Which sword is best in a one-on-one duel?..... Historical fencing
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 28 ก.ค. 2024
- Which sword is best in a one-on-one duel or sword fight?..... Longsword? Rapier? Sabre? Backsword?
Assuming the fight is strictly one-on-one, no armour of any kind, only one sword-like weapon of medium length allowed... - กีฬา
Thank you so much. I have a duel coming up to acquire my local land owners daughter through combat. I was initially going to use a can of hair spray and a lighter but i found the rapier to be better suited to the task. Once again thanks! Duels happen every day gotta be ready.
Daniel W. for real? if so, where at?
They should come back, especially if you'd like a polite civil society. There is a reason they repealed the carrying of swords in Texas last year. Better than that, why do you think people conceal carry?
That happened to me once. I was about to go to a duel wielding a whole frozen chicken violently mounted on a plunger handle. On my way i found a desperate crackhead with a 9mm. Other dude had a knowife. Ten bucks and a frozen chicken is all it cost for me to win that duel. His daughter was a bitch tho. Wasnt worth it. I really wanted to eat that chicken.
@Johannes Liechtenauer (Invader Zim voice) MMMhhhhhmmmm..... CHICKEN!
LOL, Briliant. Can of Hairspray and a Lighter.
So, for a 1vs1 duel, you'll pick the swords that were designed for 1vs1 duels.
Sounds good.
gustavo iglesias i know he is a genius i would go for a pike before this video
And no ive never been in a duel untill tomorrow were im gonna fight the general cause i accidentaly killed his horse
exactly...the rapier is kind of the evolutionary peak of 1v1 duelling weapons. Rapiers came along BECAUSE backswords and longswords were at a disadvantage to them in that context. What always has struck me as odd is how little the katana/tachi evolved over the, what, 500+ or so years it was being actively used? I mean, a sword made in the 20th century for the Imperial army in ww2 wasn't substantially different in design to one made in the 14-1500s. You don't see that in western weapons. A 14-1500s infantry officer's sword compared to an 1800's one in European or American use? WAY different in almost every way.
roentgen571 katanas where used up untill 1877
@@viggoeriksson878 they were used during WW2.
Personally, I’d pick an uzi
Conclusion ( 15:35 ) "That doesn't make me want to be a rapierist, I want to learn how to beat rapierists."
This is the argument I was having with the police too.
Wait what?
Nani?!
Broad sword or heavy sword
Epic comment!!!
epee... officer, not a rapier. she got it wrong when she yelled rapierist. lol
The keyboard is a perfect sword in online discussions xd
Oof
Witty :)
Alas, the pen is no longer so mighty as the sword. It is, as the youth of our day say, the board upon which keys lie.
Don't forget the armchair!
Impenetrable defense behind the screen!!
But did you consider the Katanas ability to teleport you behind your opponent leaving them with a huge gash seconds later?
but you can't end them rightly
Natveri no, that's only if you put it back in its sheath once you struck.
Or the katana's ability to cut through space and time???
Thats the wielder or from blades made by the Gods/Dwarves. Though in my expeirience I see it mostly done by superhuman swordsmen.
@@JohnJohnson-kd2vp
Never saw that, where did you see that?
"Folded fifty zillion times, and can cut through a tank..."
I laughed
It's funny cause it's true.
A Katana sharp enough to to slice through a Chevy suburban rushing at you at over 40 mph don’t take my word for it ask Larry Fishburne.
that was a joke right? i wasnt sure from way he said it
I have practiced with Japanese swords for decades... while every tool has its job... the katana moonlights as a food processor and is seriously devastating in an elevator or bedroom per ce.
"Assuming he's not a complete noob" he says, to an audience of noobs.
Not complete noobs. Any who watch the video are alightly less noobs and therefore better than any noobish opponent.
How dare you sir! I have been offended and now demand satisfaction!
**sniff** I mean , I guess...
@@blackscales7830 and only a noob would think watching swords on TH-cam makes you less noob, says the guy watching sword videos when I don’t own one.
@@ED-es2qv well I think it's safe to say we've learned something from the video. Especially since he directly points out how to counter noob tactics.
I studied kendo and kenjutsu for 15 years and everything you said about the katana as a weapon is spot on. It is a great weapon in some respects but it was really intended for use wearing lamellar armor and in a particular tactical context. In kendo competitions, one of the most common points scored is the "kote" strike to the hands/wrists. It doesn't take much practice before even a decently talented novice can successfully score that point. You learn defenses to avoid the strike but the bottom line is your hands and wrists are more exposed than they might be with a sword of a different design.
Finally, someone who's honest.
Why can't you add a rapier-like handguard to a katana?
@@eljanrimsa5843 He said that the armor compliments the sword, so a handguard is unneeded.
Of course, but a katana was thought to be used in a batteflied by people in armour. You can also easily strike hands of a knight wearing a longsword with a sword, but if you are using metal gauntlets with padding (and that is valid for knights AND samurai) you can for the most part shrug at sword hits at your hands.
@@eljanrimsa5843 It makes no sense. a katana is a sowrd designed to be used MAINLY two handed, in a battlefield, by people who wear armor to fight other people who possibly also wear armour. The rapier is exactly the opposite.
Hi folks - I want to add something on the effectiveness of thrusts vs. cuts. Yes it is true that there are historical examples of thrusts not stopping opponents. There are examples of someone getting run through (or even shot) and then going on to disable or kill their opponent. However, there are even MORE examples of people getting thrust and just dying! The real danger of making the thrust is twofold: 1) that the blade can get trapped in a person's body for long enough that you are undefended, either from their dying blow or from someone else attacking you, and 2) that the thrust has so little resistance that the person dying on the end of your weapon can come close enough to deal you a wound as they die or become incapacitated (this is why boar spears have lugs/wings, to keep the boar at bay, perhaps). However, there are LOTS of accounts of people getting thrust once through the body or head and becoming incapacitated or dying very quickly. It didn't happen all the time, but it happened often - and still does. If we look at modern crime stabbings, you'll see that sometimes people survive multiple stab wounds and sometimes people die from just one stab wound. It all depends on where the stab lands and what it damages (but remember a rapier penetrates much deeper than a knife, so will generally do more damage). Lastly, whilst it's fair to say that many stabs do not proove fatal, it is even MORE true to say that many cuts do not proove incapacitating. Cuts sometimes fail to cause any injury worth noting at all - across a wide period of history this has been noted. Many sources note that you can survive multiple cuts, but rarely survive multiple stabs. Quite simply also, it is easier to mess up a cut than a thrust. Cutting effectively enough to incapacitate a person is more difficult than poking someone with a pointy object. Cutting is more natural for humans (as we are a bludgeoning species like apes), but thrusting is statitically more likely to seriously wound. Remember lastly that a thrust that hits a hand or arm may well penetrate through and hit something else as well (like a gunshot) or travel up inside a limb, causing huge amounts of tissue damage. Thrusts penetrate SO easily and thrusts with an edged weapon cut as they penetrate as well. Cuts do not penetrate so easily, as they face much greater surface resistance.
All of your points make sense when understanding why a rapier would defeat any other one-handed sword, but I'm still surprised you'd take one over a longsword. Especially when considering the possibility of trading blows.
***** Trading blows? One fairly decent cut or thrust and you are fucking done, let me reiterate don't get fucking hit in 90% of fights the first real hit decides the outcome of a fight.
Hello Matt ! I the Cut VS Thrust is a never ending debate, I believe that thrusting swords are more effective in a cavalry charge but the cutting ones are far better in a melée , cutting swords can do apalling injuries to an opponent for example cutting a limb or cleaving a head , also cutting blades will not get stuck into the enemy's body . I think thrusts are more lethal in general but the cuts are more terrible ( Pscycological effect) .In the end i would say that each sword is designed to do a specific job . LOL i prefer two carry two swords a thrusting one for the charge and a cutting one for a melée. Take care and have a good day :)
Rami Bairi Thrust in a cavalry charge? Well, some armies through the years have agreed with you, notably Napoleon's Grande Armee, but I don't see it. You're far too much at risk of impaling a foot soldier TOO effectively, and getting your blade stuck in them, meaning you either have to let go and be disarmed, or hold on and be unhorsed.
Robin Hersom Hell sir I hope u're fine , Yeah the thrust has so many disadvantages despite its effectivennes.But i have mentioned the thrust in a cavalry charge because it was done particulary by heavy cavalry like the French cuirassiers, and it was accepted by almost all armies and this is a proof that it was effective. All books and descriptions tell us about the use of the point " thrust" from horseback by European armies of the 18 and 19 th centuries.
I wouldn't know, I'm still pondering the advantages of the battlestool.
Heft, hand protection AND comfortable mid-battle resting options.
:-)
The strength of the Four Leg style, or the nimbleness of the Three Leg?
I laughed so hard...
Actually, three legged bar stool would have offered reach of a longsword and great bind, provided it were the type in which the legs are joined by steel ring or rings at some intervals.It should make it easy to catch the incoming blade and thus counter a thrust. XD
LOL we should go to the next gen battlestool now, which is actually designed for the purpose
My mind went to two different places at once.
1) A stool that can fold out/morph into a weapon at the press of a button, Final Fantasy XIII style
2) Literally fighting with shit
Either are valid options.
"I don't need to cut through a buffalo here or cut an elephants trunk off........."
Clearly I clicked on the wrong video.
You never know Spenc?
lol
But definitely fragile humans wear armour gears which are tuff protection to break this Baldy talks half assed talk
@@mdshafqatulhaq8515 the scenario is not armored duel. then his answer would be different. you dont understand english very well maybe
My choice : A ball pen, for the pen is mightier than the sword....
You can simply slander your opponent until he is shunned from the public eye, forced to take his own life in complete shame!
The penis mightier than the sword...
To quote terry Pritchett “provided the sword is very small and the pen is very sharp”
Anton Short or provided the pen isn’t in the same room as the sword
Until the sword is about to plunge in you, then youll know the pen wasn t mightier then the sword
Many people commenting on this video have stated that they would cut through a rapier with their longsword/katana or whatever - you need to watch this: th-cam.com/video/cFRxZod-iI0/w-d-xo.html
Bernard Tremblay
if they broke why would they be so popular for so long?
What i mean is breakages must not have been common or they wouldn't have been such popular and famous weapons
Something I noticed from the other video, would hitting the raiper really hard not give you a massive opening? Ie a breaking force blow that connects would the shock not give you an opening?
Also I do wonder if the person is more important than the weapon? Ie would a Gurka with a kukri beat most sword users. Would your Sabre not give you more of an advantage in skill level?
we are taking the person out of the equation assuming its two people who are of equal skill, experience, physical ability and physical + mental attributes
Sherratt Pemberton Sorry, think I wrote that really badly. I was trying to get across would a Kukri user of Matt's skill level not have anti-sword/bayonet drills from the start? Would a Katana user not just treat it like a spear? Does its speed and range get counted by how the other user is used to dealing with that sort of attack? I think the thing that bothers me is why did the sabre carry on when the raiper existed? Is there some sort of killing (war) weapon vs dueling weapon thing going on?
> Says the weapon has to be longsword length or less.
> Picks rapier because it's longer than the longsword.
I like the video, but this was pretty funny to me.
I was thinking the exact same! 😆
To be fair he did address this point by talking about how one could use a long-sword of rapier length. The advantage he was pointing to is that one has a much greater degree of control with a rapier at its maximum reach given its weight etc.
In fact a longsword can reach 1.4m or even become just a little shorter than a two-handed great sword. With that length longsword can carry out a serious blow to the rapierist's leg or fore arm. Statistics do change things. In some cases an experienced rapierist may lose against another experienced swordman using a 1.3m long feder. I doubt wether a rapier is generally longer than.a long sword, because most longswords I meet are no shorter than 1.2m.
Also, though hand protection and nimble thrust are advantages, longswords are primarily two handed weapon which means they are very strong in binding. Longswords can, in most cases, strike much more frequently, giving it chances to do false attack and mislead the enemy or perform couter attack. Rapier can also do so but it's weaker in this area, and this video supposes the rapier using no buckler and no dagger. I dont think the rapier is still in advantage facing a longsword that is longer in blade.
Yeah its a tad inconsistent.
Rapiers are within longsword length. There's not just one size of longsword, there are those longer or shorter than your average rapier
"How to beat rapierists"
My sides have reached escape velocity.
Citizen_Butt easy, grab a bigger weapon and suit up into your plate armour.
Marcellus but muh fencing
@@RockerMarcee96 Лучше нету каратэ, чем мой старенький ТТ
@@RockerMarcee96 just suiting up is enough lol
Best sword for 1 on 1 duel is a spear.
its actually a glock but i'll let it pass
@@chrisw7188 depending on the size and shape of the arena you could give it to the sniper, or even some other rifle
Hold my howitzer.
@Tuzcuoğlu no they don't
MOAB 😂
I think Indiana Jones did it best.
XD You just made my day.
I don't call it cheating, I call it winning.
if you actually look at him you can see how ill he is - he's dripping with sweat
The sword with the biggest pommel is the best for 1v1 duel
+X Infinity No, the sword with the most hand protection is best for a duel.
I was almost certain he was going to go with the basket hilt claymore for his number one pick.
I watch these kind of things before I make a character in a Dark Souls game.
Yes! Dark Souls player character creation is also what brought me here.
Fuck this video, I'm going straight for the great scythe when Dark Souls 3 arrives.
+PerfectSnowball Lol, it's all about having fun at the end. Scythes can be a decent anti-cavalry weapon in a real life context. However, there are more efficient polearms for fighting people on foot.
Robert R
lmao [hits u w/ a tree trunk]
+SolidBren Not the kind featured in Dark Souls. Those are good for cutting grass, not so much blokes in armor.
“Folded fifty-zillion times and can cut through tanks“ fking dead
I'd be pretty upset at being forced to use any weapon in a fight to the death...
Ah a true gentleman.
Fisticuffs it is!
I prefer pistols, I'm too fat to run and too old to take an ass beating, but there's absolutely nothing wrong with my aim my adrenaline control or my pain tolerance.
@@mrspeigle1 Your frankness is refreshing
you said cut through a tank.. I laughed so hard beer came out my nose.. bad timing at its worse lol
Coolnicknameguy - were you drinking beer at the time?
If he wasnt drinking beer, he has a unique and potentially profitable medical condition.
Where is the light saber? It says historical fencing and light sabers where used a long long time ago.
...In a galaxy far far away ;-)
Just throw a bunch of rocks at the light saber, hopefully the blade melts the rocks, and hits the jedi with a bunch motlen rock pieces.
An elegant weappon from a better age
Lol
@@maxmuller445 a more civilized age
This analysis is exactly what I was looking for when I searched "which sword is the strongest against all other swords."
Although, now it makes me want videos which expand the scenario further and further, such as "what is the strongest non-ranged non-polearm weapon in a one-on-one fight" or how those rankings change if different types of armor are thrown into the mix.
But the rapier is vulnerable to the “Neeson Maneuver”. Just ask Tim Roth!
Not a rapier, but kind of "spadroon-ish" type of sword.
The best sword is a chain sword.
Alternatively a sword that contains the soul of a demon is very effective as well.
Good choices.
Swords whose blades are made of laser are also pretty nice.
Your best video yet, Matt. Very informative and I'm glad you shared your reasoning behind all your decisions.
And actually made me laugh out loud at the katana analysis!
Thanks :-)
Thank you for an excellent video - was really interested in your emphasis on hand protection, which was something I learned in my fencing days.
Very informative. Makes sense as different type of swords were developed for different use cases. Thank you for walking through the finer points of each type and drawbacks in the scenario of 1:1 duel. Looking forward to seeing more!
In a LARP I played in, the head rulesmaker, who was a Kendo and katana weeabo, changed the rules so that hand hits didn't count as a hit because he and the other Katana wielders were getting killed by hand hits.
Your hands are incredibly vulnerable in the forward presenting stance and a katana.
+shortstop4313 Really? Wow, it's like the annoying childhood friend who changes the game's rules when he is at a disadvantage :)
"Hand on weapon" not counting as a hit is a common rule in LARP/foam fighting to leave room for creativity in the types of weapons used. Granted, this rule does inevitably lead to "punch blocking" as veterans of the sport follow the line of logic "the closer to my hand the opponent's blade impacts, the more leverage I have to parry with" to the extreme.
I had this from a workshop about Renaissance-era weaponry and I can't entirely vouch for the instructor, so I don't know how reliable it is, but his contention was that the rapier was designed specifically for 1-on-1 duels in the narrow alleyways of Italian cities. This accounts for why they felt it worthwhile to sacrifice cutting ability to favor lightness, speed, and reach: The alleys were too narrow for any cuts except to the head.
Wow! What a great job in explaining the different weapons. Thank you.
Great analysis! This is EXACTLY the hypothetical scenario that I wondered about (hence I found this video). The answer is what I expected, but I didn't think about the fact that the rapier was essentially designed for the hypothetical scenario-- one-on-one, no armor, no shield.
The way he logically steps thru the process of choosing is fascinating. In the end you realize he has to be right.
Any time he says sword we take a drink...
+MAXCOBRALAZERFACE I'll see you in A&E
+MAXCOBRALAZERFACE Challenge... accepted.
I'll report back with results!
1 year later... still hasn't reported back. the pour soul
My opponent brings a sword to a duel ? Too bad for him, Indiana Jones showed me how to deal with this situation.
*Always* bring a gun to a sword duel.
Love all your videos, Matt. This one is especially great
You are an amazing speaker. No edits, just one take? Awesome.
The katana can create shock waves that will instantly kill the opponent
+Sigurd Torvaldsson The shock wave consists of a broken katana.
+Sigurd Torvaldsson But they don't have a pommel to throw at an opponent.
+Sigurd Torvaldsson But only if your heath is full.
+Sigurd Torvaldsson Skill opened only in 80Lvl.
+Sigurd Torvaldsson *dies* ROTFLMAO!!!
The katana grew up in a Japan: a closed society with a closed miliary, combat and weapons ethos - European swords evolved through a highly competitive history spanning many years, confilicts, and nations. So the katana "evolved" to be as good as a katana could be, excellent but limited by its context whereas European swords REALLY evolved in the unrestricted, open sense.
Thank you! Many people try to compare the two regions or say the Japanese were better when it simply isn't true! Up until the 20th century, Japan was a mostly isolationist country. This combined with a small relative population and limited iron resources meant they had far less opportunity to experiment than the West did. They were good, but no match for Western Europe.
Let's not replace one stereotype with another stereotype. The katana may not be some magical lightsaber, but Japanese swords are not stagnant either. The katana has its origins (basic shape, forging techniques, etc) in ancient and medieval China, and the modern shape of the katana evolved in Japan. The predecessors/prototypes of the katana experienced plenty of unrestricted open warfare. The katana also wasn't the only type of Japanese sword around, as Japan did have other types of swords such as straight swords, two handed swords, and polearm-sword hybrids.
@@CoffeeSnep That isn't true either. The Japanese swords aren't better, but let's not go to the other end of the extreme by denigrating them and claiming they weren't a match for Western Europe. The predecessors/prototypes of the katana was in ancient and medieval China, and they experienced plenty of development and opportunities to experiment in unrestricted warfare. By the time the katana shaped swords were evolving in Japan, the Japanese had been engaged in/would engage in wars against the Mongols, Manchus, Korean kingdoms, Ming Empire, etc. The katana was just one type of sword in Japan - the Japanese had other types of swords too (including straight swords, two handed swords, polearm swords, etc). Japan also wasn't that closed of a society - they were highly influenced by trade, exchange of ideas, and wars with continental Asia.
@@Intranetusa the katana was a nice sword, and the Japanese had a lot of great stuff. I'm not trying to say they didn't. My intention was to provide reason as to why I believe European weapons (swords in particular) evolved to have significantly more variety than in Japan. The Japanese had plenty of swords, but many of them were quite similar except for length. Japan wasn't entirely isolationist I know, but while they had contact with parts of eastern Asia, Europe had contact with most of the civilized world; with trade going from the middle East to Russia to China and so forth.
The Japanese were and are a very respectable people, but there are practical reasons to explain why many parts of Europe had more advancements, rather than yelling that one is better than the other without reason, as I very often see people do.
@@CoffeeSnep I think one major reason why "European swords" have more variety than "Japanese swords" is because Europe has 27x-28x the area/landmass of Japan and had 11x-12x the population of Japan (90 million vs 8 million) by 1500 AD. So significantly more people with significantly more space will naturally lead to more diversity. Yes, you are correct that Europe also did have more contacts with other areas of the world like the Middle East. However, to make it a fair comparison, we should compare swords in Japan to swords in one European country with a similar population and area (like Spain or something).
I really like your presentation and effortless narrative. You make very good points and so are highly engaging. Well done and thanks for a very interesting video.
And BTW, I really admire your ethos of putting yourself at a disadvantage against the best. Salut for that.
And, last 'BTW', I love that sabre too. The second you presented it I thought "What a wonderful looking well-balanced sword; heavy enough to defend against more percussive weapons like axes, and decent cutting; yet deft enough too, for quick wins by thrusting. Hand guard too looks sufficient and makes a nice bonus. It looks very right, and very handsome to boot.
Love your channel man real food for thought for people who are genuinely interested in the subject.
Often when i want to kill someone in a one on one fight, i pick the Sabre. Next time i will try the Rapier- Thanks!
I see.
1) Take rapier or estoc
2) Spam R1
3) You win
:D
#MetaWeapons
haha
#Danksouls
Respawning....
I was about to make the same joke :D
A very good analysis- would love to see more vids like this one!
Great video. I enjoyed watching it a second time as much as the first.
I came here only for the dumb comments I knew I would find. I wasn't let down.
Yeah. It's about 70% the same crappy jokes repeated over-and-over. 29% serious but dumb comments.
So glad we served you well, that was the whole intent... fuck!!!!!!!
@@mmestari and the remaining 1% are discerning intelligent people like you and me, eh?
Neckbeards love katanas.
Well, that was a stupid comment.
But but but. A katana doesn't need a long blade since they shoot laser beams whenever you swing them. Clearly you don't know what you're talking about. I'll have you know I watched 50,000 ninja movies so I'm an expert on this subject.
+Quartz Yeah, but do YOU use it? Have you ever practiced? You can't learn just by watching T.V. and experts; you need to apply it in context and try it out for yourself. Trust me, I know what I'm talking about! And since when, in real life (NOT TV), have swords ever shot laser beams, that is a little too sci-fi!
+Samuel Franceschi you took this a little too seriously.
No shit, I'm a serious guy
And that's why you clearly failed to perceieve the sarcasm in that comment.
No kidding
Great Video! I have loved rapiers from my old D&D days. Now I know spears are better, but that is because of your channel!
This isn't just a great and educational video about swords, it's a very well done and informative video period. Thanks so much!
Nothing wrong with having a good blaster at your side.
Mr Jones?
Kangal No Han Solo.
Funny its the same guy.
So uncivilized
Okay.
[switches his EDC to a wooden box with a T-shaped plunger handle for detonating dynamite.]
but what if your opponent chooses a longsword, then proceeds to throw his pommel at you?
Then you're dead
+Ola Johannesson Borge Well, then you've been ended rightly.
Throw the Pommel? As in unscrew it and hurl it like a missile, or just use it as a cudgel, while still attached? Surely, in either case, these tactics could be sidestepped, and if he take his pommel OFF and misses (it would surely take a LONG time to detach) then he's completely unbalanced, and dismantled, his own weapon...he's toast. haha
Gary Ormond We know this, Skall has explained it in his video about it. And we're talking hurling it like a missile. Have you never heard of this joke before?
Bro... you wouldn't EVER use that move in the arena unless you want to kill everyone around you (the audience) too.
Somewhere the shade of George Silver shakes its insubstantial fist at you and sneers at your Italianate rapier. ;)
I would imagine that the best weapon to take into your scenario would be the one you are trained best in. Training is just about always far more important than the tool.
Even if you are fighting someone with far more experience than you in using a long sword, if you have a spear, you still have a little advantage, as long as you have the same physical condition
Well thought out and with evidence to back your points. 10/10. Good stuff bro
"Rapierists"
like to dig another hole
when you drop your kid of at the new kindergarten and the teachers ask what you do
He's not a rapist - honest!
4:10 deal with Rapists with my Saber!!!
The Rapierist's sword has a lot of thrusting power if you know what I mean.
I really enjoy hearing the preferences of professionals once I know enough to understand the discussion.
I feel like the style of sword I'd be happy to rely on for this idea of random encounter 1v1 would have to be a transitional sidesword.
Something like the munich town guard.... A proto-rapier with a blade like an elongated arming sword and the guard of a rapier.
Sure you wouldn't have the reach of a rapier or longsword but you'd have the guard for good parry and riposte as well as the power to deny similar actions if facing a rapier.
Kinda late with the reply, but arguably that's the reason why basket-hilted swords are second place on Matt's list (which evolved from the complex-hilted swords of the Renaissance).
folded a zillion times and can cut though a tank.
T.J. Hollidge Maybe a light saber
T.J. Hollidge Drive me closer, I want to hit them with my sword!
It made me chuckle
Arthur Mongelli As a Warhammer 40k player, this sums it up... that and CHAINSAWS!
Yes, but you have to buff rhe rapier whit Darkmoon Blade and spam r1
dracopo .... r1 spam ? Parry !!!!!!
Laughs in poise
_tis been patched..._
Also , it's estoc not rapier.
For what its' worth, my two cents: your reasoning is very sound and well-founded. The sword's biggest advantage over the simple knife, mankind's first edged weapon, is its length. That's why the sword was invented in the first place thousands of years ago; to replace the knife as the primary edge weapon on ancient battlefields. Add to this the simple fact that over the centuries of extensive sword use hundreds of people working in different periods and parts of Europe arrived at similar technical solutions, e.g. protection for the hands and forearms, ergonomic considerations that make the weapon feel more like an extension of your arm, etc. Practical sword fighting styles in all advanced societies evolved to be practical because that was the main means of fighting and killing on the battlefield. Swordsmanship today is a hobby, not a practical skill needed for self-defense and regularly practiced as such. Great work on your videos!!!
Yeah, my choice as well. Rapier is the way to go for a 1 on 1
"i prefer the extra length" That's what she said. Great video though.
Haha
LOL !
I don't get people's obsession with katanas, it's a nice weapon sure and great at cutting but most people wouldn't be trained with a katana and in a regular fight with someone who has mild understanding of how to use a sword, when it comes to practicality I prefer to use a long sword type of weapon. The good thing about long swords are their ability to break bone and cut as well. Plus I don't really see much parrying when it ones to katana use. If someone with a long sword blocked my katana slice, it could damage my blade. I have nothing against katanas it's just I don't see the obsession with the weapon because it sure as hell isn't the perfect weapon.
+Carlos Contreras
I can't speak for everyone of course, but I really like the craftsmanship, and the spirituality that surrounds the sword.
And they're simple looking beautiful swords.
If I was to pick a weapon for actual fighting, I would go with the schiavona :-)
Katanas are overhyped as fighting swords. They lack the defensive qualities of other swords like longswords, rapiers, and most military sabres.
Part of why katanas don't have some of those features is because of different philosophies of fighting (more emphasis on foot work and spacing than parrying and binding of blades). The katana is also just an older design of sword that many others of its time lacked in features as well. It's impressive how long it stayed in service over history!
I think people are just attracted to them, because of their ornateness. Hand made Japanese swords can look really artistic. European swords can be extremely ornate as well, but overall they tend to be more utilitarian and emphasize usefulness/practicality in an actual fight.
...and people are just weaboos. Lmao.
Japanese cartoons hyped the shit out of katanas. It was conveyed as a symbol of japanese culture, pride, discipline. These cartoons were originally aimed at japanese boys. American boys like Quentin Tarantino bought the hype when they watched the japanese cartoons. So now you have this huge group of people that need to be taught that, uhh, no, katana is about as overrated as muscle cars.
Katanas weren't used that much in large-scale battles. They were usually reserved for duels. The Naginata was the primary weapon used in battles.
A katana with a Slightly longer then average blade, and a D shaped handguard with a cross guard would be (in my mind) a “perfect” katana.
Blend of “both worlds” in a way.
damn it, fine I'm subscribing. I like all the conditions you threw up and that you still made it as a in your opinion type video :)
I enjoyed this. Thank you.
I agree. Shame I hate rapiers.
+Lazy Spark look at a schiavonna or backsword both give most of the same advantages and only sacrifice length to take back some cutting ability and parrying strength
chargar1122 Hmm. I'm liking the look of the schiavonna.
+chargar1122 ohh wow, schiavonna is freakkn awesome xo
First off, for all of the people making gun comments, stop it. You're not clever, you're not cute. You're just wasting time. For those who keep saying "it's not the weapon, it's the wielder", this is assuming that both fighters are equal in skill. So you're not saying anything special either. We all know that a master swordsman is going to beat a novice swordsman regardless of the weapon.
A person with a brain! Thank you! :-D
Well said!
Yes, a self-appointed fun-police officer is EXACTLY what TH-cam needs right now. Keep up your important, original, and most serious work, shadowknyght.
*knight
but would a novice gunsman beat a master swordsman?
Rapier is such an incredibly swift and terrifying weapon. Scary stuff. “I needs that scratch to awaken me!” That like really put me in the moment. So good.
8 years later and this still pops up on my feed now and again
I would've first produced my pistol, and then produced my rapier.
Stand and Deliver or the devil he may take ya
"I saaaaaid a Kareeem Abdul Jabaaaaarr" or something like that
Musha ring dum a doo dum a da...
"crying stand and deliver, for he were a bold deceiver"
I would a first kicked that Jenny to the curb.
Next video, katana vs. tank
katana+tank vs. pommel
Goldfish tank or SCUBA tank?
Great Video, I enjoyed the clarity with which you made your point. let me just add a brief comment: The word "rapier" actually comes from spanish. The first rapiers were made in Toledo, Spain in the XVI-XVII centuries. They were called "espada ropera" because the word "ropa" literally means "plain clothes" in spanish. As you, very accurately, pointed out they were meant to be worn with your everyday clothes and defend you against attackers in the same condition. it's a wonderful sword to use in the conditions you mentioned (of course it would be rubbish if you were fighting an armored opponent). So, it was a weapon specialized for that situation and not very versatile at all. I would always prefer a XIX century sabre only for a single reason: "always stick to the weapon you are more familiar with and better trained". However, I see your point and agree absolutely. Thank you for your great Schola Gladiatora, Doctore.
Thank you for this.
Tip of advice for katana fanatics: watch the damn video all the way through before ranting. His review of the katana, in my opinion, was fairly good. He wouldn't complain much if he had to fight with it, and he said its offensive capabilities are at an exceptionally good level. Heck, it was similar to his review of the arming sword. All they lacked was the hand protection. See? So really, there's no reason to get butthurt.
Leroy Gallagher That's true. Everyone and their mothers know that a katana can obviously cut through nuclear bomb shelters like it was butter.
Katana can't melt steel beams! Clearly, this is an inside job!
Reading through the comments I have found only one comment that is defending the katana and well over 10 comments that bash katanas and katana fans. It's the same in the comments of pretty much any video that features a comparison of katanas and European weapons.
I like gladius a lot
What about a spear or in this scenario only swords are available
Why not a side sword? Nice mix of the longsword and the rapier, grip and cutting/stabbing versatility of the longsowrd, hand protection and reach of a rapier.
It's not as long, because it has to be wider to deliver good cutting blows.
a side sword is onehanded and therefore nothing like a longsword and far too small to be sompared with a rapier.
It is comparable to a basket hilt broadsword in lighter.
To be honest I don't think there is any real difference between a sidesword, basket-hilted broadsword or a sabre. They are so much in the same ballpark that you can more or less call them the same swords, for the purposes of this video.
Fair enough, my bad. Sorry, I'm more of a firearms guy than swords, just now getting into them. Thanks for the info, everyone!
The sidesword/broadsword/sabre is, IMO, the most versatile, do-it-all sword. Rapiers are made for dueling, though, so in a one-on-one situation, they're the way to go. If you may end up in a mixed-weapons melee, sidesword wouldn't be a bad choice by any means.
In a duel without armour in my opinion the best sword is the rapier, because it is light, quick, long and really letal. As many italian masters of reinassence taught , the rapier was very effective in a duel.
Does anyone know where I could buy the sword seen at 5:46? I've been looking for something exactly like it for a long time.
Considering the date, it should be the Albion Ringeck... I hope you got dosh to spare.
www.albion-swords.com/swords/albion/nextgen/sword-medieval-ringeck-xva.htm
I'd use the sabre over the rapier. The rapier was what first came to mind when the rules for this hypothetical situation were stated, but I like the sabre's versatility which gives you enough extra combat options to offset the reach difference.
As a sabre specialist, as someone who loves sabres, but also as someone who fences against rapiers regularly, let me tell you that the rapier has the advantage in a one-on-one fight. It is a marked advantage.
scholagladiatoria The only worry I got with a rapier is that it produces tiny holes and if you don't place the hit well it might not even be noticed by the enemy that would disable you with any sabre hit. There were enough cases were people actually ran up the rapier blade to hilt to cut down their attacker and succeded (but often died thereafter).
scholagladiatoria loved this vid. As far was western blades are concerned, I agree with you. I much prefer a to use a sabre (curved blades in general). I actually have two questions for you.
1-which sabre do you prefer?
2-I'm looking for a good book on sabre combat to study on. Are there any that you can personally recommend?
edi The problem about "tiny holes" is that they are more likely to be deadly than cuts. In the good old "de re military" of "Vegetius", a roman, it is widely explained why thrust was deadly : it goes deep, it hit frequently an organ, and is rarely stopped by a bone. Cuts goes superficial, rarely touch an organ and is generally blocked by bones, . Thrust have not to be very strong, it can pierce deep without too much force. If you want your cut to be good, it must be well made AND must be strong enough to slice through. (even if our body is vulnerable)
The source is ancient, but it has never failed to be true. Most of the moves in "medieval" manuals are piercing.
Conclusion: if cuts are not strong, they have to be numerous to be deadly. Victims of knifes attacks in real life are often dead or badly wounded when hit once by the knife, when using piercing. When using slashing, you see often a lot of cuts on the victim and some stays alive after that. (but the physiological shock is enormous and can kill)
That's why those "tiny holes" just can't stop to amaze me !
*****
I think Matt once stated in his video that while thrust are more likely to be deadly, cuts are more likely to stop an opponent fighting. Severing a few fingers or a thumb on the sword hand or hamstringing an opponent does not take a lot of strength when done with the proper technique and a sharp sword, and would generally render your opponent quite helpless.
There were many instances in history of rapier fighters being run through multiple times and only dying quite a while after. Like Matt said in his videos, a rapier fighter must be sure that he is not exposing himself to a counterattack as he is lunging for a kill. He really cannot depend on his thrust "stopping" his opponent dead on the spot (hence no practice of "tagging" as done in modern sport fencing), and must be prepared for a prolonged fight.
www.classicalfencing.com/articles/bloody.php
Most knife attacks in modern times involve multiple stab wounds, often dozens, and the majority of people stabbed actually survived, given modern medical treatment.
I still think a rapier is the best weapon for unarmored one-on-one encounter, but I would take Vegetius' statement with a large dose of salt. After all if the Romans believed so absolutely in the thrust why didn't they use a long thrusting-oriented weapon, and opt for one so broad-bladed and obviously very capable of cutting?
ssssooo, basically you're saying that the best sword for a 1-on-1 duel is a sword that was specifically designed for that purpose? sound dubious at best... i think one air pressure slash or ground elemental attack from a ranged katana would cut a rapier into atoms
Rapier is 300 years more advanced. Toledan steel is not only more flexible, but also stronger and sharper than any medieval japanese steel.
@@principetanguero His comment was... somewhat sarcastic to say the least.
100% in agreement. Good work. Cheers. :)
Rob Roy, the movie, highlighted an honor dual at the end of the movie.
It featured a Scottish Highlander with a long sword against a British man with a rapier. It highlights the difference very well..
Great movie, well worth watching.
Cunningham's sword in Rob Roy is a small sword, which is much shorter, lighter, and faster than a rapier. McGregor's sword is a highland broadsword (claymore), about the same length as the small sword but heavier and much better at cutting. The small sword is an evolution of the rapier and purely a dueling weapon, designed for dueling other small swords. The basket-hilted claymore of the time was a battlefield sword, used in conjunction with the targe (a small shield) and the famous "highland charge) tactic.
In a duel like in the movie, my money is on the more skilled swordsman, and if equal fighters it's hard to say. The small sword has a slight reach advantage not due to length (about the same length as the broadsword) but grip geometry, the small sword being held in a more point-forward position better for thrusting reach. That said, the small sword has limited or completely null cutting ability, and is much too light to effectively parry a broadsword stroke, so I think in the hands of equal fighters the broadsword has an advantage, but not much.
I think people who are saying the rapier would break are not considering metallurgy. There is a reason that swords like rapiers didn't exist in earlier times and why they came along later. The rapier requires high quality steel that was not available in older times. If the rapier is made out of good steel it isn't going to break.
Also, the rapier is so much faster than a bigger heavier sword that they are going to be able to stab you in the chest while you wind up for your epic two handed sword breaking swing that has all your strength behind it. A swing that has enough force behind it to break a rapier would leave you horribly exposed to a quick rapier thrust.
The rapier is a product of hundreds and hundreds of years of sword fighting knowledge. If the rapier sucked why didn't they keep making big medieval style swords? Weapon and fighting technology always improves over time.
Rapierist - my new favorite English word
Very interesting, thanks! If you weren't restricted to one weapon - say in the old musketeering manuals where you had a 17 inch second weapon would your choice remain the same or change? Agreed from very limited experience that the lighter the weapon the faster you can move it so with Toledo steel a rapier would be very hard to beat one to one but does that advantage lower against multiple blades or am I still going to get my fore-arm opened from a distance? My ancestors preferred distance weapons for the first four opponents then .... :-)
Great explication and non biased points. No pun intended.
Lightsaber is still best
very true,
Katana...with longer blade, proper hand-guard and if possible modern steel... KRIEGSMESSER/SWISS SABER
woah, an intelligent human being. Weird
A long sword with a modern ak47 attached.
Gorki XXX Would be not very useful. Not maneuverable enough to be a sword and too long and unwieldy to be an effective gun
Gorki XXX Combination weapons are fairly useless, don't do it.
ShellPie Boring people..
Good info for all the sword fights I find myself in.
"I'm trying to teach myself to deal with rapierists. " - Matt Easton, 2014
That's a word that you have to be very careful when pronouncing.
0:32 - "I'm going to keep it brief"
Video length: 15 minutes 43 seconds
That IS brief, believe me.
Lindy : "I'll keep it short"
Video : 1.5 hours long
Trust me , that's short.
Correct answer: A sword with a gun on it.
They exist.
+scholagladiatoria 6:16 What is the weight of that longsword?
I'd love to hear your thoughts on what armor level and weapon type you would choose for a fantasy Lord of the Rings scenario where you have to get from Point A to Point B in a potentially year long journey through wilderness and such with any number of potential combat scenarios such as duels, large melees, group versus a large target. Would you go with a ranged weapon, sword and shield, full armor and axe, spear, etc? I'm curious.
I too would be interested in this video
Rapier is the most optimal weapon to rapier your opponent.
"..to *rapier* opponent."
I think a longsword would have an advantage over the rapier as far as trying to deflect. If you get the jump on someone the rapier would be great, but I don't think it would do very well clashing against a longsword because of weight and mass. I'm not saying you couldn't parry a longsword with a Rapier, but I think it would be more difficult; especially head on. Not to mention a Rapier is only truly effective at thrusting, making you draw your arm back to go for the kill leaving yourself vulnerable and making your attacks predictable.
im fencing in my freetime and trust me if your a good fencer with a rapier you are soooo much better than sb with a longsword because if the rapier isnt too heavy you do some random stuff wait for the other one to shift his weapon to one side and if you sting then he wont see that coming that quick he could do much about it. you just have to watch the distance isnt too close and the other one doesnt shatter your blade but it is easy to maneuver your blade to avoid that
For an SCA practice, I once attached the guard from a cheap, old El Cid replica to a regulation Foil blade. It worked surprisingly well! :D
The sword on the thumbnail is so fricking beautiful it gave me ten eyegasms
Estoc bestoc
Indeed, fuck the meta.
Hype train much?
Well the estoc is basically the rapier, only adapted for armored opponents.
Even 16th century koncerz is not exactly the best dueling weapon, lacking slightly in hand protection though not agility - no basket or swept hilt. Designed to be used by heavy cavalry. These are longer than many rapiers so could have an advantage.
An earlier estoc would be even less desirable, these had crossguards and were not as long.
There is a reason there were specialized dueling swords and most of them thrust oriented.
You are reasonable man.
Timbyte I
Maybe you should have a grammar and spelling competition.
Great, now I need to buy a rapier. Excellent video!!
What would you choose for a two weapon duel? If you could have a sword and short sword or sword and dagger?