[quote]Varqanir wrote:
Okay, whole we’re on American presidents, would you rather fight Abraham Lincoln or Andrew Jackson?
[/quote]
Jackson.
Lincoln is a freak of nature if even half of the feats of strength attributed to him are true.
At least with Jackson I know I’m getting a crazy war hero, but still a regular human being.
[quote]CLUNK wrote:
Edgy or Beans?
[/quote]
People shoud pick me… I’m not nearly angry enough to actually engage in a physical fight anymore.
I’d tap, and then go grab a drink…
[quote]spar4tee wrote:
How about everyone vs this motherfucker?[/quote]
LOL spar wtf
[quote]Varqanir wrote:
Okay, whole we’re on American presidents, would you rather fight Abraham Lincoln or Andrew Jackson?
Hmm… Or how about world leaders: Vladimir Putin or King Abdullah of Jordan?
Gandhi or Jesus?
[/quote]
Are we talking chase the money changers out of the temple Jesus? That guy could throw down. 30 year old blue collar dude turned outlaw who walked around the desert all day and ate mostly fish? Always had him pegged for something of a badass, all the love thy neighbour stuff notwithstanding.
Edit: I watched and read his biography, Lincoln killed the shit out of all kinds of vampires with an axe and whatnot. No thanks.
James T. Kirk or Jean-Luc Picard?
With a sword: Miyamoto Musashi or Spartacus
[quote]mbdix wrote:
With a sword: Miyamoto Musashi or Spartacus[/quote]
Either one, with a rapier.
There is a reason the rapier was banned in Japan. the samurai just could not win against it. The katana is conceptually a slashing weapon, wielded with both hands, and as such was too slow to parry a thrust with the lighter rapier. It’s like trying to block a jab with a round kick. Maybe if you’re Chuck Norris, but if not, you’re gonna get hit. One thrust to the throat and it’s all over. Musashi was admittedly the Chuck Norris of kenjutsu, but he’d be pretty hard pressed against an expert fencer with a light rapier. Remember, even Chuck Norris got his ass kicked by Bruce Lee.
And a rapier against a Spanish gladius? No contest. Two stabbing weapons, one about twice as long as the other. Again, yeah, yeah, it’s the man, not the weapon, but Spartacus would still be at an extreme technical disadvantage.
[quote]Varqanir wrote:
[quote]mbdix wrote:
With a sword: Miyamoto Musashi or Spartacus[/quote]
Either one, with a rapier.
There is a reason the rapier was banned in Japan. the samurai just could not win against it. The katana is conceptually a slashing weapon, wielded with both hands, and as such was too slow to parry a thrust with the lighter rapier. It’s like trying to block a jab with a round kick. Maybe if you’re Chuck Norris, but if not, you’re gonna get hit. One thrust to the throat and it’s all over. Musashi was admittedly the Chuck Norris of kenjutsu, but he’d be pretty hard pressed against an expert fencer with a light rapier. Remember, even Chuck Norris got his ass kicked by Bruce Lee.
And a rapier against a Spanish gladius? No contest. Two stabbing weapons, one about twice as long as the other. Again, yeah, yeah, it’s the man, not the weapon, but Spartacus would still be at an extreme technical disadvantage.
[/quote]
You are probably right when talking about a skilled warrior with a rapier vs a skilled warrior with a katana. But, I don’t think anyone has ever been good enough to beat Musashi with a non-firearm weapon in a battle. I might be basing this on his legend over science but I am sticking with it.
This is because for Musashi it wasn’t about the weapon it was his mind
[quote]mbdix wrote:
[quote]Varqanir wrote:
[quote]mbdix wrote:
With a sword: Miyamoto Musashi or Spartacus[/quote]
Either one, with a rapier.
There is a reason the rapier was banned in Japan. the samurai just could not win against it. The katana is conceptually a slashing weapon, wielded with both hands, and as such was too slow to parry a thrust with the lighter rapier. It’s like trying to block a jab with a round kick. Maybe if you’re Chuck Norris, but if not, you’re gonna get hit. One thrust to the throat and it’s all over. Musashi was admittedly the Chuck Norris of kenjutsu, but he’d be pretty hard pressed against an expert fencer with a light rapier. Remember, even Chuck Norris got his ass kicked by Bruce Lee.
And a rapier against a Spanish gladius? No contest. Two stabbing weapons, one about twice as long as the other. Again, yeah, yeah, it’s the man, not the weapon, but Spartacus would still be at an extreme technical disadvantage.
[/quote]
You are probably right when talking about a skilled warrior with a rapier vs a skilled warrior with a katana. But, I don’t think anyone has ever been good enough to beat Musashi with a non-firearm weapon in a battle. I might be basing this on his legend over science but I am sticking with it. [/quote]
My pal Chushin and our mutual Sensei might have something to say about that. Muso Gonnosuke Katsuyoshi, founder of the Shinto Muso school of jojutsu, defeated Musashi with a four-foot stick.
[quote]Varqanir wrote:
defeated Musashi with a four-foot stick.[/quote]
There is a lame porn joke in there somewhere
[quote]Varqanir wrote:
[quote]mbdix wrote:
[quote]Varqanir wrote:
[quote]mbdix wrote:
With a sword: Miyamoto Musashi or Spartacus[/quote]
Either one, with a rapier.
There is a reason the rapier was banned in Japan. the samurai just could not win against it. The katana is conceptually a slashing weapon, wielded with both hands, and as such was too slow to parry a thrust with the lighter rapier. It’s like trying to block a jab with a round kick. Maybe if you’re Chuck Norris, but if not, you’re gonna get hit. One thrust to the throat and it’s all over. Musashi was admittedly the Chuck Norris of kenjutsu, but he’d be pretty hard pressed against an expert fencer with a light rapier. Remember, even Chuck Norris got his ass kicked by Bruce Lee.
And a rapier against a Spanish gladius? No contest. Two stabbing weapons, one about twice as long as the other. Again, yeah, yeah, it’s the man, not the weapon, but Spartacus would still be at an extreme technical disadvantage.
[/quote]
You are probably right when talking about a skilled warrior with a rapier vs a skilled warrior with a katana. But, I don’t think anyone has ever been good enough to beat Musashi with a non-firearm weapon in a battle. I might be basing this on his legend over science but I am sticking with it. [/quote]
My pal Chushin and our mutual Sensei might have something to say about that. Muso Gonnosuke Katsuyoshi, founder of the Shinto Muso school of jojutsu, defeated Musashi with a four-foot stick.[/quote]
My understanding is that Musashi had never lost a bout from the age of 13 to the age of 63. I know that he defeated an opponent with a wooden sword that he carved on the way to the battle in a boat
Edit: He carved a sword out of an ore then had a guy row him to battle and killed his opponent with it.
[quote]Varqanir wrote:
[quote]mbdix wrote:
With a sword: Miyamoto Musashi or Spartacus[/quote]
Either one, with a rapier.
There is a reason the rapier was banned in Japan. the samurai just could not win against it. The katana is conceptually a slashing weapon, wielded with both hands, and as such was too slow to parry a thrust with the lighter rapier. It’s like trying to block a jab with a round kick. Maybe if you’re Chuck Norris, but if not, you’re gonna get hit. One thrust to the throat and it’s all over. Musashi was admittedly the Chuck Norris of kenjutsu, but he’d be pretty hard pressed against an expert fencer with a light rapier. Remember, even Chuck Norris got his ass kicked by Bruce Lee.
And a rapier against a Spanish gladius? No contest. Two stabbing weapons, one about twice as long as the other. Again, yeah, yeah, it’s the man, not the weapon, but Spartacus would still be at an extreme technical disadvantage.
[/quote]
I agree with your fundamental premise of thrust > slash, but I wonder if a small sword might serve even better. A quicker, lighter, more precise pure thrusting weapon, it would further exploit the basic technical advantage you’re relying on (albeit sacrificing a little reach).
[quote]batman730 wrote:
[quote]Varqanir wrote:
[quote]mbdix wrote:
With a sword: Miyamoto Musashi or Spartacus[/quote]
Either one, with a rapier.
There is a reason the rapier was banned in Japan. the samurai just could not win against it. The katana is conceptually a slashing weapon, wielded with both hands, and as such was too slow to parry a thrust with the lighter rapier. It’s like trying to block a jab with a round kick. Maybe if you’re Chuck Norris, but if not, you’re gonna get hit. One thrust to the throat and it’s all over. Musashi was admittedly the Chuck Norris of kenjutsu, but he’d be pretty hard pressed against an expert fencer with a light rapier. Remember, even Chuck Norris got his ass kicked by Bruce Lee.
And a rapier against a Spanish gladius? No contest. Two stabbing weapons, one about twice as long as the other. Again, yeah, yeah, it’s the man, not the weapon, but Spartacus would still be at an extreme technical disadvantage.
[/quote]
I agree with your fundamental premise of thrust > slash, but I wonder if a small sword might serve even better. A quicker, lighter, more precise pure thrusting weapon, it would further exploit the basic technical advantage you’re relying on (albeit sacrificing a little reach).
[/quote]
Musashi carried a small sword as well. He is the first to carry two swords.
[quote]Varqanir wrote:
James T. Kirk or Jean-Luc Picard?[/quote]
Which Kirk? There’s two timeline’s now you know.
On the surface, Picard seems like a pussy and has leftist-touchy-feely tendancies, but he did fuck up the Borg, keep Q at bay, and he took a shit-ton of torture without breaking.
Fuck, that’s a tough call.
Edit: I’m going with Rousey just to be safe.
[quote]mbdix wrote:
With a sword: Miyamoto Musashi or Spartacus[/quote]
Regarding the actual question itself-
Wouldn’t it be obviously Musashi? The man is considered one of the, if not THE, greatest swordsman of all time in Japan. Spartacus is a leader of a slave uprising and a gladiator, but afaik there’s little of note regarding his actual physical prowess.
[quote]mbdix wrote:
[quote]batman730 wrote:
[quote]Varqanir wrote:
[quote]mbdix wrote:
With a sword: Miyamoto Musashi or Spartacus[/quote]
Either one, with a rapier.
There is a reason the rapier was banned in Japan. the samurai just could not win against it. The katana is conceptually a slashing weapon, wielded with both hands, and as such was too slow to parry a thrust with the lighter rapier. It’s like trying to block a jab with a round kick. Maybe if you’re Chuck Norris, but if not, you’re gonna get hit. One thrust to the throat and it’s all over. Musashi was admittedly the Chuck Norris of kenjutsu, but he’d be pretty hard pressed against an expert fencer with a light rapier. Remember, even Chuck Norris got his ass kicked by Bruce Lee.
And a rapier against a Spanish gladius? No contest. Two stabbing weapons, one about twice as long as the other. Again, yeah, yeah, it’s the man, not the weapon, but Spartacus would still be at an extreme technical disadvantage.
[/quote]
I agree with your fundamental premise of thrust > slash, but I wonder if a small sword might serve even better. A quicker, lighter, more precise pure thrusting weapon, it would further exploit the basic technical advantage you’re relying on (albeit sacrificing a little reach).
[/quote]
Musashi carried a small sword as well. He is the first to carry two swords. [/quote]
At risk of being the guy who offers a serious answer to a joke, when I say small sword I am referring to the weapon that the rapier evolved into. It is more recognizable as a predecessor to more modern duelling and/or fencing swords. It was generally not used for cutting at all and in fact often didn’t have sharp edges, just a point.
Despite it’s small stature, some argue that it was a more practical weapon for single combat than the larger, but more unwieldy rapier.
[quote]batman730 wrote:
[quote]Varqanir wrote:
[quote]mbdix wrote:
With a sword: Miyamoto Musashi or Spartacus[/quote]
Either one, with a rapier.
There is a reason the rapier was banned in Japan. the samurai just could not win against it. The katana is conceptually a slashing weapon, wielded with both hands, and as such was too slow to parry a thrust with the lighter rapier. It’s like trying to block a jab with a round kick. Maybe if you’re Chuck Norris, but if not, you’re gonna get hit. One thrust to the throat and it’s all over. Musashi was admittedly the Chuck Norris of kenjutsu, but he’d be pretty hard pressed against an expert fencer with a light rapier. Remember, even Chuck Norris got his ass kicked by Bruce Lee.
And a rapier against a Spanish gladius? No contest. Two stabbing weapons, one about twice as long as the other. Again, yeah, yeah, it’s the man, not the weapon, but Spartacus would still be at an extreme technical disadvantage.
[/quote]
I agree with your fundamental premise of thrust > slash, but I wonder if a small sword might serve even better. A quicker, lighter, more precise pure thrusting weapon, it would further exploit the basic technical advantage you’re relying on (albeit sacrificing a little reach).
[/quote]
The gladius and the rapier were approximately the same weight. The gladius was shorter and wider, and was not purely for thrust.
The rapier, on the other hand, was the quicker, more precise, pure thrusting weapon you describe.