstration, not getting into other aspects of the show), they tested a Spartan spear against antique, authentic samurai armor that was over 200 years old. The armor stopped the spear cold, bending the spear tip and only chipping a patch smaller than an inch square off the armor.

And do you remember how old the spear was?