Chinesse Swordman vs. Samurai
Ok, who would win, i know you’ve wondered. My personal opinion, the Chinesse guy would own the Samurai. (of course, mabye im biased cause im half-chinesse) What do u guys think?
I think your biased.
Samurai by arrow to the chest, via horseback. rd 1, 1:04
Chinaman by Dim Mak. 15 ys, 4 mths, 25, days, 2 min
Ok, assuming that the samurai has lost his bow or something, and is not on horseback.
(i also posted in the knights vs samurai thread)
3 month high school wrestling master by single leg to cradle with a finish of KFO Dragon Heart Death Punch
i am so confused…
Yeah.
To be an APK brother you gotta earn it, we all did.
take that KKM!
okay heres how it would happen. the samuria would cut off the chinese swordmans arm, then the sowrdsman would stab teh samuri in the chest. but the samuria would want to die facing japan so he turns around and sticks his sowrd in his foot to stay awake. but this is after they save all 30 or so fighters in the tourny and the samuria kills the sowrdmans master so he would fight him.
I am surprised no one mentioned this.
This should be the default answer to all Chinese vs non-chinese style questions
CHI BLAST !!!
werd man, it would be a Duel to the Death. lol
From your post on the knight vs. samurai:
It’s an unanswerable question. And computers should probably generate an error message (accompanied by a loud buzzing noise) every time someone types in any variation on the X vs. Y question.
IMO, samurai would typically be more skilled. Japanese swordsmanship emphasized practical technique and combative training. But from what I’ve seen of Chinese sword arts, it is mostly forms and showmanship. I’m not saying that China didn’t have skilled swordsmen. Any developed country with a strong history of warfare would have had skilled warriors. But I don’t think that Chinese martial training was as systematic about developing individual sword skills as the samurai tradition was. So in general, I think that the samurai would have been the better swordsman.
Not to say that the samurai were the great sword saints of the world, though. They were undoubtedly brave and dedicated, but to this day I think that their warrior skills have been greatly exaggerated by pop culture and Japanese pseudo-history. The art of fencing, for example, makes Japanese swordsmanship seem clumsy and unsophisticated in my opinion. Furthermore, Japan was an isolated country where different factions fought relatively low level conflicts against one another. The Japanese were insignificant when compared to military powers throughout the history of the civilized world. To compare the samurai to the Roman legions or the Mongol hordes, for example, would be ridiculous. These people developed unquestionable warrior skills through the course of conquering the better part of the world. All the samurai really did was fight amongst themselves within the confines of Japan. When talking about individual military states and warrior cultures, I would put the Spartans far ahead of the samurai as well.
ok, i guess the only way to answer that question is to go back in time, get a hundred or so highly trained Kung Fu masters, then get 100 samurai, and let them battle to the death…muahhahahah!
(of course, that would generate some serious ethical problems)
Originally posted by DragonzRage
[B]
Not to say that the samurai were the great sword saints of the world, though. They were undoubtedly brave and dedicated, but to this day I think that their warrior skills have been greatly exaggerated by pop culture and Japanese pseudo-history. The art of fencing, for example, makes Japanese swordsmanship seem clumsy and unsophisticated in my opinion. Furthermore, Japan was an isolated country where different factions fought relatively low level conflicts against one another. The Japanese were insignificant when compared to military powers throughout the history of the civilized world. To compare the samurai to the Roman legions or the Mongol hordes, for example, would be ridiculous. These people developed unquestionable warrior skills through the course of conquering the better part of the world. All the samurai really did was fight amongst themselves within the confines of Japan. When talking about individual military states and warrior cultures, I would put the Spartans far ahead of the samurai as well. [/B]
Ouch, thats harsh.. Well, we have no way of knowing right? i mean, we have no clue how the spartans faught, for all we know they suck. but your right, Japan has had little experiecne fighting with other cultures, except for that campain in Korea, which failed miserably. hmm…ok, how about Kumdo vs Kendo? muahhaha!
how about the kool-aid man vs. bazooka joe?
Its probably about as realistic of a situation as this shite thread.
The art of fencing, for example, makes Japanese swordsmanship seem clumsy and unsophisticated in my opinion.
Could you please clarify this? I’m gathering an opinion that makes you think that the Japanese swordsmen (and kendoka) are “clumsy”. correct?
I’ve studied kendo (semester in college) and know a 3rd dan kendoka. I’d bet that you’d be amazed how quick and deadly their cuts are. even compared to western fencing.
fencing - duel
kendo - armored combat
diffetent weapons, different circumstances, different approaches.
Oh no, not another of these “I spewed on my wall makeing a rochet blot and it made me think about…” threads.
How about Kojack vs. Barretta…
Barretta would own that bald man’s azz . . . why he would want to, though, is beyond me.